From: alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia)
Subject: Re: Excluding men
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 22:11:17 GMT

In article <19NOV199212534070@rosie.uh.edu>, fina2f@rosie.uh.edu (Venkatesh, P. C.) writes:
> ------
> Posted for Susan Chacko, please send email to susanc@helix.nih.gov
> ------
> 
> In article <1992Nov18.002019.26782@cbnewsi.cb.att.com>, alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia) writes...
> >
> >
> >Could we see some sort of a vote count or referendum among the subscribers
> >of this mailing list on this issue ?
> > 
> >Just post the results on sci, acuai etc.
> > 
> 
> Thank you for the kind suggestion. 

You are welcome.

> The mailing list is private, and there's absolutely no need to 
> justify its policies. Although we do use 'public' resources, such as 
> the internet, that doesn't mean that the mailing list must be public too. 

First, mailist list is NOT private but an Internet Mailing list.
So let's not hide behind this magic word 'private'.

> If this were not so, I could 
> demand that you post all your private email on this newsgroup, since 
> your mail also travels by the tax-supported internet.

Nobody has asked that the posts posted on the mailing list be posted on
other newsgroups which are open to others. What has been asked of the
moderators of this Internet mailist list is the following: Keep it OPEN
to participation by anyone who is willing to contribute on its chartered
issues. DO NOT decline membership to the Internet mailing list solely
on the basis of gender. That amounts to discrimination and I believe it
is illegal for any organization using public facilities like INTERNET.

Your analogy to private emails is misplaced since no one has asked to
divulge the contents of the posts on this women's maillist publicly.

> As I said, there's no *requirement* that the policies of the mailing
> list be justified. 

If I were you, I would double check by posting on news.groups or some other
groups where the INTERNET mailing list policies may be discussed.
There are a large number of INTERNET Mailing Lists and I believe there is
a guideline associated with such mailing lists. If the present guidelines 
permit exclusions based on gender, I will have no further problem.
It is for your own good that you check that before someone makes an issue
out of this publicly. I am willing to let it go one more time (I already let 
it go once on SCI) as some people have requested so. However let it be 
clear that I am letting it go out of sympathy for Indian women, not
because it is their fundamental right to discriminate against men at
large.


> However, the question of male participation has
> been much discussed in the mailing list and on these newsgroups, so
> it's clear that there are many different positions on the issue,
> among the members and the world at large, and it's good that they
> were discussed. I do, however, think that it's been discussed to
> death.
> 

All I asked is a vote on it so that we know what percentage of women
think that male participation is not good for such a mailing list.
Such a vote could be conducted without any further discussion.
Such a vote could be conducted on the Mailing list itself. Pick up
a neutral vote taker. Shayamla Permeshwaran/Amirthi would be a good choice 
for the vote taker. It is advisable that the moderators or the mailing list 
members adopt policies which are nondiscriminatory as far as gender, national
origin, race, sexual orientation (all the AA jargon) etc. are concerned.

> Susan

Alok
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian,soc.culture.indian