From: jbl3g@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Jason Basinger Linkins)
Subject: Re: Intellectuals & women
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 22:01:40 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.133840.1@udphvx.cineca.it> dallagata@udphvx.cineca.it writes:
>In article <1993Jan22.223525.7628@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, jbl3g@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Jason Basinger Linkins) writes:
>> In article <1993Jan22.115547.1@udphvx.cineca.it> dallagata@udphvx.cineca.it writes:
>
>Ok, let's try to summarize. 
Yes Michele, let's push that ape brain to the very limits...

If you don't like it, just tell 
>me that, and I will answer to all the point you made, but now I 
>don't care.
>
>You says (correct me if I am wrong here): 
>
>[1] To have a child can be the most wonderful experience for 
>    some women, *BUT* not for everywoman.
That is correct.  But you should specify.  "...but not NECESSARILY for
everywoman [sic]

So let's clean that up.  "To have a child can be the most wonderful 
experience for some women, but not necessarily for every woman."
>
>[2] If they decide in this way, it is just because they have the 
>    right to decide their lifes.

Let's qualify that one too.  (NOTE: I am not changing the spirit of the
statement, merely qualifying it.)

"If they decide in this way, it is just because they have the right to decide
their lives.  It is not for another to judge the rightness or wrongness of
their decision."
>
>[3] I (you) am not cold, I do care about women (sorry, but I 
>    need this point because I wanna also proove that you are
>    cold, with my bigger model that's better then your).

This statement must be stricken.  You have no way of proving I am cold to any
one but you.
>
>[4] The world works in this way, let it spins in this way.
I have never, ever, said that I profess to know anything about the way
the world works.  This statement is erroneous, and must also be stricken.

>
>I say:
>
>[1] I belive, that for every woman to have a child can be the 
>    most wonderful experience.

Fine.  Women for the most part may not agree with you though, and
your statement is difficult for you to defend, because you are unable
to practically experience pregnancy.  You have no hands-on way of knowing
if pregnancy is like.  NOTE:  I am not saying that you cannot know about 
children and believe practically that they are wonderful.  Heck, I like
children.  BUT, how do you know anything about pregnancy?  Have you been
pregnant?  If not, this statement is hearsay and opinion and not backed
up by anything factual.

>
>[2] They can decide to do something else, right, but that's 
>    the big point. If they do, I just don't like them (that 
>    means I give to them the same respect that I can give to
>    an asshole).

I feel sorry for anyone who feels compelled to respect an asshole.  I believe
that an idiot like you can do it though.  Also, don't expect them to like
you, either.  Furthermore, just because you do not like something does not
make it intrinsically wrong.

>
>[3] The world is wrong (not only in this point) let's think 
>    about how to improve it.

I agree.  Do you want to improve it?  Wake up.  Treat all human beings 
(including women) as equals.

>
>[4] I DON'T WANT TO ENSLAVE WOMEN, I WOULD LIKE TO FREE THEN FROM 
>    THE SLAVERY THAT MEN AS YOU GIVE TO THEM!

I have not enslaved anyone.  You are wrong.  I have suggested only one
thing throughout my thread with you. WOMEN SHOULD BE FREE TO DECIDE WHAT IS
BEST FOR THEM, AND SHOULD NOT BE PRESSURED BY CHAUVINISTIC ASSHOLES TO GET
PREGNANT IF THAT IS NOT WHAT THEY DESIRE.  I have in no way suggested the
enslavement of women.  You will not be able to find one shred of evidence that
says I have ever endorsed the slavery of women.

>
>Here my point (you mist it, sorry, maybe it has been an english 
>problem):
>
>The keyword is *to decide*. Many women decide to have not 
>children because they want to keep their career.
>
>It is not a women "fault", it is a society fault.
>You can be right when we speak about women that *absolutely* 
>do not want to have children (for many reasons).
>
>But, what about the women that decide to have not children 
>because this society don't let them to have children and to 
>have a career? Do you think that there are not solutions? 

Guess what?  If a woman loves her career, and realises that getting pregnant
and having to raise a child would keep her from doing the thing she loves
(her career) then I believe it is perfectly fine for her to opt not to 
have children.  Someone else will have children, instead, I'm sure.

It is not for me or you to decide what is best.

>
>Do you think that is in this way and so it will have to be 
>in this way? Do you think that this is to *care* about women?
>Do you think that this is not cold?

No, it is not cold.  I maintain, that it is not for me to decide.  If I got
married to an actress, and told her, now that we're married, you are going to 
have to give up acting and have a baby, THAT would be cold.

>
>There are women (two is enough), that are NOT ABLE TO DECIDE, 
>man. Whatever they decide, they loose something else. It is 
>not FAIR. And if something is not fair, we have to change it, 
>ok? And to change this, does not mean "Tell to women that 
>they have only to have children", NO! 

Yet you suggest that society would be a better place if women would put
having children ahead of the rest of their lives.

>
>It means: "Tell to women that they have to fight as *women*
>to have the *RIGHT* TO WORK AND TO HAVE A FAMILY". And they do 
>not do it. i
It is too bad that you have not witnessed the struggle of women, fighting
to have those rights.  Many already work and have families.  Why
don't you get your head out of your ass?


That's what I would like to see in this world:
>Women fighting to improve the society giving to it the best 
>of women culture (yes, even the concept of love for the 
>children, instead of the concept of hate, that causes the 
>wars, tipical of men, dear boy). 
Why do you refuse to allow it to happen?


>
>Why do they have to decide?

Because we cannot decide for them.  It is cold.   It is not right.


 Why a woman DON'T 
>HAVE TO BE HAPPY ANYMORE FOR BEING A MOTHER?!? 
Because many people are fulfilled in other ways!  Where is it stated, 
ALL WOMEN MUST BE MOTHERS.


 To have the 
>same right, MEANS THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE TO DECIDE TO HAVE 
>NOT CHILDREN, OK?
And to have the same right means that they do not have to decide TO HAVE
children.  THEY CAN DECIDE WHATEVER THEY WANT, AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO 
LISTEN TO DICKHEADS LIKE YOU!


>And now I also answer you about when I think that women 
>behave like men:
>
>Women behave like men when they think that this system is ok.

I guarantee you that the same women who put their careers above childbirth
are also the ones who believe the system is fucked.  It is a fucked up
male idea that the woman belongs "barefoot and pregnant."

>This system is a male oriented system. For sure. To think 
>that this system don't damage them and that don't hurt their 
>feelings is stupid and dangerous, other than a *male* 
>thought. If they think in this way, they behave as men, if 
>they don't they have to try to change it. Easy, no?
No, you make absolutely no sense.  You say that the system is male oriented.
Fine.  Next you say that if women think that the system is not out to hurt
them, they are stupid, perhaps true.  But what is this "other is a male
thought?"  Makes no sense.  Your last sentence is a grammatical nightmare.
If they think in what way?  If they think that the system is fucked, you
mean?   How is that a "male thought".  And women must try to change the 
system...including the part of that same fucked up system that says
"women should be pregnant" and "it is okay for men to rape."