From: lynch@ils.nwu.edu (Richard Lynch)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Why I Am a Feminist
Date: 8 Nov 92 01:18:13 GMT
Organization: The Institute for the Learning Sciences

In article <1992Nov7.160349.27570@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>In article <1992Nov6.213744.27000@ils.nwu.edu> lynch@ils.nwu.edu (Richard Lynch) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov6.053803.22887@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>>>In article <1992Nov6.000026.15585@midway.uchicago.edu> mec6@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>>>In article <1992Nov5.163209.3920@netcom.com> 
>>>>payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>>>> 
>>>>>I think a valid point that is usually missing in most feminist postings
>>>>>is that most of the things men do most of the time are productive and/or
>>>>>constructive.
>>>>
>>>>Okay, I'm with ya so far...
>>>>
>>>>>Men and women both have good points and bad points, strengths and
>>>>>weaknesses. Reading posts here gives one the impression that the only
>>>>>things men do deserving consideration is to rape, sexually harrass, have
>>>>>sex with their children, etc... 
>>>>
>>>>Oh please.  You're tempting me to pull your post that says, "Who here has
>>>>said this!  Give examples!  If things are as you paint, you should be
>>>>able to point just about *any* post to prove your point!" or something
>>>>like that.  (Then we could have 50,000 follow-ups where I go, "BUT IS
>>>>THIS REPRESENTATIVE!!".)  But I think it's not a good idea to get Rich
>>>>started.  :)
>>>
>>>Well, there are a few duplications, but there were 175 instances of the
>>>word rape in the last 10 days. Here is a list, I can compress the posts
>>>and mail them to you if you want.
>>>
>>>There is some duplication here, I need to write some filter scripts.
>>>But this is just the last 10 days.
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>[175 lines with the word rape gone]
>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>While I don't want to read all 175 myself, will you concede that *some* of
>>these could actually have contained the word rape
>
>Are you implying that my 'grep' is broken? Every line contained the word
>rape, and I will mail you the posts if you want to re-read all them all.

No, you idiot.  I am not implying that your 'grep' is broken.
Please do mail me the posts, so I can re-read them all and do what you should
have done in the first place.  Evaluate their *CONTENT* based on what they said
rather than the inclusion of a value-neutral word.

>BTW, if you are too lazy to read them, you should not be posting about
>the content. 

Got me there.  Send 'em to me.  Actually, I already read them, and I can
guarantee that *some* of them were pro-male, or at least neutral towards men
in general.

>>, but been pro-male?
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Btw, why did you break this part of the sentence off?  It's kind of an
important clause, and without it explains why you come to the stupid conclusion
that I would think grep is broken.

>
>Where did this come from? Rape is not a pro-male topic, ever.

Not all men rape.
The preceding sentence could be construed as pro-male.  It contains the word
rape.

>>There may well be more posts about how awful men are than there are about awful
>>feminists are, but as far as I'm concerned, it's the posts and those who post
>>them that are awful.
>
>Those who post them is the alt.feminist readership. But then again, who would
>doubt that we are all aweful?  :^}
>
>>[This specifically includes those who post somebody else's text as a strawman.]
>
>"[S]omebody else's text as a strawman."? How does that work?

Sorry, I should have indicated I meant real paper text,... a la Gazit.
-- 
"TANSTAAFL"     lynch@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.feminism