From: Laurie Mann
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Blowing Up Stereotypes  (Re: An Old Male Fantasy that needs to pass)
Date: 16 Oct 92 18:58:48 GMT
Reply-To: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com

susan larsen writes
>Women clinging desparately to a definition of female that elevates mother-
>hood to goddess-head.  Men, who think they have to parade around their 
>machismo by claiming a divine right to fight.  Why is it that these  
individuals 
>fear so terribly the suggestion that a woman may not be a suitable mother or 
>a man would rather caress the cheek of an infant than violate the body of 
>an enemy with government issued weapons?  Why should the image of a woman 
>carrying an M-16 or a man in an apron cause convulsions of fear and loathing 
>in quarters as diverse as the net and the Republican Convention?
>Why do we harrass and terrorize unmercifully the few brave souls who would 
>dare to pursue their own inner calling in contravention to the brutally 
>conformist norms that are so forcefully and punitively applied to the  
populace?   

Susan, I think this is a VITAL observation.  Why indeed?  

The theory goes that we are THINKING people.  However, people would rather
dedicate themselves to the past with a blind obedience than really consider  
these issues.

In general, women and a few men who contribute to this group are willing to to  
discuss and think about these issues.  But, there are an awful lot of men who  
post here that would make Pat Buchanan look like a liberal.

>Instead of bickering incessantly about the viability of women as soldiers or 
>men as caretakers, why are we not pondering the foundations upon which our 
>impressions are settled?  Why isn't everyone raging to the gods above that 
>I am an individual and I demand to be regarded and respected as an individual?   
>And why wouldn't we offer the same regard and respect that we so desparately  
crave 
>for our selves to our individual brothers and sisters?

I don't need to rage to "the gods above" (sic) about much of anything.  I do  
rage at myself sometimes, and at people who make it their place in life
to hurt other people and "keep them in their place."  Every time we tell our  
daughters "That's only for boys" or our sons "That's only for girls" we are  
perpetuating stereotypes.  Don't perpetuated them---blow them up instead.

I think what makes some people the most angry at the "femnazis" is that
we aren't playing by the traditional rules of deferring to men.   Over time,
I've acquired a large kill file in soc.women because there are so many clueless  
men who post here.  Why should I waste time/energy trying to discuss important  
issues with men, when all they can do is bash women?  There was a time when I  
was opposed on principle to the notion of soc.women.only, but no more.  It's  
time to stop being "so nice."

*  NeXT: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com * GEnie:  Laurie.Mann  *
**** Bush or Perot, Just say NO! **  Vote for CHANGE in 1992!****
***** "Hollywood still doesn't get it." Dan Quayle, 9/21/92 *****
* "No Dan, YOU still don't get it."  American Voters, Fall 1992 *
From: sam@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 20:08:47 GMT
Subject: Re: LOVE!!!!!LOVE!!!!!!!LOVE!!!!!!!!MORE LOVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Organization: HP Signal Analysis Division - Rohnert Park, CA