HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bickis@skmath3.pa.dec.com (M. Bickis)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Lipstick
Date: 10 Sep 1992 00:55:38 GMT
Organization: University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

It's interesting that Lenore Levine's article about lipstick has had a
much higher proportion of female commentators than is typical on this
newsgroup.  I hope I am not prempting women's space by offering a man's
view on the issue.

I don't pretend to speak for all men, but I personally think this is a
non-issue.  Whether or not a woman wears lipstick, or any other
decorations, is irrelevant to me.  I would certainly never consider it a
factor if I was interviewing her for a job, or had to deal with her as a
colleague or student.  If I had any bias, it would be in favour of a
woman who did *not* wear makeup, because that would tell me that she was
less likely to be hung up about body-image problems, which, it seems, is
still a great distraction for modern women.  But then, I am just
revealing my personal preferences, which might not be typical for North
American men.  Personally, I think women look better *without* make-up. 
There is nothing more attractive than a woman with naked eyes. :-)

But, having said the above, if some women feel they have to or want to
paint their faces, why is it such a big deal?  Does it really take
*that* much time and expense?  Most men do shave every morning, which is
no less of a cosmetic extravagance than putting on lipstick.  I shave my
chin for no good reason except that I think (or more importantly, my
wife thinks) that I look better with a bare chin.  Now if I added up all
the time I spend shaving over a lifetime, and add up the costs of
razors, shaving cream, after-shave--  don't I have better things to do
with my time?

To go back to Lenore's original excerpt:  For a man to say to a woman,
(in a derogatory way) "Don't you ever wear lipstick?" is as tactless as
for a woman to say to a man with a beard "Don't you ever shave?"

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>bickis@math.usask.ca<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Mik Bickis       \,,,       .*#*.  \    University of Saskatchewan
Department of        \,,,  ^\\|//^  ```\   Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Mathematics & Statistics \   )|(        ```\   Canada      S7N 0W0
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<S|A|S|K|A|T|C|H|E|W|A|N|>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>



-- 
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
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: bhattach@quip.eecs.umich.edu (sayan bhattacharyya)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: "Our Daughters Must Die" - Infanticide in India
Date: 8 Sep 1992 14:43:32 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor, MI
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <memo.609331@cix.compulink.co.uk> dbailey@cix.clink.co.UK writes:
>There are women's organisations in India, which have had
>successes.  This problem unfortunately seems just too large for
>them.

[Long article on female infanticide and abuses against women in
 India  deleted]


>Obviously post-mortems, murder prosecutions, a ban on
>sex-disclosing by scan clinics, and enforcement of dowry
>legislation would deal largely with the problems.  But there seems
>no will.  I think this should be an international feminist issue,
>what do you think?

I appreciate Diane's concern and it is a welcome change to see the
problem of third world women being talked about on this newsgroup 
where such discussion is so rare.

However, I am skeptical that making an "international feminist
issue" of this will help to solve the problem in the long term.
As was pointed out in the earlier discussion, this is not just
a "women's" issue but has a lot of economic and social causes.
Indeed this problem is not an isolated problem but is part of
the larger dynamics of oppression. 

It is interesting that you yourself noted that women's organizations
have so far been totally unable to tackle the problem. Doesn't 
this point to the fact that the malaise lies at some other level 
and treating it just as a "women's issue" will always fail to
address the real causes of the problem ?

It is interesting to note that the two states in India where the
situation of women is better compared to the rest of the country
(although still by no means perfect) are West Bengal and Kerala,
which also have the best record in the country in land reform and
agrarian reform. Conversely, the states where the situation is worst
(e.g. Rajasthan , where there was a recorded instance of "suttee"
or "widow-burning" just a couple of years ago) are also among the
most feudal and have seen little or no agrarian reforms. I think
that this is more than a coincidence, and I think that this is 
evidence that the problems you mention in your article have more
deep-rooted economic causes than you suspect.

Change can only come from within , not from without. This is not to
to say that making an "international feminist issue" as you suggested
will be totally fruitless. Certainly it will be laudable and may 
help in the short run by focusing attention on the problem. 


-Sayan Bhattacharyya

~~~~~~

Sayan Bhattacharyya
Artificial Intelligence Lab        bhattach@quip.eecs.umich.edu
The University of Michigan






-- 
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
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: buckmr@rpi.EDU (Ron Buckmire)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: NOW how many Female Senate Candidates left?
Date: 4 Sep 92 22:26:59 GMT

I know that Josie Heath lost in Colorado's primary.

Anyone know the status of Jean Lloyd-Jones in Iowa?

The NY Senate race is coming up Sept 15th and it is between Ferraro
(ick) and Bob Abrams (a *real* Feminist!) since Holtzmann never really
caught on and is now self-destructing with negative campiagning (even
though she's the best candidate in the race).

--
RON BUCKMIRE
Association for the Prevention of the Sale of Clothing to Richard Grieco
11 Colvin Circle, Troy, NY 12180
uunet!rpi.edu!buckmr||buckmr@rpitsmts.bitnet||buckmr@rpi.edu||+1 518 276 8910

--
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: rdh@veritas.com (Robert Hartman)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: bashing feminism in soc.feminism
Date: 14 Sep 1992 22:35:10 GMT
Organization: VERITAS Software
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <3dm-sr_@engin.umich.edu> bhattach@engin.umich.edu (Sayan Bhattacharyya) writes:
>In article <1992Aug31.200443.1765@Veritas.COM> rdh@veritas.COM (Robert Hartman) writes:
>
>>  As I understand it, this is supposed to be a group for
>>discussion of feminist issues, not a group for discussion of the issue
>>of feminism.
>
>While I agree with Robert's contention that articles 'bashing` feminism
>are out of place in this newsgroup, I disagree with him that debating
>about 'feminism itself' is also out of place.
>
>Note that `bashing` is not the same as `debating` . The former is a name
>for uninformed and prejudiced attack. `Debating' on the other hand is
>a term for civilised and two-sided discourse.

What I'm having a problem with is not so much straightforward
discussion of feminism per se, but with attacks on feminism that are
disguised as "debate."  For instance, I now wonder if the recent
"debates" about whether or not feminism is callous to men's issues came
up because certain people were looking for an excuse to dismiss
feminism as irrelevant or hostile to them, and therefore something they
could continue to ignore or oppose, without having to bother with the
legitimate issues feminism raises.  To me, that sort of "debate" is the
antithesis of the honest dialogue I think you're advocating.

Part of the reason I got so heated up about that issue is that I really
do hate it when my honest criticism is taken as that.  But given the
high proportion of men on the net who seem to do that, I suppose I can
understand it.

> ... Bear in mind that
>in parliamentary democracy the opposition has as important a role 
>to play as the government. If you ban the opposition, what you
>get is a dictatorship.

In parliamentary democracy, there are two assumptions that allow the
opposition to participate.  Both must hold for that form of government
to prevail.  The first is that the party in power will govern
lawfully.  The second is that the opposition will remain loyal.  When
either party uses the form of debate to undermine those givens, any
further discussion becomes a travesty.

So, I would expect the moderators to reject articles according to their
stated policy.  And I would expect people who submit articles to do so
in a constructive spirit.  Otherwise, this group just won't be worth
reading.

-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.
From: falcao@felix.Metaphor.COM (Ronnie Falcao)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Draft as a human issue
Date: 14 Sep 92 22:31:54 GMT
Organization: Metaphor Computer Systems, Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

[Moderator's note:  This is for informational purposes only.  The
discussion of the draft has been cut off.  No followups will be posted.]

I received some mail about a group that is working to stop
draft registration.

Third World Resisters was formed last year to support Tahan Jones,
Erik Larsen and other war resisters.  From their literature:

"Our work is far from complete.  Third World Resisters will work
towards getting conscientious objection taught in public high schools
as part of the regular curriculum.  We will be working to stop
draft registration.  There are currently 15 million young men
between the ages of 18 and 26 registered for the draft.  Many of
them are opposed to war. . . . 

"Tahan has vowed to remain in the peace and justice movement after
he is released from federal prison.  He wants to speak to young men
and women about his experience and about military recruitment and
enlistment issues.  He needs your support to continue doing peace
education work. . . .

"Your tax-deductible contribution remitted to Third World Resisters/
Agape can help us print literature, put on forums, travel and do outreach
to military age youth."

Their address is Third World Resisters, P.O. Box 2074, Berkeley, CA  94702

They list other relevant groups: American Friends Service Committee,
War Resisters League, Fellowship of Reconciliation, and the
National Interreligious Service Board for Conscientious Objectors.

They also mention H.R. 5060, Representative Dellums' legislation
to reform the CO process.

I urge those who oppose the draft to take action to support relevant
groups and to write letters to your federal representatives.

	- Ronnie

falcao@metaphor.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
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: "Jennifer A. Newbury" <jn1t+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Lipstick
Date: 10 Sep 1992 14:54:04 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
	<18idbnINNdsm@agate.berkeley.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

Hmmm... It's sorta funny--  Here at Carnegie Mellon University I can
always pick out the freshman females during the first month of classes
because they're the ones who still wear makeup.  The lack o' paint on
the faces of the upper classwomen is definately not due to a lack of
contact with men-- the ratio here is very lopsided (I'm the ONLY woman
in the junior physics class!). Life here is rather high-pressured and
makeup is one of the first things to ignore when things get stressed.
Peer pressure back in high school "forced" me to wear makeup. Once I got
to college, I opted to stop wearing it (in favor of five extra minutes
of sleep in the morning) and realized that no one really cares. How
liberating!  Now none of my old chums from high school wear makeup for
the same reasons.  Of course, peer pressure may still have a lot to do
with the lack of makeup on the faces of CMU women-- the "au naturel"
earthy-crunchy look is quite "in." 

--Jenny 


-- 
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
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: mahadeva@point.cs.uwm.edu (Aruna Mahadevan)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Anyone noticed the new mudflaps?
Date: 15 Sep 1992 00:53:06 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

Hi,

I have been noticing something recently, and would like to get some
feedback as to whether others have noticed it, and what their reaction
was.  I was driving on I-5 in California a few days ago, and noticed
this mudflap on a truck.  It has the silhouette of naked women on it. 
I have seen similar silhouettes on license-plate holders, and painted on
tinted windows while driving to work or going out to eat.  I think it is
rather demeaning to women to have to see this stuff on mudflaps, windows
and license plate holders.  Is there anything anyone can do to stop this
before it becomes a very common thing?
Any comments?

-Aruna

--
Aruna Mahadevan  (Software Engineer, Sybase, Inc.)
* The opinions presented above are not those of my employer - they are
  mine! *



-- 
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: sharring@cs.tamu.EDU (Steven L Harrington)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: male/female joy of sex
Date: 4 Sep 92 22:14:04 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department, Texas A&M University

In article <9208311801.AA06257@mica.berkeley.edu> muffy@mica.berkeley.EDU (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>In article <173rusINNncb@agate.berkeley.edu> mas1!kens@apple.com (Ken Showman) writes:
>> Muffy writes:

>My contention is still that many (most?)  women do *not* actually
>enjoy sex, even though they are generally physically capable of doing
>so.

I'm getting in on this discussion rather late, and don't have much
substantive to say about it; however, I cannot let this statement
ride. _Please_ tell me where you got this information. Is it merely
opinion? If so, what brought you to it? I haven't heard a statement
that struck me as absurd as this in quite some time. I make no claims
to being an expert in the field, but my "contention" is 180 degrees
in the other direction.

-steve harrington
-texas a&m university



--
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: dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Anyone noticed the new mudflaps?
Date: 16 Sep 1992 00:24:03 GMT
Organization: Columbia University, Dept. of Biological Sciences.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Sep15.191412.9200@cbnews.cb.att.com> mvwjf@mvgpf.att.COM (William J Fallon) writes:
>!In article <195c0vINN1h4@agate.berkeley.edu> dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) writes:
>!>
>!>   I think the public nudity issue is one of the more interesting
>!>conflicts relating to feminism. 
>
>Tell us again you can't see a difference between a man displaying
>a nude picture of an anonymous woman and a woman deciding to bare
>part of her own body where she controls the circumstances.
>

  Again:  I can't see the difference between a man displaying a nude picture
of an anonymous woman and a woman deciding to bare part of her own body 
where she controls the circumstances.

   I think it is pretty easy to see my point if you don't bring lot's of
emotional explosives into the room with you. The issue is whether the
display of the female body is offensive, or not.
   The current status of this (in many places) is that a non-obscene display
such as the mudflap is OK, while going topless is not. I think the vast
majority of feminists don't like this situation, but the argument is which
way to go.

  I think it is going to be very hard to come up with a coherent viewpoint 
where it is OK for a woman to expose herself while it is illegal for a man
to display a picture of the same thing. Can a woman put up pictures of herself?
Of another woman? In light of obscenity law, what is the difference between
a picture, and the actual thing (breasts, for example).
   I think some people who support toplessness, don't realise the implications
of it. It women have the freedom to go topless, then the image of naked
female breasts is going to become popular, and you must realize that it will
be seen most commonly in beer commercials.

DanZ


-- 
This article is for entertainment purposes only. Any facts, opinions,
narratives or ideas contained herein are not necessarily true, and do
not necessarily represent the views of any particular person.  



-- 
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: tittle@ics.uci.edu (Cindy Tittle Moore)
Subject: Call for Moderators
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: University of California, Irvine: ICS Department
Date: 16 Sep 92 00:14:15 GMT

Once again, we are preparing a call for moderators.

Soc.feminism is multiply-moderated.  This allows us to reduce the
burden on each moderator, while allowing moderation to continue
uninterrupted if an individual moderator goes on vacation.

We started with three moderators: Valerie Maslak, Cindy Tittle Moore,
and Miriam Nadel.  Valerie dropped out after her net connection
deteriorated.  We added Muffy Barkocy earlier this year.  Miriam
has been inactive for some time due to special work projects and is
contemplating whether or not to retire.

We would like to have at least four active moderators.  The
requirements are fairly simple:

  1) You must have good net connections (both usenet and email),
  2) You must be prepared to moderate for at least a year (we'd like to
     keep the turnover rate down),
  3) You must abide by the guidelines when approving posts,
  4) The general readership of soc.feminism must be generally positive
     about your moderatorship, and
  5) You must be acceptable to the current set of moderators since,
     while we work largely independently, multiple-moderation does
     not work if there is a lack of mutual respect among the moderators.

All the moderators so far have been women, but there is no reason a
man couldn't apply.  We had one man apply last time, but his net
connections didn't seem to be good.  Additionally, there are several
men that we've asked to moderate -- and they've declined.

The time demands are not too bad.  We typically spend about four hours
a week on this group (not counting the time spent reading the
newsgroup); sometimes more and sometimes less depending on the current
level of discussion.  Of course, the more moderators there are, the
less time it should take.  We have software to expedite posting
articles that you're welcome to use.  You do get to put up with the
occasional nasty email from someone unhappy with your rejection; this
is an occupational hazard of being a moderator, but because this is a
group about feminism, the attacks are often misogynistic as well.

This is the procedure: if you're interested in moderating
soc.feminism, drop us a line at feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.

After two weeks, we'll post the list of volunteers to this group.
At this point, we'd like all of you readers to send in any comments
you have to the same address, feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  All
comments will be kept anonymous outside of the moderators.

After reviewing the comments, we (Cindy, Muffy, Miriam) will choose
the new moderators to be added to the multiple-moderation of
soc.feminism.

Regards,
Cindy, Muffy, and Miriam



--
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: Dorothy Morse <dmorse@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Lipstick
Date: 8 Sep 1992 14:27:10 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

Aren't there economic pressures to wear lipstick too? Going to apply for
a job, you are likely to put on some makeup even if you customarily don't
wear it--because you want to blend in.
And I've never seen a tv anchorwoman without lipstick on and never seen
a tv anchorman with lipstick on.  Maybe the anchormen have subtler lipstick.
I thought Bush had on some makeup at the Republican Convention, but my
TV is just black and white, so I wasn't sure


-- 
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
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.