From: Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Guilty of (Fill In The Blank)
X-To: C J SILVERIO
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 03:43:00 GMT

cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C J Silverio) writes...
CJS> beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
CJS> |In article <1992Sep27.142543.22029@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@nyx.cs.du
CJS> (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
CJS> |>Gee, and why would the women "refuse to speak honestly and openly"?  Mayb
CJS> |>becuase they've already heard about how if they "show disrespect", they'l
CJS> |>be killed?

CJS> |Again, the only proposal to kill a woman simply because she
CJS> |"shows disrespect" has come from you.  Is that why you are so
CJS> |afraid of informing men about things that might upset them?

CJS> You are incorrect.  Will Steeves posted here that he would
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
CJS> probably kill a woman for being disrespectful
     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You misinterpreted what I said, C.J.  When I wrote that, it was from the
context of someone in a *very* distressed and distraught state of affairs,
not not knowing where to turn, or whom to confide in, for fear of a threat
upon my life from the woman I loved.

To re-iterate *once again*, the only reason I used such strong language, was
to shock people into realising that the loss of a wanted child (or foetus,
whatever...) is a devastating experience which *can*, without the assistance
of swift action, drive a man to desperate actions such as violence or suicide.
Violent actions are *never* justifiable, which is something which no one seems
to quote from me, when they reply to my messages, but we *ought* to not act
as though emotional stressors do not exist.  If a man going through this
experience does not receive counselling, or worse, is treated like he is to
blame for the situation that he's in, his emotional situation *will* indeed
deteriorate, and in some cases, can become a danger to himself and others.

*I* was in this very situation, and although my situation deteriorated, I was
more serious about the idea of "killing *MYSELF* where I stood," than of
committing violence towards anyone else.  Obviously, given my "violent
tendencies" (I started *one* fight, in my entire life, and it lasted about
five seconds...when I was *eight* ... Yeah, real "violent tendencies" there!),
it would have been *quite obvious* that I was not serious about what I said,
but unfortunately, I was not quite blunt enough!  All I asked for, was to be
acknowledged as a person in as terrible a situation as the woman, yet I was
treated like I did not exist.

And apparently, a few people here, do not even believe that a man even has
the right to get counselling!  This is what I meant when I spoke of "respect,"
ie., that a man has the right to get as much counselling as the woman!  Often,
if the woman is not counselled, *she* will also face emotional crises far
greater than would be the case, if she *had* received counselling.  I was *not*
talking about *controlling* anyone, which is another word which I hear thrown
around a lot.

And in regards to the issue of why I think that this is an argument for
father notification, I was attempting to show people that if the father is as
informed as the mother, and both receive counselling (not necessarily together,
unless they want it that way), they will both be more emotionally prepared.

Of course, if you sidestep the issue by treating the father like he is a
nonexistent entity, or worse, deceive him, the chances are fairly good that
eventually, it will be found out.  *Nobody* likes betrayal, but the ways which
some people handle feelings of betrayal, differ vastly from other people's
reactions.  The *vast majority* will react as you and I, and most others have,
with some emotional strain, perhaps even vague feelings of revenge, but only a
very *small* minority will take it out in acts of violence.

But, do we treat *all* men as though they are "potential oppressors," and not
inform them of what is happening, because of the small minority who will react
with violence?  Is it fair?  Indeed, this is why I support the idea of
notification *except* where it is judged to be dangerous for the mother.

What is so wrong with this idea?  Perhaps, "it's difficult to judge when the
mother will be in danger"?  Perhaps others as well, but to treat all men as
potential criminals is the quintessence of what I consider wrong with the
so-called "Politically Correct" movement, ie., "all men are potential rapists,"
"all men are potential ...", etc.  Treating people as individuals, rather than
members of a group, goes a long way to ensure understanding and harmony.

---
Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
(416) 322-7876
---
 * SLMR 2.1a * Oxymoron : Virtual Reality
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,talk.abortion,soc.men,soc.women