HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
Subject: Re: What does "Male-dominated society" mean?
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 02:42:28 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.010521.28434@smds.com> rh@ishmael.UUCP (Richard Harter) writes:
>In article <1993Jan23.201246.9736@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>
>>And yet we keep seeing posters maintain that there is a
>>cultural/societal proscription against violence towards women.  How
>>does it work, then, that men and women in fairly equal numbers abuse
>>their mates, but there is a proscription in favor of women but not in
>>favor of men?
>
>Quite simply and, it seems to me rather obvious.  Men direct most of
>their violence against other men.  If one counts all cases the target
>of male violence is more likely to be male than female by a ratio of
>about 3 to 1.  If one excludes domestic violence then the ratio is
>more like 10 to 1.

But the discussion (and apparently the view held by several posters)
is that men have a cultural/societal proscription against violence
towards women, while women don't have a similar proscription against
violence towards men.  As far as I know, you're the first to start
talking about male violence against men.

>>By this reasoning, it appears that women are much
>>better at controlling their violence than men, since men commit
>>violence in spite of a proscription and women commit violence in the
>>absence of one.
>
>There are a lot of missing and hidden premises in that sentence.
>What is true is that violence outside of domestic settings is almost
>exclusively a male activity and is generally targeted against males.
>Within domestic settings violence is more nearly egalitarian.  Make
>of that what you will.

Very few missing and hidden premises that are relevant to the
discussion about proscriptions against violence towards women.

>>This nearly sounds like a moral superiority of women
>>that a few feminists suggest.
>
>Indubitably, if one accepts that non-violence is morally superior.
>It is well known, for example, that rabbits are morally superior
>to wolves.  Ask any rabbit.

As far as I know, this discussion has been about domestic violence and
who takes the offensive.  We haven't really gotten into the discussion
of whether the women and men are fighting back abusive mates or just
hitting them because they can.  

Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.feminism
From: galt%peruvian.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Greg Alt)
Subject: Re: What feminists believe (was: Re: Male Men Bashers)
Date: 23 Jan 93 20:18:08 MST
Followup-To: soc.women,alt.feminism
Organization: University of Utah Computer Science

In article <1993Jan22.093251.30@microsoft.com> jenk@microsoft.com (Jen Kilmer) writes:
>>12. Women should be drafted as well, where a draft exists.
>
>YES.

Why is this a feminist issue?  Currently, men's rights are denied by the
draft, so you would like women to have the same rights taken away?  That
is ridiculous.  To call that a feminist view is even more ridiculous.
----
Join the Greg Alt boycott! Put /galt/h :j in your killfile today!
----
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: lingling@abraxas.adelphi.edu (Lisa Nyman)
Subject: Re: Subway gropers
Organization: Adelphi University
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 02:34:16 GMT

kendall@adobe.com (Janice Kendall) writes:

>In article <1993Jan21.122002.12023@adx.adelphi.edu> lingling@abraxas.adelphi.edu (Lisa Nyman) writes:
>>
[subway situation deleted to save space]

>Have you received any responses?  If yes, would you mind posting a summary?

Not yet, surprisingly.

>You can check with you hand or look to see what it is touching you.  You can
>use your elbows and knees to keep some space and to keep people from pressing
>against you.

I suggested this, too, (checking with my hand).  Then, possibly
go the route of humiliting the guy, as she tried to do.
--
Lisa Wolfisch Nyman         "Life is too short to wear ugly underwear."
panda@syrinx.umd.edu                    
Just remember, geographers do it in places unknown to the general public.
New from Dweeb Publishers: Memoirs of a Workstation Widow, Oh the Agony of It
From: lib@cbnews.cb.att.com (Lib)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Male Men Bashers
Date: 25 Jan 93 18:15:13 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <C0x5Hx.I06@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
>
>  But I don't mean to just extoll such activity as a "people
>  filter" -- it's also a lot of fun.  Get out in the fresh air,
>  see the stars at night for a change, see nature close up,
>  get spectacular views from the summits of mountains, escape
>  from TV and traffic, and enjoy the company of a group of 
>  like-minded people.   On the east coast contact the AMC
>  (Appalachian Mountain Club).  There are several organizations
>  in the west that organize trips; perhaps a poster out there
>  could suggest some.   

Well maybe all the women that some one of you met camping were
interesting, athletic, fun, etc. but most of the men I've met that
way were dirty, smelly, ignorant back woods types who acted like 
they've never seen a woman before.
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.feminism
From: bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris)
Subject: Re: No Subject
Organization: Motorola, CCR&D, CORP, Schaumburg, IL
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 23:21:26 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.034813.16656@fuug.fi> an4835@anon.penet.fi writes:
)Pls note that this is not an indictment of my spouse but basically a cry for
)help so that I can deal with this and steer our relationshipto a healthier  
)base. Indeed, the fault lies mainly with me that I am and have been somewhat
)meek, timid and overly afraid of displeasing her at any cost. I am thru this
)forum inviting assistance that will help me to be less afraid of being honest.

)Problem Examples (Too numerous and painful to list them all):

(summary)

)* Unreliable
)* Arrogant:
)* Unsupportive:
)* Possessive 
)* Casual Lying
)* Name calling

)CONCLUSION:
) All said and done, I do LOVE my family and will live and die for them.
) Counsellor I talked with was very useless; Friends only cause complications
) Parents recommend that I pray to the Almighty;
) Now I await your thoughts, suggestions and, yes, constructive criticism,
) to deal with this situation. Thanks sooo much, sincerely.

You certainly don't come accross as being very timid here on the net!
In fact, this list reads a lot like an indictment of your spouse in spite
of your disclaimer.  

A good counsellor should be able to help you be less timid if that's really
your problem.  As a third party who doesn't know anything at all about
your marriage, I must say that at least in your net.persona, you are not
coming accross as timid.  Have you actually said stuff like this to her
and your counselor?

Also, there is a definite conflict between loving someone and finding 
them unreliable, arrogant, etc etc etc.  [What a surprise! :-(].  There
probably isn't any magic way to turn her into the person you want her to be.
Sorry.  You'll have to make some hard decisions, based on what's realistic,
to expect from here and what your own needs are.

Good luck.
From: lisa@zeppelin.llnl.gov (Lisa Corsetti)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: and you'd best eat it cold.
Date: 28 Jan 93 01:29:27 GMT
Reply-To: lisa@zeppelin.llnl.gov (Lisa Corsetti)
Organization: Climate Model Intercomparison Group, LLNL

In article <4632@unisql.UUCP> wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie) writes:
>In article <147772@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> lisa@zeppelin.llnl.gov (Lisa Corsetti) writes:
>>How does it feel?
>
>	It's a good thing that all you people are so into revenge or we
>might someday stumble into true equality.
>
>					
Warfie,

Hi.  I'm not into revenge or turning things around.  I'm just pointing
out that not being treated as an equal is not a good feeling.  It is
wrong.  So, please, chill out.

Lisa


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|  "There's no beginning, no ending. There's just infinite                    |
|   passion of life."                                                         |
`-----------------------------------------------------------------------------'
From: hrose@eff.org (Helen Trillian Rose)
Subject: Re: PREGNANCY
Organization: The Evil Fascist IRC Admins From Hell, Inc.
	<1k928lINN8to@shelley.u.washington.edu>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 22:48:34 GMT

Martha> == Martha Smith <mjsmith@cac.washington.edu> 
  
 |> The only thing that will make you feel guilty about abortion is a priest.
 |> 

 Martha> As a devout Catholic woman I object to this statement - a
 Martha> priest should never be what makes me feel guilty - nor any
 Martha> other human being for that matter.  I feel guilty based upon my
 Martha> relationship with God.  While you say that you did not seek the
 Martha> church's advice, the more relevant question is did you seek
 Martha> God's?

I disagree. Priests and other preachers of the catholic church (nuns,
etc). Take Catholic school for instance. They take you when you're as
young as 4 (in England) and start teaching you *their* morals. They
teach you what *they* want you to know. I went to an all-girls high
school. They were teaching us feminism and anti-abortion beliefs side by
side. Most people I know call this contradictory. And it was all taught
by priests and nuns. I was twelve, and a (young) freshman. All of our
physical science class were taken into a room, by a Nun (not our
physical science teacher -- she was a lay-teacher) and shown "The Silent
Scream", and then a priest came in and lectured us on how right it was.
There was anti-abortion propaganda *all over* the school. Girls weren't
taught what condoms were, or how to use them, even in an age where AIDS
was rearing its ugly head (early-mid 1980s). 

So don't tell me that a priest can't make you feel guilty. They're
better at guilt than just about anyone.

--Helen
--
Helen Trillian Rose             	<hrose@kei.com, hrose@eff.org>
Kapor Enterprises, Inc.            	email eff@eff.org for EFF Info
Electronic Frontier Foundation          Flames to: 
Systems and Networks Administration	women-not-to-be-messed-with@eff.org
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: a question to married women
X-To: QINXIAN WANG
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 03:47:00 GMT

geoqwang@brahms.udel.edu (Qinxian Wang) writes...
>I recently read some books and maganizes about the differences between men
>and women, and I am amazed by the different ways of thinking for men and
>women.  It seems to me that men in general don't know women,
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Well, Qinxian, you're at least half right...

What?  And do you *really* think that women *do* know men?  (This is
what is seemingly implied by your post).  IMHO, neither gender *really*
"knows" the other, no matter how long they live together.

However, I do *not* consider this to be a valid argument for separatism.
Indeed, it's probably an argument *against* it ; the longer we are with
each other, the closer we come to truly knowing each other.

Even so, the problem of not knowing the other gender is hardly limited to
males.


>even they live together because of the fundamental difference - women
>feel and men don't, as I understand.

...And this is also *very* stereotypical, Qinxian.


[With apologies for responding even though I am not a married woman :-) ]

---
Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
(416) 322-7876

"Gravity: It's more than just a fragrance.  It's the LAW!"
   - Will Steeves, President, GOiDS "R" We, Inc.

 * SLMR 2.1a * Not paranoid?  They're still out to get you!
From: adric@access.digex.com (William Johnson)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: What does "Male-dominated society" mean?
Date: 25 Jan 1993 21:29:36 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com

In article <1jhohpINNmqg@emx.cc.utexas.edu> dpaxton@emx.cc.utexas.edu (Debi Paxton) writes:
>  And in many homes it was a sort of
>chain of command, you know.  Dad is mad at life, he beats on
>Mom.  Mom beats the kids, the big kids beat the little ones,
>and the little ones kill cats.  Most of those kids will grow up
>to either be abusers or abused--it's the norm.  Violence begets 
>violence -- but who was at the top of that heap?  It wasn't a
>woman, and it wasn't a child.

Yes, but that doesn't mean it was men's FAULT.  You yourself said violence
begets violence.  Children of abusive parents go on to abuse, or so they
say.  So what if there is a NON abusive father in a relationship, but the
MOTHER abuses her (male) child.  Next generation, the male abuses his wife
and it starts there, and then we look and say "Look, he's at the top of the
chain, therefore, he started it all".  But he isn't.  His parents are further
up the chain than he is.

I'm not saying it was all started by women, nor am I saying it was all started
by men.  What I *AM* saying is that it's not as cut and dried.  Yes, men
were in a position of power in times past.  Yes they were at the head of the
family.  But no, most of them did NOT start the abuse.  They just continued
what they'd learned from their parents.

Will.
-- 
Copyright (C) 1993 by William Johnson  All rights wronged, all lefts made
adric@access.digex.com                     without benefit of turn signal.
Will Johnson, 307 S. Reynolds St Box P-216, Alexandria, VA  22304
"Tis better to have loved and lost than never to have included a quote in your .sig file."
From: maslak@unix.SRI.COM (Valerie Maslak)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Women's Self-Help Groups Info Wanted
Date: 22 Jan 93 20:09:37 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park, California

In article <1993Jan18.184020.23476@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> mag1@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (michael.a.giden) writes:
>
>My wife age 34, no children, just underwent a
>hystorectomy.  As you can imagine, she's
>quite depressed.  I'm looking for information on
>self-help groups that we might get in touch with.
>
>Thanks
>Mike Giden


I don't know of any self-help groups, especially since you didn't
note your geographical area, but you might start with the hospital
where your wife had her operation. Another source of information is
the book "Our Bodies, Our Selves," originally published by the
Boston Women's Heath Collective. One more suggestion:
there's an excellent organization in the San Francisco Bay area here in
California called Planetree that provides health information on
almost any medical problem. They might be a source of information
that would help your wife understand and deal with what's happened
to her.  Or they might be able to find you the name of a support
group. Call 415-923-3680.

Valerie Maslak
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: cindy@solan10.solan.unit.no (Cynthia Kandolf)
Subject: Re: Housework
Organization: /home/ludviga/cindy/.organization
	<1993Jan17.233339.1620@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
	<1993Jan18.180427.25720@adobe.com>
Date: 22 Jan 93 21:46:27

I've been asked via e-mail whether i think my husband does his share
of the housework because he's Norwegian and he was brought up that
way.  The sender asked that i reply by posting, so that's what i'm
doing.

My answer is i'm not sure.  I do know that in Norwegian schools, for
many years now, every child has been required to take classes in
cooking and to knit and sew in art class, and every child has had to
do some carpentry work.  This means that every adult under a certain
age in Norway technically should know how to do these things.

On the other hand, i know some Norwegian men who don't do their share
of the work.  I don't want to mention any names... At the other
extreme, i know a man who is taking leave from work right now to take
care of his baby daughter (and all the housework) while his wife
finishes her studies.

I think there are two more important reasons than nationality as to
why Steinar is the way he is about the house.  First, he is the oldest
of five children.  His father was out of the country for two years
when he was a child, working for the UN.  In a situation like that,
everyone had to do chores, there was no question and no trying to
bargain your way out of it.  Related to this is the fact that his
parents never dealt out chores based on sex.  The boys had to take
their turns at cooking and the girls had to take their turns at mowing
the lawn.  The second reason is that he lived alone for a number of
years before we married.  If he didn't take care of things around his
apartment, they simply didn't get taken care of.  

In any case, i consider myself very very lucky to be married to him.
Washing the dishes is only one of his good characteristics! ;-)

-Cindy Kandolf
 cindy@solan.unit.no
 Trondheim, Norway

Newsgroups: soc.women
From: noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer)
Subject: Re: Male Men Bashers
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 04:16:30 GMT

In article <C16BFs.74I@javelin.sim.es.com> biesel@javelin.sim.es.com (Heiner Biesel) writes:
><3399390@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>
>>Someone (The Great Name?) offered as a definition of feminism "that set of
>>beliefs which is held by 95% of all feminists".  This needs some work.  I
>>call myself a feminist, so I'll start.  This is a list of SOME of my beliefs.
>>For fun, I'll start with:
>
>>0.  The earth goes around the sun.
> 
>Naive physics; it is computationally convenient to assume this, but the
>general theory of relativity permits us to view the universe as revolving
>around the earth, with perfectly computable and reasonable results.

HeHe.  Actually, the first statement is, for the most part, false even
using the computationally convenient data and theories.  Pick a point
in space at random.  The probability is that the point will be quite
distant from our galaxy.  From most of these points, the earth and sun
are not discernable, and, therefore, are only possible--they do not,
irrefutably, exist.  From a few closer points the earth and sun are
discernably zig-zagging through space, with the sun doing little of the
zigging and zagging.  However, from these points, the earth does not go
around the sun in complete circles, it just zigs and zags.  From other
close points, it appears as though the sun and earth are in a race,
with the earth passing the sun and visa versa about once a year.
From still other close points they earth and sun are just trading
places, left and right, right and left, up and down, down and up, and
would seem to be exhibiting this behavior deemed "goes around."

Someone said it.... It's relative.

[more musings deleted]

>>Am I lying about my beliefs?  
>
>Probably.

Surely.

Aaron L. Hoffmeyer
TR@CBNEA.ATT.COM 
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.feminism
From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne)
Subject: Re: What feminists believe (was: Re: Male Men Bashers)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:45:00 GMT

In article <93026.073259RIPBC@CUNYVM.BITNET> <RIPBC@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes:
>From: jenk@microsoft.com (Jen Kilmer)
>
>-
>-I have serious reservations about drafts in general, and am glad that
>-no draft currently exists in my country [USA - registration <> draft].
>-
>-However, to have men be drafted and not women reinforces the &*)% gender
>-roles about how men are to sacrifice themselves for the sake of women
>-& children and that women are helpless little darlings that can barely
>-wipe their own behinds, much LESS do anything useful or productive.
>-
>-To summarize: I prefer no draft [and no registration]. However, if there
>-is a draft, it should be of both genders.
>-
>-Yes, I've written my rep & senators on this issue.

Jen, you mean that both masculine and feminine should be drafted? I thought
the choices were men and women?

>--jen
>
>
>  I think you are very fairminded on this issue (i.e. my position is exactly
>the same as yours!)  except perhaps that women might be given the same
>choice (if they wish) that conscientious objectors are given - namely
>to give some OTHER service.
>
>   There is another curious discrimination also going on here.  Policemen and
>firemen (mostly men) are paid fairly well, in part because they risk their
>lives at their jobs.  However, draftees, who are at much greater risk, are
>not paid nearly as well.  One could think of the draft as expropriation of
>property without adequate compensation.
>
>   Some years ago (in the late 70s) the Boston Globe wrote in an editorial
>that job preferences for veterans were bad because `women had been denied
>the opportunity to be veterans'.  

Perhaps you missed the point, if the veterans were women, then they would get
special preferances in hiring. So the greater the proportion of women, the
more AA would have reduced the veterans job problems. Of course, the men
would have probably been even worse off than today, but overall, things
would be better. :^/  

Ain't social engineering great?

>                                   This really takes the cake. I bet the
>editorial was written by a `gallant' man!  It is hard to imagine a woman
>being quite so unfair to men in general - at least not one who writes
>editorials for the Globe.

Where I use to work, the women would occasionally get mad at me for no
particular reason. Or at least due to the rule of silence, they would not
tell me what the imagined offense was. During lunch they would talk as
I was not there. I have heard enough to know that women can that unfair.
Looking back, I learned a lot at that job.
 
>Rohit Parikh


Rich

payner@netcom.com


Newsgroups: soc.women
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: Male Men Bashers
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 22:07:11 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1993Jan25.181513.22313@cbnews.cb.att.com> lib@cbnews.cb.att.com (Lib) writes:
>In article <C0x5Hx.I06@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
>>  But I don't mean to just extoll such activity as a "people
>>  filter" -- it's also a lot of fun.  Get out in the fresh air,
>>  see the stars at night for a change, see nature close up,
>>  get spectacular views from the summits of mountains, escape
>>  from TV and traffic, and enjoy the company of a group of 
>>  like-minded people.   On the east coast contact the AMC
>>  (Appalachian Mountain Club).  There are several organizations
>>  in the west that organize trips; perhaps a poster out there
>>  could suggest some.   
>
>Well maybe all the women that some one of you met camping were
>interesting, athletic, fun, etc. but most of the men I've met that
>way were dirty, smelly, ignorant back woods types who acted like 
>they've never seen a woman before.

  This is interesting.  Where do you camp/who organizes the trips
  you've been on?

  BTW, just to make sure we're using terms consistently -- by
  "camping" I'm referring to backpacking into the mountains
  or wilderness, *NOT* "car camping" in which you drive to a
  campsight.   That's a whole different set of demographics.

  The group trips I've been on have either been organized through
  the AMC (Appalachian Mountain Club) or involved friends I've
  met in the AMC.   Around here (Boston area and southern New
  Hampshire) it seems to attract mostly educated professionals,
  or college students of both sexes.  Engineers, doctors, lawyers,
  teachers, writers/editors, scientists, that sort of stuff.  
  If I've had any complaint about the crowds I've met on AMC
  trips run by the Boston and New York chapters it would be
  that they are overly yuppified (lots of BMW's, SAABs, Volvo's, 
  etc at the trail heads -- and high tech camping gear), and
  overly politically liberal.   Some of them may be nerdy, 
  but smelly or ignorant is something I've never seen.  My 
  wife is active in the AMC Music Committee where they go up to 
  AMC huts and play chamber music.  So I'm pretty sure we're
  not talking about the same crowd.
                                   


---peter



Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men