Xref: utzoo news.admin:3096 alt.flame:2227 soc.women:12100 Path: utzoo!mnetor!cxsea!ssc-vax!uw-beaver!mit-eddie!bloom-beacon!gatech!ncar!ames!necntc!linus!philabs!micomvax!ray From: ray@micomvax.UUCP (Ray Dunn) Newsgroups: news.admin,alt.flame,soc.women Subject: Re: Proposed lawsuit Message-ID: <1203@micomvax.UUCP> Date: 23 Jul 88 02:30:41 GMT References: <12165@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <6272@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <7181@sigi.Colorado.EDU> <532@pcrat.UUCP> Reply-To: ray@micomvax.UUCP (Ray Dunn) Organization: Philips Electronics Ltd. (TDS - Montreal) St. Laurent QC, Canada Lines: 123 For reasons that I hope will become obvious: This article is Copyright, 1988. All rights reserved. It may not be reproduced in any form, except in its entirety, including this copyright notice, without the written authority of its author, who can be contacted at the address given below. I have just tried to compose a posting which attempted to show that the "correctness" of the form of address is irrelevant to the subject under discussion, that the controversy revolves around whether a person has a *right* to be addressed in the manner of their choice, irrespective of the "correctness" or "normal usage" of that form of address. In attempting to so argue, I have convinced myself that this is, in fact, not the case, and is the central point at issue. *If* the requested form of address is a socially acceptable one, and in normal usage, then I believe "harassment" could exist if a person's wishes were continually ignored. This doesn't imply that the "supposed victim" would then necessarily have any legal redress, particularly under the present Usenet circumstances, and certainly not under any equal opportunity or anti-discrimination statutes. On Usenet, potential victims do not even have to leave the net to avoid these "slurs". An appropriate kill file entry, or other form of selective reading would ensure that they would never have to have their sensibilities outraged. The remarks would then fall into the same category as if they were being communicated out of ear-shot, and then only slander/libel would be an issue. Potential victims of self-defined harassments on Usenet need only see harassing postings if they *want* to see them. No extraordinary action need be taken to avoid what they define as harassment. Indeed, in this instance, the supposed victim has already *publicly acknowledged* that he selectively reads his e-mail to avoid what he doesn't want to read. Why does he not selectively read news postings? To do otherwise is perverse. Now, assume the supposed victim is female, and she insisting on being addressed as he/him. This form of address is *not* a socially acceptable one nor is it common usage (one can ignore whether it is *gramatical* correct or not, that is irrelevant, and is merely an intellectual game). The supposed victim is thus being perverse by insisting on being so addressed. In fact, Mark has no complaint of harassment if I address her in the fashion that she, as one who admits to being female, is normally addressed in our society, and which is accepted by (everyone but Mark?) as being in no way derogatory. Indeed, if Mark goes beyond the norms of our society to try to *force* me to call her "him", then it is *she* who is exposing herself to legal action - whether she has "moral" grounds for her wishes or not. Further, if she continues to insist that I call her "he", then she is open to a complaint of harassment from *me*, because she is attempting to force me into a position of ridicule within society - "look at that stupid person calling that woman "he"". No-one has the right to force another to act in a way not accepted as normal by society. This right would seem to be much stronger than any that Mark feels she has to insist how I address her. I could *choose* to be polite and/or sympathetic to Mark and call him "him" as he would like. I believe it is my choice, not his right. Mark *has* been abused on the net many times. Not by being referred to by she/her, but by those small minded people who, when they recognize vulnerability in another, need to cover their own inadequacies by attacking in a mean spirited and purile fashion. These are the bully boys of the net. Unfortunately though, Mark has brought this upon himself, not through his vulnerability, but by repeatedly initiating and responding kind with kind. He falls into the same category as his aggressors. He is a bully boy pretending to be a victim. Whether this behaviour is within Mark's control, we have no way of judging except by the otherwise lucid, rational quality of his postings. These would indicate to me that Mark is in fact, deliberately engineering the content of the responses he generates on the net - again perverse and even masochistic behaviour consistent with the overall picture. I'm sorry for you Mark, you are not a happy person. I'm equally sorry for all the users of Usenet, for there can be no doubt that you are "harassing" all of us, whether in a legally meaningful sense or not. There are, however, people out there, some have already surfaced, who would find it amusing to deal with you on your own terms, and have infinitely more time, resources, and precedent, than you. I caution you to withdraw. I would strongly suggest that in the meantime, everyone stop harassing Mark, and that we don't allow ourselves to be harassed *by* Mark. As it is difficult to do this on Mark's terms, even while behaving in a way normally accepted by society as a whole, and by Usenet in particular, the solution appears to be: DO NOT RESPOND TO ANY OF MARK'S POSTINGS OR TO ANY POSTINGS WHICH REFER TO MARK. YOU MAY HARASS MARK OR ANOTHER USER OF USENET BY SO DOING. I SEE NO OTHER WAY OF BEHAVING IN A MANNER WHICH MARK WILL NOT TAKE AS HARASSMENT. PLEASE. FOR THE ABOVE REASON, DO *NOT* RESPOND TO THIS ARTICLE OR ANY OTHER WHICH MAKES REFERENCE TO MARK ETHAN SMITH, IS WRITTEN BY MARK ETHAN SMITH, OR DISCUSSES THIS SUBJECT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY. And to the half a dozen or so who have been identified by Mark, but whom we had already identified ourselves anyway as being unable to control their less civilized urges, for once, be sensible, be mature, *keep your mouths SHUT*, and *your fingers STILL*. If we have the discipline to do this, the problem *may* solve itself. Please note the copyright notice at the beginning of this article. -- Ray Dunn. | UUCP: ..!{philabs, mnetor}!micomvax!ray Philips Electronics Ltd. | TEL : (514) 744-8200 Ext: 2347 600 Dr Frederik Philips Blvd | FAX : (514) 744-6455 St Laurent. Quebec. H4M 2S9 | TLX : 05-824090