From: eisimps@cie.uoregon.edu (Eileen Simpson)
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Organization: University of Oregon Campus Information Exchange
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 00:18:24 GMT

In article <1992Sep26.162502.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
>In article <1992Sep26.050847.3122@nntp.uoregon.edu>, eisimps@cie.uoregon.edu (Eileen Simpson) writes:
>  [adoption debate deleted]
>> I am entirely willing to raise a child on my own.  What I am not willing to
>> do is saddle a child with a flakey, uncommitted father.  I will not
>> fascilitate male irresponsibility by 'doing the noble thing' and having the
>> baby but not expect him to be part of it.  I have done too much paternity
>> law and support enforcement to put up with absent or half-assed fathers
>> because they screw up kids too. 
>> 
>     The only way this can occur is if you consent to sex with a
>flakey, uncommitted, half-assed man.  I can now see one problem
>with America -- the issue of character is unimportant when it
>comes to the selection of both a sex partner and the President.
>(Note that with Gennifer Flowers and Hillary, this is the same selection.)
>

Excuse me, but you just checked out on the male's responsibility for his
conduct.  This is one of my big problems with the right to life MOVEMENT
(as distinguished from the general idea that abortion should be
infrequent).  There's been a tendency for the woman to be made responsible
for her decisions as well as HIS.  You just bought into it.

Yeah, I know you are going to say that a woman should know the character of
the man she marries or has sex with, but the way you use that it is as a
complete defense to the man's conduct!  I am sick of women being
responsible for the general state of male irresponsibility because "they
should have known who they were involved with."  How about the concept that
a MAN, as opposed to a *male* faces up to lifes responsibilities and is
deserving of condemnation if he does not?

What any woman over 25 finds out is that many men are two-faced:  there is the
face she sees when he is trying to establish the relationship and the face
he shows at the end.  There is no reliable indicator that many of these guys 
are flakes in the end-game.  Blaming women for this is one of those
psuedo-"personal responsibility" arguements that is really part of what
gives guys like this permission to continue to be flakes and have others
pay the prices for it.  The adult community has no social stigma or
significant consequence for a man who behaves like a jerk and abandons his
responsibilities to children.  The reality is that many men will be highly
solicitous and responsible while there is something in it for them, and
disappear when things become inconvenient.  This did not happen very
frequently in the past because they were stigmatized.  Now we run
psuedo-psych bullshit to say, 'well, the woman should have known what she
was getting into.'

When we can see around corners, read minds, and have a toll-free 800 number
that will give us a bias-free report on how the guy is when he feels his
responsibilities have become 'inconvenient,' I think you will have a point.
Until then, women who date unmarried men who appear responsible,
professional, considerate, caring, and compassionate can be excused if they
do not foresee that he will only behave this way unless they break up--at
which point he will become a self-centered boor and run like hell. 

If you are talking about dating guys that "ooze slime from every pore,"
then sure, the lady should figure it out.  If you think the only men who
could behave in the manner I described are "slimers" you are very naive. 

In the cold cruel world, I see women with 20 year marriages left because
their husbands have a "mid-life crisis."  The phrase is  societal permission
slip to check out without social stigma.  Men who do not support their
children include such people as doctors, lawyers, teachers, accountants,
university professors, and any other profession you can name.  Many of
these men are quite charming and professionally responsible.  They function
as responsible adults until the marriage breaks up--then they are flakes
because there are few legal and no social consequences for it.

It is NOT the woman's fault that she doesn't know thay will do this if the
relationship breaks up.  But if you still think it is, you must know
how they should know.  In that case, YOU ARE SITTING ON A GOLD MINE!!  Send
me e-mail today, and I will gladly help set you up in this money making
venture.  (I've been reading about Ramtha, and we can make big bucks here.)
Call today! 

eyes.



select your dates on the basis of lengthy acquaintance-ship and full
knowledge of character -or- do you experience sexual attraction, and then
pursue the woman?  If you do the former, you are so rare you ought to be
declared a national historical monument!  As a woman who will *not*
consider a man as a 'date' or see romantic potential until I have known him
platonically for quite some time, I can tell you that I have yet to meet a
man who accepts this arrangement willingly.  Men are impatient and date to
explore the potential for a sexual relationship and are not willing to
spend the time to find out what character is like before they have sex.