From: levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine)
Subject: Re: Damned Souls (was Re: Version Five)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 18:24:27 GMT

gazit@duke.cs.duke.edu (Hillel Gazit) writes:

>The following article was rejected from soc.feminism.

>In article <1hkqjdINNj7d@agate.berkeley.edu> 
>levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine) writes:

>>>Hillel, can you really deny that people in this culture fall too quickly
>>>for a slick sound byte? That they too often evaluate a situation by 
>>>appearances, and do not take the time to find out what is really
>>>happening?

>Tell me Lenore, what will be your response to someone who questions
>your experiences using a language like:

>#Lenore, can you really deny that people in this culture fall too quickly
>#for a slick sound byte? That they too often evaluate a situation by 
>#appearances, and do not take the time to find out what is really
>#happening?

>Do you want people to talk to you using such a tone?

I don't see how my tone can be construed as insulting. I would not
be offended by such a comment. Nevertheless, I apologize if you
thought of it as insulting.

The reason I wrote this paragraph, is that I was thinking about
a young man who posted to alt.feminism last spring. He was talking
about another young man at his university, with a Latin name, who 
was sexually using women.

The first young man was not a good communicator and did not present his
case very well; he also had some very questionable philosophical
positions. Nevertheless his case had some merit; I've known sexual
users and predators of both genders myself, and the games they
play can be quite horrible. But a lot of people jumped on this young
man. Now, I remember you as *defending* him. Was I wrong?

At any rate, that's why I wrote the paragraph I did. I was merely
reminding you of that case.

>>Some company (department, agency) wishes to hire a token woman (black,
>>disabled, etc.) to show off how wonderful they are. Therefore, they
>>don't pick any of the well-qualified white males available for this
>>position. However, they don't pick the *best-qualified* woman. Instead,
>>they pick a woman who makes a good photo op -- attractive, smiling and
>>noncontroversial.

>It certainly happens, and the Old Boys can get away with that, because
>the deal you (liberals and feminists) offered to them.  Affirmative 
>action is a deal that tells them "hire enough women and minorities
>and then nobody will be able to sue you about discrimination."

>They took the deal, and that was dirty act on their part.

>You offered the deal, and defended it for 20 years as "equality,"
>and this is even a dirtier act your part.

You are talking about the actions and positions of other people.
I can't necessarily defend them; I'm not even quite sure what they are,
unless you're a *lot* more specific. And I may not even agree with them
myself.

>>Let me add -- that as a middle-aged curmudgeon, I think my chances of 
>>being hired as anyone's token are slimmer than a snowball's in hell.
>>(Not to worry though; I suspect I'll do just fine on my own merits.)

>Don't be so sure on both counts.

Of what? That my merits will be paid attention to, or that I have
merit?

>Hillel                                               gazit@cs.duke.edu

Lenore Levine
Newsgroups: soc.men,alt.abortion.inequity,alt.feminism