HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org>
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Shaming men's sexuality
Date: 16 Dec 1992 16:34:33 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

[Moderator's note: excessive included text trimmed.]

vanhoek@bend.UCSD.EDU (Karen van Hoek) writes...
KVH> My overall point is that it really is true that some feminists
KVH> seem to think it's open season on men, especially with regards
                                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
KVH> to men's sexuality.

It's interesting that you mention this, Karen.  This is also a sentiment
echoed in "Pornography: The Other Side" by Prof. Ferrel M. Christensen,
of the University of Alberta, and also the President of the organisation
MERGE.

It was his opinion, in large part supported by his research, that many
anti-pornography feminists are in some sense opposing male sexuality,
rather than merely the depiction of women as "sexual objects," and that
many anti-pornography stances are not only sexist (against women as well
as men, in the sense that they would treat women as requiring "special
protection" from the "evils of male sexuality," as though they are not
capable of making their own decisions), but partly to blame for some of
the problems which they say would be solved by restrictions on pornography.

It's a very interesting read, although I apologise for seeming to sound like
a huckster!

---
Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
(416) 322-7876

"Cthulhu for President in '92 - Why vote for the _lesser_ of two evils?"
                                                          - Bronis Vidugiris
---
 * SLMR 2.1a * Do Quarter Horses have only a single leg?


-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: leecr@microsoft.com (Lee Crocker)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: In defense of porn
Date: 12 Dec 1992 03:54:31 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

Janis Maria Cortese:

> ... Maybe someone should present a reasoned argument why porn or
> anything else is GOOD for society as a whole, or even in parts ...

Russell Turpin:

> [...eloquent defense of pornography on social and psycological
> grounds...]

The most obvious social benefit from my point of view is the
reason my girlfriend is a professional stripper: she makes lots
of money.  She is intelligent, strong, thoroughly enjoys her
sexuality on and off the job, and stripping gives her the
financial independence to do things she might otherwise not be
able to.

Men like Hugh Hefner and Bob Guccione may be sexist pigs, but
they put food on a lot more tables than Dworkin and McKinnon
ever have or ever will.  Putting them out of business puts a
lot of women (not just models, but editors and others) out of
work.
-- 
Lee Daniel Crocker    | Free minds; free bodies; free trade.
leecr@microsoft.com   | Libertarian Party  1-800-682-1776



-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: kaarts@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Kenneth John Aarts)
Subject: Re: Women on net et. al.
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: 16 Dec 92 21:49:40 GMT

In <1g5jchINNhtj@agate.berkeley.edu> celeste%express@freedom.msfc.nasa.gov (Celeste) writes:

>When we work in a exclutionary system and have an alternative,
>we use our alternative but work around the exclutionary system.
>The exclutionary system never sees our alternative! In fact
>those of us in the alternative system never confront the
>exclutionary system. This leads to many situations where
>the women know what is going on and the men haven't a clue!
>Of course the men accuse the women of being "irrational"
>and the women feel the men are being blind and ignorant.

>Women struggle everyday with their thoughs and feelings begin
>"excluded" from male resoning at work and in politics. Only when
>women "emulate" the male
>protcols of resoning, are the ideas of women accepted.
>The book "Prisoner of Men's Dreams" explores how everyone is
>judged on a "male" standard instead of a human or woman standard.

The impression I have received is that in all female schools, female
students behave/learn/interact in a manner that is more traditionally
masculine than when they are in mixed gender schools.  Can anyone
direct me to information that affirms or refutes this?
	In addition, the first few chapters of Dale Spender's "Man
Made Language" left me with the thoughts that some of the masculine
styles of communication are more natural, but that women are excluded
from using those styles.  She seemed to be making the point that
feminine communication styles were forced on women.  Is this accurate?

Ken


--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: rhb@world.std.COM (Robert H Brueckner)
Subject: Re: Motivations for Gender-Neutral Terminology
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: 17 Dec 92 18:16:37 GMT
	<1gm0jdINNii7@agate.berkeley.edu> <1992Dec16.180331.29781@noao.edu>

In article <1992Dec16.180331.29781@noao.edu> muller@noao.edu (Beatrice Muller) writes:

QUOTE
   Robert, I don't know how many female native German speakers you
   know, but I can assure you that a lot of them think gender
   neutral language is important. In German it is even worse
   than in English because most nouns referring to human beings
   are not gender neutal. E.g. die Schueler, (pupils) is supposed
   to inculed female pupils as well but it is definitely masculin
   (if you only would have female pupils it would be die Schuelerinnen,
   but if you have 1000 female pupils and *one* male pupil it would
   be die Schueler). There are now (thanks to feminists) even
   attempts by government agencies to use gender neutral language
   or if this is not possible, to include both genders like
   Schueler und Schuelerinnen.
   It does matter! And who deceides what is 'more important'?

   Beatrice
END QUOTE

I said I never heard them complain. This is not a cheap dodge, either.
In six months of working in a German corporation I never once heard a
woman mention the gender issue as it applies to language.I assume that
if it had been important it would have been talked about, and no
unmarried woman I ever addressed as "Frauelein" ever got offended
(although *I* thought about it and it did feel a bit odd to me).
However, I am willing to concede that this may have changed in the
past few years. I haven't been there since the reunification.

You are technically correct when you say that 1000 female pupils and
*one* male pupil would be addressed as Schueler; however, I think only
the most pedantic language purists even in Germany would be that
strict; most of the people I worked with would have just called them
Schuelerinnen, overlooking the one male. In colloquial speech they are
just as relaxed as we are (even more so, if you count dialects).

And while I concede that this may be an important issue for some,
please forgive me if I don't deem it *as* important as, say, the
eradication of hunger, the protection of the environment, equal pay
for women in equal jobs, the elimination of war, the plight of the
homeless, or the threat of giant asteroids striking the earth.

RB



--
|"The truth is cruel, but it can be loved, and it makes free those who  |
| have loved it." -- George Santayana  // Opinions expressed here, when |
| clear and persuasive, are my own. --Rob Brueckner (rhb@world.std.com) |


--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: turpin@cs.utexas.edu (Russell Turpin)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Do we ever know anyone else?  (was: A Safe Place)
Date: 16 Dec 1992 17:22:14 GMT
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Summary: Through a glass darkly ...
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

-*----
In <1g5r51INNk2f@agate.berkeley.edu> ramoss@rpi.edu writes:
>> ...  Also, it is impossible for someone to know what is like
>> being a woman (or at that a minority) unless they are a member
>> the oppressed group. ...

In article <1glutuINNi65@agate.berkeley.edu> kaarts@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Kenneth John Aarts) writes:
> In the same way, it is impossible for women to know what it is 
> like to be a man. ...

To take this to its rightful conclusion, I cannot know what it
is like to be Kenneth John Arts, even though we are both men. 
More generally, one cannot know what it is like to be another.
One can only listen and imagine.

Russell


-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: matt@physics.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Motivations for Gender-Neutral Terminology
Date: 14 Dec 1992 21:31:36 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (Theoretical Physics Group)
Distribution: world
Reply-To: matt@physics.berkeley.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <1gis4pINNt4e@agate.berkeley.edu> wagner@hp800.lasalle.edu (Jon Wagner) writes:

> I have been wondering about the motivation behind gender-neutral
> terminology.  There have been many changes to classic works (such as 
> the Bible) to conform to this idea.  I am not against these transformations
> but I wonder where the roots of the movement began.  I have three ideas,
> which are probably wrong, but I invite discussion on them.

I have no opinions about why someone would or wouldn't want to change
the terminology in the Bible; I'll let someone who cares more about
that book than I do discuss it.  (In this particular case, you have to
be especially careful: are we talking about changes in the Hebrew,
Greek, and Aramaic texts, or merely about a different translation of
those texts into English?  If the latter, than which translation is
really more faithful to the original?)

In my field, though, there's a very clear motivation for
gender-neutral language: all-male language is insulting to half of the
readers, because it implies that they do not exist.  I am thinking,
specifically, of phrases like "If the reader has been attentive, he
will notice that...," which can be found in older textbooks.  There's
just no reason why you ever have to write phrases like that in
textbooks; it's always possible to reword them in a more inclusive
manner.

--
Matthew Austern                   Just keep yelling until you attract a
(510) 644-2618                    crowd, then a constituency, a movement, a
austern@lbl.bitnet                faction, an army!  If you don't have any
matt@physics.berkeley.edu         solutions, become a part of the problem!


-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: sfjr@wam.umd.edu (Steve Russell)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Mythopoetic Groups
Date: 12 Dec 1992 16:04:12 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

The emerging conversation about mythopoetic men's groups has brought up
questions I have always wanted to ask and opinions I've wanted to give.
  These are relatively uniformed observations/questions, so if I offend
you please INFORM me of your view , Im interested.

1.  These "men's" groups seem almost the same as the various "goddess-
    religions" being created by some feminists.  Why do some feminists
    criticize these groups so heavily?

2.  These groups function on the seemingly reasonable assumption that
    same sex individuals need to bond more then they do in ordingary
    life.  Im not sure I believe this.  I make friends,(male or female)
    through my various hobbies.  I find the needs I have met by these
    arent supplied exclusively ( or close) by one sex or the other.
    If it was so, why couldnt I just make friends with men through my
    hobbies?  What do I gain from the "mythopoetic" aspects of going
    out in the woods are worshipping sex organs etc etc?

3.  It seems to my view that many problems have been self-created for
    human's by engaging in myth making/religion building for the past
    several thousand years.  Isnt it illogical to solve the problem
    of stereotypes/edicts from these things by going out and inventing
    more of them?  

4.  By #3, wouldnt people be better off if they looked at themselves
    and the world as is?  Why do we need to become "The Great Hunter"
    or "The Healing Woman"?  Why cant we be just "Harry The Accountant"
    or "Lisa The Lawyer"?  This may seem trite but it looks like if
    you want to change yourself/society you first have to live with
    yourself/society, not putting on war paint once a week or making
    rituals to nonexistent goddesses.


Sorry If I offended anyone, I honestly want contrary opinions since I
dont know much about these groups.  Just giving my apriori two cents

Steve R


-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
Xref: sparky soc.feminism:2952 news.answers:4622
From: muller@noao.edu (Beatrice Muller)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Motivations for Gender-Neutral Terminology
Date: 16 Dec 1992 18:07:09 GMT
Organization: National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <1gm0jdINNii7@agate.berkeley.edu> rhb@world.std.com (Robert H Brueckner) writes:
>
>Sorry, but "Mensch" is definitely masculine: der Mensch. It means "a
>person" roughly the same way "mankind" means "people" in English: with
>a decided "man as representative of the species" flavor. But one
>should not confuse grammatical gender with sexual gender. There are
>many instances of words playing against type in this respect.
>"Maedchen," for example, is a neuter noun meaning "girl." American
>women I know who speak German get upset at being rendered neuter by
>nouns like "Maedchen" or "Frauelein" (excuse the added "e" in these
>words, but diereses are impossible in this text processor), though I
>have never heard a German woman complain. They don't think about it, I
>suppose. And men don't think about the fact that "die Hode" (testicle)
>is a feminine noun. It just doesn't matter. There are more important
>things to worry about.
>
>RB
>

Robert, I don't know how many female native German speakers you
know, but I can assure you that a lot of them think gender
neutral language is important. In German it is even worse
than in English because most nouns referring to human beings
are not gender neutal. E.g. die Schueler, (pupils) is supposed
to inculed female pupils as well but it is definitely masculin
(if you only would have female pupils it would be die Schuelerinnen,
but if you have 1000 female pupils and *one* male pupil it would
be die Schueler). There are now (thanks to feminists) even
attempts by government agencies to use gender neutral language
or if this is not possible, to include both genders like
Schueler und Schuelerinnen.    
It does matter! And who deceides what is 'more important'?

Beatrice


-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Should Women Support Other Women?
Date: 17 Dec 1992 21:19:25 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

levine@symcom.math.uiuc.EDU (Lenore Levine) writes:

(Re choosing an academic advisor.)

>A very nice person, who is completely nonsexist and supportive
>of you, may get you involved in a field that is essentially
>a gilded trap. In today's job market, you have to find an area
>where you, personally, can distinguish yourself by your achievements.

I'm looking back at what I wrote a few days ago, and it *does*
sound a little patronizing. I don't think I sound aware enough,
of the fact that some people have limited options. That is, for
example, what is a graduate student supposed to do, if the only advisor
available in her field is a horse's ass? Or worse?

I can't say there's an easy answer in a situation like that. All I
*can* say is that the cut-and-dried advice, "Find a nice person,
an unprejudiced person. A woman if possible, if you're a woman," may
not always be appropriate.  


-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: mbarroso@watson.Princeton.EDU (Margarida Barroso)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Women's and men's safety
Date: 15 Dec 1992 18:49:04 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <1gkvapINNar6@agate.berkeley.edu>, rhb@world.std.com (Robert H Brueckner) writes:
> 
> 
> Well, I do think this is awful. It's obvious that women are easy
> targets in this society -- I just watched a segment of 48 hours
> recently in which professional burglars and robbers confessed that,
> when breaking into a hotel room, if they know a man is in there they
> walk away. They call first and if a woman answers they go ahead. Women
> are the easier prey, and no wonder they're afraid. I agree that women
> are imprisoned by this fear (though, having come only recently to this
> group, I hadn't been aware of the extent of the imprisonment).
> 
> 
For me the real frightening thing, is that since that fear is taught to you
since you are a kid (meaning a girl) one does not really notice it!! I for 
example, wouldn't have said right away, I am afraid, but then you start
looking around for the things you don't do because you are a woman and
you are afraid, and its overwhelming!!!
Here in New Jersey, there has been this thing with carjacking, and I was
really annoyed with the advices given by the police, you should try not to
go to the mall at night and alone!! C'mon, now I can't go to the movies at 
night or else, all by myself??? This is too much!!!
I think that the problem is much more complicated and does not affect only
women. In front of a gun, it does not really matter if you are a man or a 
woman, it is just that we are easy targets, like the elderly or the children!!
American society is terribly violent and that is scary! 
That violence is everywhere and starts in TV, where you can't say bad words
but you can kill as you wish!! Finally, I don't agree that repression is
the final solution, living in a complete police state is not my notion of
future!!! The more you get violent repressing crime, the more violent crime
you will get in revenge!! Maybe changing the atitudes of people will a step
forward, but that will take lots of time and money and willingness of people
to change!!!
guida          

-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: davids@engin.umich.edu (David Snearline)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Women's and men's safety
Date: 17 Dec 1992 22:07:16 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <1gkv73INNaqq@agate.berkeley.edu> vanhoek@bend.UCSD.EDU
(Karen van Hoek) writes:
>I live in Ann Arbor, a very nice town; my male friends all feel safe
>walking in many parts of it at almost all hours.  I don't.  In fact,
>given a recent rape in broad daylight in one of the woods, I'm afraid
>to go walking alone in the woods.

As a native resident of Ann Arbor, I partially agree with Karen.  Many
places in the city are fairly safe for men to walk at night.  But I think
the disparity in how safe it is for women vs. how safe it is for men is
somewhat exaggerated.  Growing up, I lived on the southeast side of the city,
where you didn't feel safe at night regardless of your gender.  And while
I will walk alone in the Arb at night, I keep my eyes wide open.  I realize
there is a risk involved, but I accept the risk for the sake of my freedom.

I think that the community reacts differently with regards to violence
against women than men.  When a male jogger was killed in Brown park a
few years ago, there was hardly a stir.  Parents would warn their kids
not to walk through the park alone, but that was it.  However, in the
case Karen mentioned, where a woman was raped in Eberwhite Woods, the whole
city moved with a flurry of action.  The fact is that both men and women
are victims of crime here.

But, just because I think the disparity in safety is exaggerated, it doesn't
mean that I believe it does not exist.  And I think that means that men
need to work together with women to make things safer.  In my view, this means
being willing to be a travelling companion for a friend, at all hours, no
matter how inconvienent it may be for me.  This means listening to women's
concerns, and not just shrugging them off, like I see many men doing.  This
means crossing to the opposite side of the street at night if a woman is
coming from the opposite direction, to make her feel more comfortable.  This
means letting male friends know that they are out of line with sexist comments.

Should all of the be necessary?  No, but this isn't an ideal world either...
And I think that both women and men should realize that we are in this
together.  Men should listen to women's concerns *AND* women should listen
to men's concerns.

-- 
David Snearline			CAEN Networking and Operations
davids@engin.umich.edu		University of Michigan Engineering


-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.