Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihuxf.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!hoxna!houxm!ihnp4!ihuxf!features
From: features@ihuxf.UUCP (aMAZon)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: net.{men, women}.only
Message-ID: <2676@ihuxf.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 26-Aug-85 14:32:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxf.2676
Posted: Mon Aug 26 14:32:13 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 28-Aug-85 20:59:51 EDT
References: <175@drutx.UUCP> <231@whuts.UUCP> <2674@sun.uucp> <448@timeinc.UUCP> <5626@tektronix.UUCP> <460@timeinc.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 24

> >
> >net.women.only did not collapse under its own contradictions!  It
> >was flat-out abandoned because it didn't work.  I did not see one
> >vote for net.women.only in the recent poll  prior to its demise.
> >Where do you think all of those women went?  Into the woodwork?
> >
> 
> No. Into their own mailing list, where the nasty world won't bite.
> The reason that net.women.only didn't work (in my opinion) was
> that it was a public admission of women seeking special privs.
> So it wasn't posted to very frequently.  So the mailing list was
> built.
> 

Ross's arguments here re: net.women, net.women.only, the feminist
mailing list, and the (non-existent) net.men.only are surprisingly
reminiscent of the same kind of thinking that goes on in
net.religion, net.religion.christian, and the Christian mailing
list.

How tolerant we all are of others' beliefs!
-- 

aMAZon @ AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL; ihnp4!ihuxf!features