Xref: utzoo news.admin:3085 misc.legal:5362 soc.women:12071
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!mtuxo!mtgzz!drutx!druco!ruchira
From: ruchira@druco.ATT.COM (Ruchira S. Datta)
Newsgroups: news.admin,misc.legal,soc.women
Subject: Re: Proposed lawsuit
Summary: Lighten up!
Message-ID: <2999@druco.ATT.COM>
Date: 20 Jul 88 18:34:40 GMT
References: <12165@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <6278@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <12180@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Organization: AT&T, Denver, CO
Lines: 152

In article <12180@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, era1987@violet.berkeley.edu writes:
> In article <6278@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> peter@athena.mit.edu (Peter J Desnoyers) writes:
> >Who is this MES person? Why does (sexual term) get so ****ed off when people
> >refer to (sexual term) by feminine pronouns?
> 
> I am an emancipated woman, and I am accustomed to and have
> established my legal right to equal terms without regard to sex.
> 
> Do you know what the word "feminine" refers to?  That's right,
> it refers to sex.  And so do "feminine pronouns."
> 

	Listen, Mark, on the USENET we communicate in English.  In English personal 
pronouns come in three types, as in the nominative case: "he", "she", "it". "He" 
refers to people who are male. "She" refers to people who are female. "It" refers
to objects and animals.  There is absolutely nothing sexist in referring to a 
female as "she".  In and of itself it is a completely objective term.  In some other
languages there is one third person pronoun referring to both male and female.
You are welcome to start speaking one of those other languages.  If, in English,
you don't like people referring to your sex at every turn, you should ask that they
refer to you as "it".  People refer to animals as "it" because they do not think
about the animal's sex.  Similarly, if people refer to you as "it" it means they
are not thinking about your sex.  If however, you ask that people refer to you as
"he", it means that you wish that you were a male and want people to treat you like
one.  While the latter may be a characteristic of an "emancipated woman", the former
is certainly not.  In asking that you be referred to as male, you are, in fact,
subscribing to the notion that male is better.  

> Pretending you know my sex but don't know my name is an
> interesting ploy to violate my rights yet again.  I am a person,
> a human being, a citizen, and my name is Mark.  Do you call everyone
> named Mark by diminutive pronouns, or are you doing it only to
> treat me differently from other people similarly situated, on the
> basis of my sex?  If you're not an attorney, or law student, have

There have been many postings in regard to you which refer to you as only "MES".
However, from the content of these postings it was quite obvious that you were
a female.  I don't think Peter was engaging in any "ploy" by "pretending to know
your sex but not your name".  Of course, he was deliberately trying to offend you
by referring to you as "her", since you have made it clear you don't want to be
called that. Again, I disagree with you that "she" and "her" are diminutive 
pronouns.  "She" and "her" refer to females, and to say that they are diminutive
is to say that there is something wrong with being female.

> somebody explain that last statement to you, while I add you to the
> list of named defendants.
> 

As other posters have said repeatedly, there is no law against using feminine 
pronouns.  Even if your charge that it is sexual discrimination were to stand
up in court, the people on the net have no business dealings with you, (e.g. as 
employers), so they cannot be prosecuted.

> The reason my name is Mark, is so that people will have no need to
> use diminutive, sexual, exclusive terms to refer to me.
> Otherwise, if I had a traditional name, and was referred to with
> traditional pronouns, every single reference to me would refer
> to my sex instead of to me.  Think of it this way, Peter.  I am a

Once more, using the name Mark implies that you wish you were male.  "He" refers
to one's sex just as much as "she".  As someone else suggested, why not use a 
name that applies to both sexes?  If you've read some of Ursula LeGuin's books,
you will notice that in those societies in her books where sexual equality prevails,
the same names can refer to either male or female.

> man in the Constitutional sense that all men are created equal.

The Constitution is definitely sexist.  One should change the Constitution to
include women, not reject one's sex in order to be included in the Constitution.
Yet again, rejecting one's sex implies that there is something wrong with it.  
The Constitution should say, "All *human beings* are created equal."

> The inclusive sense.  I am not female, my sex is.  I am not blue,
> my eyes are.  
> 
> Now read this slowly ard repeat it to yourself several times:
> Emancipateed women have the same rights as men.  Emancipated women
> have the right to be treated exactly the same as men, without regard
> to their sex, that is, without regard to the fact that their sex may

I agree with you.

> not be male.  Sex is not always relevant, and does not have to be
> mentioned in every statement.  When one federal judge had a need to
> mention my sex, it was written thus:  "...plaintiff states a
> complaint on the basis of his sex (female)...."  It is because of
> the irreparable harm done me by the Usenet bigots, that you would
> know my sex before you know my name, and refer to me differently
> than you have ever referred to anyone else with my name.  For the
> first year I posted, nobody used diminutive terms to refer to me,
> and there no problems.  Then the bigots started their harassment
> campaign, encouraging people like yourself to treat me as a class
> member, baed on sex, rather than as a unique individual, and
> to judge my postings on the basis of my sex rather than according
> to their merits.

Although I did not read the net when you first posted, I would conjecture that
people assumed you were male because of your name (as seems to have been your
intention), not that sexist bigots all of a sudden appeared on the net out of
nowhere.

> 
> Your site, MIT, Peter, didn't use to admit females.  There is still
> a lot of discrimination at your site, but most people are more
> discreet about it than you are, because they don't want to lose federal
> funding.  Should they lose their funding due to your posting, just

I think you should give the people at MIT more credit for their efforts toward
less sexual discrimination. I happen to be a student at Caltech, which is 
also largely federally funded, but there is a gulf of difference (percentagewise)
between the number of women at Caltech and the number of women at MIT.

> because you wanted to have a little fun, they might not be too pleased
> with you.  Do you think you could discriminate against women on your
> own time, your own computer, and nnot post in such a way as to make
> MIT liable?  It is obvious that you have never encountered an
> emancipated woman, and like Judge Teitelbaum, are accustomed to
> women who submit to diminutive terms and other forms of
> sexual stereotyping.  I don't.  If you have any more stupid questions,
> don't hesitate to ask.  The first Black to say, "Don't

I don't think Peter's question could be called "stupid".  Probably, he has read
postings about you but not your postings.  Since your views are highly unusual,
it is not stupid to ask for an explanation of them.

> call me boy," got similar treatment from bigots like you.  They said,
> "Why does that ol' colored boy get so teed off when we call him boy?"

I don't think this analogy holds.  "Boy" has and has always had a specific usage
in English: it refers to a male who has not yet reached maturity.  When a white
man calls a black man "boy", it implies that the black is inferior, since the white
is a "man", and manhood is considered a desirable trait.  If a white man were to call
an 8-year-old black boy "boy", he would not be racist, because he is using the term
as it is meant to be used in English.  Similarly, if a man calls a woman "girl",
it implies that he regards her as inferior since he does not believe she is a 
responsible adult.	If a man calls me a girl, he would not be sexist, because 
I am 15 years old and therefore am not an adult.  So he is using the term as it is
meant to be used in English.  In the same way, if a man refers to you as "she" or 
"her", he is merely using these terms as they are meant to be used in English.  
If you don't like the English language, you should try speaking a different one.

> I hope the analogy helps you overcome your learning disability.

Peter asked a genuine question; since you had not previously explained your views
to him, it is unfair to accuse him of having a learning disability, not to mention
demonstrative of a bigoted (your word) attitude towards people who really do have
learning disabilities.

> 
> --Mark

 --Ruchira