From: drs@stsci.edu (David Soderblom,B441,7983,ADD.02-26-92)
Subject: Re: Deaths on Railroad Property
Originator: drs@hyades.stsci.edu
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 23:51:16 GMT

From article <1992Dec23.224448.28692@plx.com>, by asgard@plx.com (J.R. Stoner):
> In article <1992Dec23.162343.29221@stsci.edu> drs@stsci.edu (David Soderblom) writes:
> _In another follow-up, somebody mentioned another incident in which some very
> _young children were killed after straying from their backyard onto the
> _tracks, and the poster castigated the mother for her inattention.
> 
> That someone was me.  The (one) little child was not killed and was heroically
> saved by the trainman involved.
> 
> _I have to conclude that this person must either be single or that their major
> _contribution to child raising was a one-time ejaculation for them to be so
> _unfeeling and ignorant of just what is involved in caring for children.
> 
> This crack is unwarranted, uninformed,  and out of order.  I have not given
> you any information that would make my gender known to you.  It so happens
> that I am a man, but your assumption is dishonestly taken.
> It is quite the thing to go with the fashionable stereotype of a man as
> walking wallet/sperm doner, which is offensive enough, but you have no right
> to say I do not care about children, and I have never said anything about
> which parent has sole responsibility for child care.
> 
> _Children are not the sole responsibility of the mother,
> 
> It must make you feel better to write those words for me, as I have not said
> them.  Nor do I subscribe to that stereotype/strawman role you have assigned
> for me.
> 
> _and, as any parent who
> _has actually spent time with their children can verify, children can find ways
> _to get into trouble on time scales that are much shorter than the time it takes
> _to get a load of laundry into the washer and get back upstairs.  Fortunately
> _they don't do it very often (not usually, anyway).  Unless you personally
> _know exactly what that mother or father was facing during those moments
> _that lead to tragedy, I suggest that you keep moral judgments to yourself.
> 
> My remarks about that "mother" are based on the fact that living next to
> a working railroad, and not being aware of the possibility of a train coming
> along with children nearby, would be willfully negligent.  Should my family
> be similarly located I will ensure that proper fencing separates my house
> from my back yard.
> 
> _These opinions are strictly personal.
> 
> Then it is taken personally, as they are offensive on their face.
> -- 
> In 1911/and strident voices raised high/Votes! Votes for women, was the cry.
> The Titanic was sinking/and death was nigh/Boats! Boats for women, was the cry.
> J.R. Stoner, DWMIT - asgard@plx.com - sun.com!plx!plxsun!asgard

My remarks went too far, and I wish to apologize to Mr. Stoner for their tone.
I do recall that the original posting specifically referred to what the mother
should or should not have done -- not "parent", but "mother."  That is
blatant sexism, no matter what the gender of the person posting.  I too would
be very vigilant if I lived next to a rail line, and it was a vivid imagining
of the incident and its aftermath that led me to react as strongly as I did.
It still gives me chills to think about it.

Yes, we must all be responsible for our own actions; my remarks were meant
to imply nothing about the propriety of law suits in the instances that
were mentioned.  Plain foolishness is a basic human trait that seems to
cut across all social distinctions, and I wished to remind us railfans that
we can be foolish sometimes too.  May no such tragedy ever befall you.

David R. Soderblom
Space Telescope Science Institute
Baltimore MD
soderblom@stsci.edu