From: jbl3g@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Jason Basinger Linkins)
Subject: Re: Intellectuals & women
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 02:53:49 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.174421.1@udphvx.cineca.it> dallagata@udphvx.cineca.it writes:
>In article <1993Jan24.220749.4526@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, jbl3g@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Jason Basinger Linkins) writes:
>> In article <1993Jan24.061211.1@udphvx.cineca.it> dallagata@udphvx.cineca.it writes:
>> 
>> Sure.  I understand, and that is perfectly reasonable.  But life is full
>> of regrets, full of "I could have done this..."  But it is for the individ-
>> ual to try to find his or her own fulfillment.  If they can't...that's life.
>> It is better that they find it on their own then to have fools like you
>> decide for them.
>
>[Jason, flame off, please]

Sorry, pig, but lest you forget, this is alt.flame.

>
>I-do-not-want-to-decide-for-anybody-but-me. Can you 
>understand this? 
You have yet to demonstrate this.

>My point is to let a woman to work and to care 
>abouyt family if SHE WANTS TO DO THAT.
>
>I can give you an example of what I think:
This should be good.
>
>Italy, 1992. I was in a corporation, I was supposed to become 
>a manager. i
Did you blow enough of your superiors to get the job?  Come on, tell
me all the juicy details.

[sad sad story of Michele's one female friend deleted.]
>
>Those things scares the women. Those things can induce the 
>woman to think that to have a child is a bad business. 
>To induce a woman to think in this way, is a moral crime
>(on my morality, sure).
It is no less a moral crime to induce a woman to have a baby.  Once
again (let's see if it makes a dent in your thick skull) THE WOMAN
MUST DECIDE FOR HERSELF WHAT SHE THINKS!  SHe doesn't need you
to tell her what to think, no matter how much real-life experience
you allegedly have.

>
>Maybe now you understand better my point. I don't want to 
>enforce women to think that they are baby-machines, I would 
>like to stop the society to induce women to think that 
>having a child, they can lose everything else.

I have never argued about that!  I would like to see society adopt
some measures that make it possible for women to work at an enjoyable
occupation and also have the chance to raise some children.  I think
that woudl be just peachy.  UNTIL THEN, I feel that if a woman really
enjoys her job, if it makes her feel good, if it adds to who she is,
and she doesn't want to have children, then it is okay!  It is her 
decision, anyway.

>
>To do it, society needs to have a different vision of woman 
>that work, a larger one. 
I agree, but you need to learn more about women.  What you don't
know about women could fill a row of books.

>> I am still
>> waiting for all those supporters of yours to make themselves known to me.
>
>They do what they want to do. I can't enforce them to dedice 
>to show up. It is alt.flame.
Oh.  I suppose these are your imaginary supporters then.  Your "supporters"
are bullshit!


>
>> Also, the names of the three-hundred year old women I asked for before
>> is still something I need to have.
>
>That's a point that you conveniently cut before. I said 
>that *you* think that they were not happy, but that, *maybe* 
>they were happy. I just told you that you could not *proove* 
>anything about that. Neither with the history books.
Ahh, but you said that women were happy hundreds of years ago.  I'm
sorry, but you have to back up your claims.  The burden of proof is on YOU.

>
>Anyway, do you think that the Native American women were not 
>happy? Let me know, just for fun.

Once upon a time, there were some native American women.  Some were happy.
Some were sad.  Then, one day, white Italians and Spaniards came to their
land and fucked them over.  None have been really as happy since.


Newsgroups: alt.flame