From: muffy@mica.berkeley.EDU (Muffy Barkocy)
Subject: Are issues divisible?
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Date: 25 Jul 92 06:06:53 GMT

I've been seeing a lot of claims on here that:

1> It is impossible to divide issues in such a way that you can work on
   their effect on women.
and/or
2) If you *do* divide issues in this way, you will of necessity screw
   over men in trying to fix things for women.

Now, I will agree that there are *some* issues (perhaps a majority, but
I am not convinced of that) which have to be worked on with a
consideration of the effect of the solution on both sides.  However, I
do not believe that all issues are this way.

As an illustration; I mentioned breast cancer as a "women's issue" in
a recent post.  I was informed by a couple of people that men also get
breast cancer, although not as frequently (or well-publicizedly) as
women.  So, that means that breast cancer is an issue for both men and
women.  Now, let's see what happens if we divide it up.

The problem for women is that there is not a lot of money given to
research on breast cancer, especially compared to the money given for
other diseases that do not kill as many people.  The claim is that this
is because it is regarded as a "woman's disease" and therefore not as
important as other diseases.

The problem for men is partially the above, but primarily that men are
not expected to *get* breast cancer at all, and therefore they are
unlikely to be diagnosed with it until way too late.

Now, here I am, random feminist.  My company goes public, and I suddenly
have a million dollars to play around with.  I know about breast cancer
being underfunded, so I give the million to a researcher.  This turns
out to be just what is needed, and a cure is found.  (I wish!)  Things
are now much better for women.  The situation for men is slightly
improved, since those who *are* correctly diagnosed can be cured.
However, the men's problem still remains - no one thinks of it as a
disease of men.

In the other scenario, I decide to give some money to research and some
to publicize the risk for me.  Now, there is not enough money for the
researcher to find the cure, but men become well-informed about the risk
for them.  Now, things have improved somewhat for men, but not at all
for women.

I know these scenarios are not all that likely, but the general idea is
there.  It *is* possible to work on the "woman's" side of a problem
without negatively affecting men, and it seems to some people that it is
better not to divide their efforts, since that means that much less
effort on what they see as the main problem.

Muffy
--
Muffy Barkocy | muffy@mica.berkeley.edu | wi.4636@wizvax.methuen.ma.us
~Little round planet/in a big universe/sometimes it looks blessed/
 sometimes it looks cursed/Depends on what you look at, obviously/
 But even more it depends on the way that you see~ - Bruce Cockburn


--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.