From: danoc@earlybird.Eng.Sun.COM (Dan O'Connell [CONTRACTOR])
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Soc.feminism Digest # 153
Date: 12 Aug 1992 16:06:51 GMT
Organization: Shama-lama-ding-dong
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

(KATHY MCCLOSKEY) opines to Robert C.:

>injustices.  Our laws are still tipped toward male perogative, and our

That's an interesting assertion, but not one that I am 
convinced of. Would you care to elaborate? You go on to
say:

 women nationwide -- i'm simply reminding you that we have a huge
 reason to be suspect -- how many times must we be bitten before we
 realize _men_ in power aren't to be trusted?  and that new trust will

It may be true that conservative, older, white men have the
political clout in the U.S., but there is something missing
>from that picture: they tend to be wealthy also. I think 
many of our laws are geared towards the protection of the
already-powerful, perhaps it is the powerless regardless of
gender and race who need a wider voice.

This is not to suggest that feminism, etc be belayed in
favor of an overarching humanism: I think both must be
promoted.

Cindy B-E, et al, have made the point that it is too early
to merge womens groups and mens groups (sorry for the clumsy
terminology here), because "we" are not ready for it.

I agree, but would go further. In every person's life
perhaps especially at adolesence, but also at other critical
times, we need to be exclusively for some short period, with
those of our gender -- people who can "truly understand" 
where we are and have been. Hence the need for safe space
to be a woman among women or a man among men. 

I do not think this will ever change. What then about humanism?
If a person is a humanist as I envision the term, then it is
important to espouse and champion those individual causes
and actions which tend toward a broader humanism for all.

For example, it is important that feminists "say" what feminism
means to them and what should be "it's" political agenda;
other humanistic men and women (who may not specifically 
identify themselves as "feminists"), when they see a
cause/action they support, must join their voices to the call.

The key here is autonomy.

 be hardwon...it will take many overtures, many laws, many men making
 good on promises before we may allow ourselves to trust again.  so men
 must deal with the mistrust, even if it is undeserved individually --
 the weight of history is just too heavy for it to be otherwise at this
 point.

Your analysis seems to suggest that men vote/act as a group,
and that women will also. I think this ignores people as
individual human beings. Conservative republican women have
just as much at stake as do conservative republican men in
maintaining the status quo. I guess you change your mind here:

 - speaking of individuals and i will close -- i truly believe the
 major societal battles are won one person at a time.  it is the only

Interesting.

Dano



-- 
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.