Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site midas.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!tektronix!teklds!midas!jeffw
From: jeffw@midas.UUCP (Jeff Winslow)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.singles
Subject: Re: Gregg Mackenzie on the elimination of Cheryl (FLAME)
Message-ID: <145@midas.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 15-Feb-86 04:28:17 EST
Article-I.D.: midas.145
Posted: Sat Feb 15 04:28:17 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 17-Feb-86 05:55:24 EST
References: <125@ttidcc.UUCP> <215@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU> <503@cisden.UUCP> <2501@reed.UUCP>
Reply-To: jeffw@midas.UUCP (Jeff Winslow)
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 52
Xref: watmath net.women:9047 net.singles:10302

In article <2501@reed.UUCP> ellen@reed.UUCP (Ellen Eades) writes:
>> 
>> Gregg Mackenzie
>> cisden!gmack
>> That's just because it's all a subversive plot and we're all against
>> you.  We've all come to realize that Cheryl is the only one who 
>> *really* knows what's going on in our (men's) sick, twisted little 
>> minds.  The only thing we can do now is eliminate Cheryl and hope 
>> she hasn't spread the truth too far.  We're gonna get you Cheryl. 
>> You can't hide .... our people are everywhere...
>
>THIS IS *NOT* *FUNNY*!!!!
>
>Gregg did not attach *any* smiley-faces to this posting and I
>intend to treat it seriously.  Threats by men toward women are
>not in any way humorous.  I think any man who enjoys saying
>"We're gonna get you Cheryl" has a SICK mind and a CRUEL one.
>The fact is that women are *killed* *every* *day* in the United
>States by men.  Gregg's attempt to use this fact as humor is
>twisted and outrageous.  He is poking fun at the fear that many
>women consider a natural part of daily life and I cannot
>tolerate it.  He is making a joke out of murder, rape, beating
>and intimidation.  IT IS *NOT* *A* *JOKE*!!!

Sorry about this, but...wrong, wrong, and once again wrong.

Not that I don't believe in a situation as tragic as you describe. Just
that it doesn't have a damn thing to do with the article in question, except
that the one happened to make you think of the other. (Uh-oh, there
goes that psychoanalytical engine again.)

Gregg's article is a painfully obvious satire on Cheryl's belligerence.
He is poking fun at her and her recent rhetorical style - NOT at anyone's
fear or death or rape or pet ptarmigan (Now watch this space for far-fetched
attempts to show that I think rape is no more serious than ptarmigans -
really some of these people are just too bloody-minded to be believed!
(not you, Ellen)). And I think you know that very well - you just choose
to ignore it so you can flame away. In doing so you make a number
of assumptions and implications that seem to me to make the terms
"twisted and outrageous" mild by comparison. Why conclude that cruelty
rather than (at worst) tastelessness was the motive?

Frankly, although I can't very strenuously disagree with most of what
Cheryl says (leaving out the obvious BS), I think she's taking herself
far too seriously these days, and a little satire aimed in that direction
is welcome. I thought it was good for a chuckle. If you think that makes
me sick and cruel, you only show how little you know me. And besides,
it's that damn psychoanalysis again.   :-)


				Jeff Winslow
				"Why do you hate the So$#%^&BLAM!!! uurrgh..."