From: tparks@world.std.com (terry parks)
Subject: Re: Carol Moseley Braun (was Re: Women in Politics)
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 17:18:40 GMT

>And no one's saying that women should have to vote for women, but just
>that they should have the choice.

They (and even men), have this choice, right now. There's no restriction
on sexists being able to vote. If you and your fellow sexists want to
vote for people on the basis of their gender you can. If you want to
vote for an ardent bigot like Ms. Braun or someone like David Duke,
you can. Just spare me the rhetoric of all the "good" reasons why
women shouldn't work outside the home, I mean, why Senator Braun should
not represent men.


>>Any organization which restricts membership on the basis of race is racist.

>Are you sure that the Black Caucus does not allow white people to join?

Yes. But in general, let's not be fooled. An organization, any organization
which engages in racial prejudice is racist. An organization which, say,
charges Blaks dues of $10 a year and Caucasians $100 is racist regardless
of someone's attempt to defend it with cries of "but they allow white members".


>>>Just a check.
>>>Please tell me whether you think the following organizations are
>>>discriminatory? (they are all at our school) 
>>>The Jewish Student's Union
>>>The Arab Culture Club
>>>Organization of Black Students
>>>The Women's Union
>>>The Korean Club,
>>
>>Well, I would need some more information to make a conclusion but I would
>>say that the OBS and WU clearly appear so (assuming by discriminatory
>>you mean bigoted).

>Why is it that you single out the women's and black's, but not Jews
>Koreans or Muslims?

If one sees sufficient value in it, such as being able to join the
Jewish Student's Union, one can convert to Judaism. If Korean Club
membership is desired, one can move to Korean. And if access to the
thousands of scholarships restricted to females is desired, then one can ...
well, one cannot become a female. Which is why sexists make and
support such restrictions.

>(I bet I can bet on the answer).
>Student organizations here can not restrict membership on criteria of
>race, sex, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, etc, so 
>they are not discriminatory in the way you imply.

Oh, really? The Organization of Black Students doesn't restrict membership
on race--they just try to, eh? The very name is meant to alienate people
on the basis of race. But I guess there's no bigotry that you don't
embrace, eh?

>But thank you for giving us another example of how you reason and
>draw rather strong conclusions about things you know nothing about.

I get it, the Organization of Black Students isn't called the Organization
of Black Students.

>>>How about these:
>>>the NAACP
>>>the Anti-Defamation League of the Bnai Brith
>>>the league of women voters 
>>
>>I would need some more info on the ADL but the NAACP and the League of Sexist,
>>I mean Women, voters certainly are.

>Look Einstein.
>the league of Women Voters perform a public service.

So does the KKK, no doubt another organization you defend.

So does the KKK, no doubt another organization you defend.

>They sponsor the debates between candidates,

And KKK cleans up trash alongside highways. I'm not impressed with your
concept that if you're bigoted not all the time, well, then that's okay
when you are bigoted.


>And why is the NAACP racist. If you knew history, you would know that the
>'C' stands for colored, and blacks have not been called that for a long
>time.  When the NAACP started, blacks were denied access to education,
>employment, voting, etc. 

And of course with your feable bigot mind, the solution for "blacks"
being denied education, employment, voting, etc. is to deny "whites"
education, employment, voting, etc. 


>One more question.  Martin Luther King Jr.  (I'll assume
>you know who he is.  Hint, no relation to Rodney King).  Racist?

Did he engage in or support racial prejudice?


>>Okay, your turn:
>> 
>>Organization of White Students
>>The Men's Union
>>the NAAWP
>>the league of men voters

>The NAAWP is racist. 

So a group to advance those of a specific race is racist but, in your
view, only when that racist is white and not black. So indeed, you are
racist in which organizations you think are racist.


>Organization of White Students?
>Depends where.  If whites were a minority (like they are in some places),
>then it wouldn't be racist. 

Why? 



>But I don't believe that you when you say the problem isn't that
>she's black and female, since you criticized the women's group
>and the black group, but not the Jewish, Korean, or Muslim groups.

Huh, is she Jewish, Korean, and Muslim as well?

>>>What's your problem with her?

>>She's a racist and sexist bigot.

>No sir, you are.

And this is because?


>  And this makes your judgements about other people
>racism and sexism meaningless.

>>>Does she remind you of someone who hurt you?
>>
>>What's this? Is this like you telling us that I can't speak out against 
>>rape unless I've been raped. Take such "logic" back to the playground
>>where it will be better received.

>I'm trying to find motivations for your hatred of her.

>>She's a racist and sexist bigot.


>   I haven't
>found any yet and you haven't given any.  So I'm speculating, until you 
>give me a real reason.

>>She's a racist and sexist bigot.



>Are the Jewish groups I belong to discriminatory.

Probably. Are they bigoted? Well, do they discriminate on the basis of
select physical characteristics?


>of course, you ignore the fact that she has a reputation of crossing
>race and gender lines. 

And you want me to ignore what she herself says. I know, who should
I believe, you or my own eyes.

>And this is because she rejects gender and
>racial bias (read what people besides yourself say about her), not 
>embraces it.

This is not what she herself says.


Xref: sparky soc.women:8975 soc.men:8459 talk.rape:902 talk.abortion:15260 rec.arts.sf.misc:1430