From: regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard)
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men,soc.women,talk.abortion,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Affirmative Action (Re: Reproductive Technologies)
Date: 5 Jan 1993 09:18:54 -0800
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdde.sdd.hp.com

my, my.  Are 5 newsgroups *really* necessary?  Is what Don has to fling upon
this net *that* important?  Sigh.

In article <C0E32p.AG2@cs.psu.edu> beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
><1ia1h8INNs7p@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:
>><C0CBE3.InL@cs.psu.edu> beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
>>><1i9pfhINNo7s@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:
>>>>Well, I'm all for applying equitable standards to child custody and support
>>>>awards, so that makes the rest of your posting suspect, since I am a feminist.
>>>Yes, but are you all for applying AFFIRMATIVE ACTION?
>>Define it.
>>Then I'll take a whack at answering.

>Another smokescreen response, Adrienne?  You conveniently omitted
>Karl Denninger's question re AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, in favor of evading
>the issue through the term "equitable standards" -- and then,
>claiming that you represent feminists, you accuse *his* article of
>being "suspect"?

Scuse, please, but Karl didn't bother defining it either.  Now, it seems
a definition is reasonable request because 'affirmative action' takes many
forms.  Are you looking for an answer, or just a brangle?

I'll repeat: if you will define what you mean by the question, I will
attempt to answer it.

BTW, while you are *conveniently* redefining the discussion, let me point
out that I claim that I am a feminist.  I do not claim to REPRESENT
feminists.  Get a life.

>1.  Presumption in favor of the father, until such time as fathers
>receive 49% of sole/primary custody awords.

No.  I'd go for 50% of fathers receiving sole/primary custody starting
now, but not a backwards presumption.  We aren't trying to even out a 
social ill when we are talking about the private constructs of a given 
family: rather we are trying to deal with the breakup of that family in
an equitable manner.  

>[No smokescreens, Adrienne:

Don, if you want to be an ass, be my guest.  If you cannot clarify your
question, well, you are well on your way, aren't you?

>AND/OR

>2.  Fines against judges whose record continues to show bias against
>fathers (eg. 40% or less).

Sure.  I'd like to see the guidelines that judges are expected to use,
though, and the methods they would be measured by.  Just for curiousities
sake, doncha know.

>AND/OR

>3.  Insert your definition here, Adrienne.  (Either you meant to claim 
>you support AA or you evaded it, using "equitable standards" intentionally.)

My definition of 'equitable standard' would be to presume, absent some 
useful measure of 'unfitness', that a father is as likely as a mother to be
a good parent, and to award custody equally, without regard to the genders
of the parties.  That still leaves room to rule out custody granted to a
'bad' parent (which I'm sure we would both agree would be undesireable -- 
but of course doesn't address the issue of 'what if both parents are bad?')
while  rendering most custody decisions impartial WRT sex of the parents.

>And please, Adrienne, stick to the issue:

Well, Don, you are a *peach* of a one to talk, aren't you?  If you weren't
so defensive and full of bull, you could ask a straightforward question.

>discussing whether the political climate would *allow* this to
>be implemented.  Just whether it fits into established AA principles
>supported by women's groups and minorities.

Let me know what *you* think 'established AA principles' involve -- 
without your slant on their implementation sometime, bub, and see how far
we can have a reasonable discussion about it.  FACT of the matter is, any
discussion of principles necessarily requires a discussion of practical
application, or it's a waste of time.  You may care to waste your time,
I don't.

And your biased either/or shit don't cut it bub.  I've stated my position
above, and I am a feminist.  You, however, are merely pugnacious.

Adrienne Regard

Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,talk.abortion