Xref: utzoo soc.women:15397 news.groups:6631 soc.men:6525 news.admin:4370
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!actnyc!gcf
From: gcf@actnyc.UUCP (G Fitch)
Newsgroups: soc.women,news.groups,soc.men,news.admin
Subject: Re: A Suggestion?
Message-ID: <1143@actnyc.UUCP>
Date: 29 Dec 88 03:15:17 GMT
References: <2457@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu> <1751@scolex> <1152@igloo.UUCP> <10239@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US> <7249@chinet.chi.il.us> <2845@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu> <281@dcs.UUCP>
Reply-To: gcf@actnyc.UUCP (G Fitch)
Followup-To: news.groups
Distribution: na
Organization: Eukaryotic
Lines: 47

}
} >In article <7249@chinet.chi.il.us> learn@chinet.chi.il.us (bill vajk) writes:
} >}In my opinion, there is a new illness in some the philosophies
} >}in soc.women, one I will not help perpetuate. Special treatment for a
} >}minority group is fine, unless it is done at the expense of another group.
} >
} In article <2845@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu> jwm@aplvax.UUCP (Jim Meritt) writes:
} >Bill - How about special treatment for a majority group done at the
} >expense of a minority group?
} >As Val has enjoyed pointing out, women constitute in excess of 51% of the
} >population!
}
In article <281@dcs.UUCP> wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul) writes:
}Ah, but not all women will identify with what goes on or is envisioned 
}by the prime movers in soc.women.
}
}(Most of the ones I know won't).
}
}Thus, the women this refers to ARE a minority. Maybe a large minority, but
}a minority nonetheless.

Then what's the problem?  If the "prime movers" are such a minority,
they aren't prime movers.  They can have their "Experiment" and the
rest of the world, including this majority of women who aren't moved
by the "prime movers" (according to their opponents), will pay no 
attention and go its merry way.

I find it remarkable that this alleged minority is conceived of as
possessing powers over others as if soc.women were organized as some
kind of authoritarian hierarchy.  In fact, it's completely passive;
anyone can post to it, where it hasn't been suppressed of course.
There's no problem except in the minds of those who can't abide
being rejected by _any_ women.

}One of the things which always amaze me about the "women's movement"
}(call it what you will) is the presumtuousness with which its members
}assume that they represent all women, or at least all intelligent women.
}If that were really true, in light of the statistic pointed out above,
}they would long since have achieved their goals.

I wonder if any of the authorities on the women's movement, such as
the above, would care to cite chapter and verse.  Feminists claim to
represent women's interests, but not, as far as I know, women _in_
_toto_.  Once again, I think we're seeing a monolithic authoritarianism
imputed to a group that doesn't actually show much evidence of it.

Followups to news.groups.