From: AGRSS@lure.latrobe.edu.au ("SUBBAIAH,Santharam")
Subject: Re: A feminist style socio-economic reform!
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: La Trobe University, Melbourne
Date: 25 Jul 92 05:21:21 GMT

In <14h7bjINNp4v@agate.berkeley.edu> chdunn@cco.caltech.edu writes:

> AGRSS@lure.latrobe.edu.au ("SUBBAIAH,Santharam") writes:
>
> (and I or I expect to endeavor to compose a response)
> 	I plan to propose a series of reforms that could be considered
> >by a feminist when he or she becomes the president of the USA, or
> >better still, when he or she becomes an influencial leader of the
> >strongest lobby in the corridors of White House.
>
> >REFORM 1.
> >	"All women who deliver normal children should be compensated
> >in monetory terms for their child bearing services".
>
> [Stuff deleted]
>
> RESULT.
> 	If child-bearing is truly a burden, then once this principle
> of compensation for pregnancy is established, the rich will pay the
                             			^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> poor to be their surrogates.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	I believe that the practice of surrogate pregnancies, carrying
somebody-else's ovum fertilized by some other male, for a payment from
rich couples, or from poor but infertile couples already exist.  I
think payment for such "pregnancy services" is logical, and conforms
to the existing socio-economic norms of "user pays principle".
However, I am not sure whether that is ethical or not. But my proposed
reform does not cover surrogate pregnancies. The compensation
recommended is for pregnancies carrying the pregnant's OWN FOETUS.
Hence, the question of payments from rich to poor does not arise. I
reiterate that the compensation proposed would have to flow from the
society as a whole (say, from the Government's revenue) to all women
who deliver NORMAL babies. A perfect analogy for the kind of payment I
am proposing is the salary payment paid to public servants employed by
Public Sector Undertakings.

P.S. I understand the anxiety of many concerned readers about the fate
of women who HAPPEN TO deliver non-normal babies. Please refer my
forthcoming posting under the same subject where I have proposed a
separate reform regarding the compensation both for women who HAPPEN
TO deliver non-normal babies, and for those non-normal babies of BAD
LUCK, together with reasons for non-inclusion of non-normal babies in
my first reform proposal.

> 	In reality, many women have mixed feelings of elation and
                                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^
> trepidation at the thought of carrying a delicate creature within.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^

	I see your point here. But the trouble is how to QUANTIFY the
amount of elation (supposedly a positive feeling) and trepidation
(supposedly a negative feeling). I am fully convinced that women have
been taken for granted ever since the evolution of our primates, leave
alone the evolution of humans, and have not been paid for the mental
and physical agony caused by trepidation because we (i.e. our society
including both males and females) conveniently assume that the
benefits represented by "elation" would exceed the costs represented
by "trepidation". A period of thousands of years is too long a period
for humans (who amazingly believe in ethics such as "getting our hairs
cut or styled by a hairstyler without payment is unethical") to
conveniently ignore the ethical obligation of compensating the
producers (women) of such hairstylers, pilots of space ships,
Einsteins, Gandhis, Lincolns, Gorbechevs, coal miners, ..., ..., Dunns
(people like you), and Subbaiahs (people like me).

> I would give a testicle for the privilege.
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Will you still give a testicle for the "privilege"?.


> 	Nature encumbers us with countless burdens.  We are not
> victims of nature; we are winners of life.
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

O.K. It is precisely because we are winners of life, I still believe
that we will be able to REALISE and EDUCE the existence of the ongoing
wholesale robbery (i.e. getting benefits from fellow humans without
any monetary payment) of pregnancy services by our society for the
past few thousand years, if the following happen:

1. Someone has to bell the cat, which has been done; and
2. There should be open minded public debate, the happening of which
   is doubtful.

> 	--Christopher Dunn

Thanks for your time spent on my newsarticle. Please post your
reservations or supporting arguments against or for the above views.

Disclaimer: My views expressed above have got nothing to do with my
organization. In fact, the above views have been developed by me
despite my organization.

SANTHARAM SUBBAIAH	|agrss@lure.latrobe.edu.au
SCH. OF AGRICULTURE	|Phone: 61 3 479 1494
LA TROBE UNIVERSITY	|Quenching the faustian thirst is the only way to
MELBOURNE AUSTRALIA	|attenuate inequality. So quench it.

--
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.