HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pw@panix.COM (Paul Wallich)
Subject: Re: Women's and men's safety
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: Trivializers R Us
Date: 12 Jan 93 22:24:24 GMT

In article <1i5epmINNglg@agate.berkeley.edu> mara@Panix.Com (Mara Chibnik) writes:

>Do we want to make women more accepting of risk, or to make men less
>accepting of risk, or both?
>
>I maintain that most (if not all) differences pertaining to
>acceptance of risk are learned.  Girls tend to be kept closer to
>whatever adult is watching them, to be warned faster about being
>careful, to be played with less roughly, to be expected to play less
>risky games.  I think it would be great for girls to be freed up in
>this regard.
>
>At the same time, I think that boys are encouraged to boast about
>their willingness to do dangerous things, and that they are taught
>that exercising prudence is not something to be proud of, because it
>is less "manly" than what is commonly called courage.

I think it's not just encouragement to take risks, it's also
familiarity with getting knocked around. Boys are expected
to get cuts, scrapes and bruises, and in addition to the
social cachet (break an arm and you're a hero for weeks :-|)
there's the lesson that pain is something you can handle. It
hurts, but it's nowhere near the end of the world.

This familiarity with the consequences of physical risk-taking
may lead men to take a different attitude toward other risks
as well (e.g. being mugged) because they're in [at least what
they think is] known territory: they have a sense of what
could happen, how much it would hurt, and how much they want
to trade off convenience against safety. (Of course the perception
may differ from the reality, but that's another kettle of fish.)

Now clearly there's a point where familiarity with physical
pain shades off into desensitization and psychic numbing,
but I think that the whole social package that surrounds
boys/men and physical risk does have certain things to say
for it.

paul



--
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: muffy@remarque.berkeley.EDU (Muffy Barkocy)
Subject: rights of the individual (Re: men crossing the street at night to avo0
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: Natural Language Incorporated
Date: 12 Jan 93 23:53:18 GMT
	<9301060221.AA02997@york.cs.ucla.edu> <1ifilkINNo04@agate.berkeley.edu>
	<3g23tBj027n@khantazi.welly.gen.nz>

In article <3g23tBj027n@khantazi.welly.gen.nz> banksie@khantazi.welly.gen.nz writes:
> [...] I find it interesting to note the number of times when
> simple minor behavior modifications are suggested that the invariable
> arguement is that it is unconstitutional and somehow subverting
> people's 'rights'. [...]
> Surely these people must be aware that this is a highly
> antisocial attitude? Society has always been, and always will be, a
> balance between the rights of the individual and those of the society
> as a collective whole.

A feminist viewpoint on this?  Well, consider this: women are still
generally raised with an expectation of serving/supporting/nurturing
others, in our society.  What that means, in particular, is that they
are expected to be willing to experience at least some, but often quite
a lot, of personal inconvenience in the service of others (generally
children, but also men).  Men, on the other hand, are expected to
"succeed," which often translates (again, in this society) to trampling
on other people in an effort to "get ahead" or "get to the top."

You can easily apply these concepts to this discussion (with a good deal
of generalization, of course - that's why "women" and "men" are in
quotes): "women" see something like crossing the street as a perfectly
reasonable thing, trying to make other people feel better.  They propose
this, not thinking of it as all that big a deal - they would probably be
quite willing to do something similar if they thought it was warranted.
"Men," on the other hand, are resistant to doing things for others, as
it might get in the way of getting ahead.  So, they see this as very
contrary to what they are expected to do, and a very big deal.

Muffy


--

Muffy Barkocy                      | ~Never had a lot of faith in human beings/
muffy@mica.berkeley.edu            |  but sometimes we manage to shine/like a
"amorous inclinations"? Aha! I'm   |  light on a hill beaming out to space/from
not "not straight," I'm *inclined*.|  somewhere hard to find~ - Bruce Cockburn

--
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: aaldrich@encore.com (Al Aldrich)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: men crossing the street at night to avo
Date: 7 Jan 1993 19:22:43 GMT
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

This has been a fairly interesting conversation to observe. I thought I
would throw in a couple of thoughts.

One, to reaffirm the problem. I was at Star Island off the coast of Maine
a couple of years ago at a Religious Education conference. The evenings
activities had been very much loving, caring and fun, and as we were
walking back , I ( a man ) approached 2 women on a dark narrow path and
passed them, saying `good evening'. They commented on how amazing it was
to be in such a situation that I( a man ) COULD approach them from behind
on a dark narrow path as a `stranger' and that they had NO fear of being
attacked. They asserted how this was the one and only place that they
could feel this safety. What an eye opener that was for me.

Since then, I have tried to be sensitive about my behaviour when encountering
women in the dark in public places. I don't think I would necessarily just
`cross the street'.. I think this would be seen as `strange'. What I have
done instead is say Hello in a friendly tone and continue walking, giving
as wide a berth as possible as I pass. I think, just skulking to the other
side of the street without saying anything could be viewed as suspicious.

Comments ?

al





-- 
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: andyw@meaddata.COM (Andy Welter)
Subject: Re: men crossing the street at night to avo
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Reply-To: andyw@meaddata.COM
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Date: 12 Jan 93 22:41:47 GMT

In article 1if80mINNlml@agate.berkeley.edu, mara@Panix.Com (Mara Chibnik) writes:
>andyw@meaddata.com (Andy Welter) writes:
>

> >Seems kind of silly to me... if I were a woman and a man crossed
> >the street to obviously avoid me, I'd probably either confused or
> >insulted.  And if I were a black woman, I'd probably assume that it
> >was someone who was stereotypically afraid of a black face.
>
>I am a white woman.  If a man crossed the street to avoid me-- that
>is, to avoid frightening me-- I might never realize it.  If I did I'd
>be delighted.  I cannot say what a woman of color, and in particular
>a black woman, would say, but I maintain that Andy Welter (whose race
>I don't know) doesn't either.
>
>Please note, not so much Andy but those men who look upon this
>discussion as though women were "demanding" that men cross away from
>them at night, that I (at least) am not at all "demanding" this.  I'm
>saying that it reduces stress for me, and that I like when it
>happens.  I like when people remember my birthday, too, which isn't
>the same as demanding that they send me a card.
>
^^^^^
good points... duely noted.

I guess this may be a big difference in attitude between men and women
(or at least me and the women who have posted here) I would tend to
think that someone crossing the street to avoid me did so because they
think I looked dangerous... Which at times is an insulting assumption.
(When I am dressed for a Ramones concert I would be more understanding
:-) )

And I have heard several black men complain about people quickly
locking their car doors or crossing the street when they appoach.

If most women see this issue a different way, I suppose crossing the
street might be the polite thing to do at times.

I doubt I would bother if I was walking face to face with a woman, she
has the opportunity to size up the situation while I approach.  But if
I happend to be walking faster than a woman, and catching up to her
from behind, I could see how that would be a more intimidating
circumstance... can't keep an eye on me... can't tell how close I am
etc.

Guess this is a lesson about everybody seeing things in their own way.


---
|Andrew Welter	     |  All views are mine and not |      (513) 865-6822
|Mead Data Central   |    that of my employer      |      pd&o-ps-ts-dsp
|P.O. Box 933        |                             |     andyw@meaddata.com
|Dayton, Ohio  45401 |          	           | ...!uunet!meaddata!andyw


--
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.
Xref: sparky soc.feminism:3167 news.answers:5063
From: cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Women and Men's Safety
Date: 7 Jan 93 22:33:14 GMT
Organization: University of California, Irvine
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <1ihundINN6g9@agate.berkeley.edu> BARANSKI@VEAMF1.NUSC.NAVY.MIL writes:
>In <1id7cjINNctb@agate.berkeley.edu> cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu writes:
>
> In article <1id4svINNbu0@agate.berkeley.edu> andyw@meaddata.com writes:
> >The difference in attitudes and feelings is your responsibility.
> 
> If a woman is raped, her feelings and fears are NOT her responsibility and she
> cannot be called to task for them.
>
>True.  It is also true that if I am walking down the street, and I pass near a
>woman who has been raped, who's reaction to me simply walking past is fear,
>that I am not responsible for her fear.  Her rapist is responsible for her
>present fear, not I.  

Fine.  But, does that mean that you don't want to be bothered lifting a
finger to help her?  Are we reduced to "It ain't my mess, so I'm not
going to clean it up?"  You didn't do it, so you aren't going to do
thing one to make something a little easier for her?

If you were to encounter an abused child who is fearful of adult men, as
many are in the centers and shelters -- I've heard of kids running in
terror from ANY adult male, read the literature -- are you going to say,
"Hey, *I* didn't do it" or are you going to put out the minimal effort
it takes to reassure the kid that you won't beat his brains in?

Imagine how that sounds to a rape victim.  "Hell, *I* didn't do it."
All that she's been through, all that she fears, and you address it by
saying, "Not MY problem."  It is ALL of our problem!  *I* didn't make
this mess either, but if we don't start taking some damned personal
responsibility instead of just yelling "not my job" we're just going to
leave this mess to our grandchildren to clean up.  

>Her present fear is not 'real' in that it is not caused by the present reality,
>but by her past reality which I did not share.  Therefore, her fear is not
>'''real''' to me, as it's cause  has not been part of my reality.  Yet, her

World War II was not felt by you; is that then not real?  Are you saying
that you only care about what happens to you and you aren't going to
step beyond that?  I'm not deliberately saying that you ARE
ego-centered, but surely you can see how your statements sound that way.
 
Regards,
Janis C.





-- 
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: uunet!infmx!hartman@ncar.ucar.EDU (Robert Hartman)
Subject: Romance novels as emotion-porn
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.
Date: 7 Jan 93 21:45:59 GMT

In article <1if81dINNlmo@agate.berkeley.edu> chris@psych.toronto.edu (Chris Hitchcock) writes:
>In article <1ictk0INN96s@agate.berkeley.edu> jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews) writes:
>>
>>     The Harlequins I've read (Mills & Boon books, for you
>>Brits) are all about an emotion-free, strong man, powerful in
>>some way, who is so attracted to the woman that by the end of
>>the book he has asked her to marry him (or some such thing).
>>This is just the flip side of the stereotyped male fantasy of
>>the beautiful, sexy woman who is so attracted to the man that
>>she wants to have uncommitted sex with him.
>>
>>     The fantasies are different, but complementary.  They both
>>are based on the exchange of protection (or "commitment") for
>>sex, which is the basis of traditional relationships.  They both
>>represent the best thing that each sex can dream of getting out
>>of such a relationship.
>
>Well, there *are* romance novels with strong heroines; the last one
>I read (lent to me by a male friend who seeks such things out) was
>about a female university professor and her attraction to and
>eventual union with the bartender at the college bar. The thing that
>drives me kind of crazy about these books is that they are so often
>based on misunderstanding. But I suppose it's hard to fill a novel
>with all those sparkling moments of romance amidst normal life which
>most of us accumulate as relationships start.

I'm certain that there are exceptions, but that's beside the point.  By
and large, I believe that romance novels are emotion-porn, in the same
way that skin-mags are sex-porn. Some may be good.  Some may be silly.
Some may be offensive.  But it all panders to the unrealistic hope that
fantasies can come true without too much effort.  And these novels
typicall reinforce some very unhealthy notions about men and the nature
of romance.

>Besides, I'd argue strongly against the suggestion that protection for
>sex is the best thing women can get out of a relationship.

So would I.  But this isn't the traditional or prevailing view, or the
view that is typically promulgated at least.  We all have a feminism
to thank for providing us with an alternative to that scenario.

> ... Then again, I've mostly
>dated men who earned as much or less than I do, and I've never questioned
>having a career for myself.

And I'm sure that at least part of this has to do with the fact that
you've questioned the typical mores of our culture and made up your
own mind.  And I think that's great!

-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
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: tittle@alexandre-dumas.ics.uci.edu (Cindy Tittle Moore)
Subject: Re: Women's and men's safety
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Date: 5 Jan 93 06:44:49 GMT

In <1iafu6INNiq3@agate.berkeley.edu> turpin@cs.utexas.edu (Russell Turpin) writes:

>In article <1993Jan3.114505.15032@monu1.cc.monash.edu.au> pol253b@monu1.cc.monash.edu.au (Ms D Alexander) writes:
>> I'm not sure that making a comparison between the fear of injury from
>> sporting activities, and the fear of injury which results from acts of
>> violence is legitimate.  The two are conceptually miles apart.  ...

>I would have said they were only feet apart.  That is, the
>two risks have significant commonalities in my mind.  But
>this may be a male thing.  In which case the dialogue moves
>back one level of abstraction, where we wonder about the
>importance of men seeing this coupling as close and women
>seeing it as distant.

You don't see a huge difference between choice and coercion?

(I'm NOT slamming you; this is how I would have characterized the
difference between the two sets of risk and I find it surprising
that you don't (appear to) focus on that difference at all.)

Regards,
--Cindy
--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may 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: gds@ficus.cs.ucla.EDU (Greg Skinner)
Subject: Re: Women and Men's Safety
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: in your face!
Date: 12 Jan 93 22:08:59 GMT

In article <1iipns$gif@agate.berkeley.edu> cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu writes:
>Percentages.  How many times does [women attacking men] happen?

I don't know.
That's not the point though.  As you cannot be sure that any given man
has or has not been attacked by women, to treat them as if they hadn't
been attacked by women would be to commit the same act you're
claiming that men make: scaring women.

>I keep a distance from EVERYONE at night.  The men ain't scared of me.

How can you be sure of this?  Did you ask them?

--
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: mvwjf@mvgpf.att.com (William J Fallon)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Paglia and Dworkin
Date: 5 Jan 1993 17:39:07 GMT
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <1iasr5INNm19@agate.berkeley.edu> levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine) writes:
>I am so tired of Camille Paglia and Andrea Dworkin; of their media
>grandstanding, and their inability to relate feminism to the realities 
>of daily life. 


Don't know about Dworkin but methinks Paglia has useful messages for
ordinary women. Her statements about date rape (that women should be
more careful about potentially dangerous situations) may be inflammatory
but do in fact relate to the realities of daily life. Also her frank
discussion of her own sexuality seems useful in helping women divest
themselves of negative feelings about what she feels are perfectly
normal feelings (whether or not you share her orientation) .


-- 
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: chris@psych.toronto.EDU (Chris Hitchcock)
Subject: Re: Women and Men's Safety
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: Dept. of Psychology, University of Toronto
Date: 12 Jan 93 22:10:53 GMT

In article <1ihundINN6g9@agate.berkeley.edu> BARANSKI@VEAMF1.NUSC.NAVY.MIL writes:

> If a woman is raped, her feelings and fears are NOT her
> responsibility and she cannot be called to task for them.
>
>True.  It is also true that if I am walking down the street, and I
>pass near a woman who has been raped, who's reaction to me simply
>walking past is fear, that I am not responsible for her fear.  Her
>rapist is responsible for her present fear, not I.
>
>Her present fear is not 'real' in that it is not caused by the
>present reality, but by her past reality which I did not share.
>Therefore, her fear is not '''real''' to me, as it's cause has not
>been part of my reality.  Yet, her fear is both subjectively (*she*
>really feels fear), and objectively (she *really* feels fear) real.

Mr. Baranski raises a common and valid point, that there are people
who's reactions to situations are unexpected and perhaps
'inappropriate' (whatever that means; I think I mean of a kind which
most people couldn't expect to occur), and that it's unfair to expect
people to be mindreaders. On the other hand, a lot of what is being
said by women here about encountering unknown men in strange places in
the dark is pretty consistent: We're scared. No one's calling for a
law to oblige men to cross the road, we're just pointing out our
perceptions, and commenting that, unlike the one poster, we're not
*offended* when a man shows courtesy for our fear, and marks himself
as a non-threatening person by crossing the street. Instead, we're
grateful. Personally, I don't feel as strongly about the issue; I
certainly wouldn't label a man who didn't cross the street a rapist,
and I'm sorry that there are people who have sent email of that kind.
I think if it were really common it might even start to annoy me. On
the other hand, if there is a rapist around who has been attacking
women but hasn't been caught yet, it might make everyone a lot more
comfortable.

On the other hand, it's not just "neurotic rape victims" who are
afraid when strange men walk close to them in deserted areas, it's
most women.  I sometimes wonder if that's why women in general don't
enjoy horror films as much as men. It's easy to get scared if you're a
woman; just go for a walk alone at night. :-)

Chris.
--
Chris Hitchcock, Dept. of Psychology     chris@psych.toronto.edu
University of Toronto      in my new life: clh@vax.ox.ac.uk
Toronto, Ontario          UseNet:  I only read it for the
CANADA  M5S 1A1                         .signatures

--
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.