From: HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.)
Subject: Re: FOCA: And I quote.....
Organization: University of Houston Administrative Computing
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 19:16:44 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

In <17duanINNcvl@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@sdd.hp.com writes:

> In article <1992Aug25.155443.23622@menudo.uh.edu> HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.) writes:
> >In <17dgvmINN82m@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@sdd.hp.com writes:
> >
> >> >> > >>I think that they tend to inflate the trauma of childbirth, automatically
> >> >> > >>ruling it out -- I don't think they do a "thorough examination".
> >> >> > >There *are* 1.5 million women, or thereabouts, every year who decide that
> >> >> > >an abortion is a better option than bearing a child.  1.5 MILLION.  I
> >> >> > >suppose 'they' 'inflate' the trauma (actually LIVE the trauma) whereas you,
> >> >
> >> >  I've never understood why Adreinne seems to think that because a large number
> >> >of people choose to do something, that makes it okay.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> I've never understood why people who (1) haven't the equipment for the 
> >> process, and therefore (2) are less likely to understand the process and
> >
> >  (2) does not follow from (1).
> 
> Not in a vacuum, no, it doesn't.  In the *real* *world*, however, where a
> puritanical society has dodged simple information to young teens, and 
> where prejudice and misinformation about 'the opposite sex' abounds, I
> think it does.
> 
> Where do you live?  In the vacuum, or the real world?

  This supports my point. I fail to see how the dodging affects only males and
not the females.

> > (3) will never face the process always seem to know more than (4) people
> >> who have the equipment for the process (4) are much more likely to under- 
> >> stand the process 
> >
> >  (4)[2] does not neccasarily follow from (4)[1]
> 
> Not in a vacuum, no, it doesn't.  In the *real* *world*, however, where 
> girls are the 'automatic' choice of babysitter, where parents and society
> regularly speak of 'getting in trouble' with their female children and 
> stupidly ignore discussing it with their male children, where females are much
> more likely to share information on female processes with fledgling females,
> it does.
> 
> Which world do you live in?

  Absolutely none of this seems to suggest an better understanding of the 
process.  Babysitting gives an idea of pregnancy and parenting?  "Getting in
trouble" does, too?  Young females sharing inaccurate information?  Mothers
supposedly share accurate info with their daughters?  I submit that if this 
last were true, we would not have half the troubles we see.

  Which world do YOU live in?  You cannot have it both ways; either most of our
young people know whats going on or they don't.  Quit hopping around.

> >> (5) in fact are closely inculturated in our society with
> >> an understanding of the process and 
> >
> >  (5) is (IMO) hogwash.  Given the crappy state of sex ed in this nation, I
> >      would be amazed to find people (in general) properly "inculturated" with a
> >      true UNDERSTANDING of the process.
> 
> Well, I might have to agree with you here, Jim.  It's quite true that you and
> I, both educated people, long beyond the point of sex ed in the jr and sr
> high schools don't agree on 'the process'.  

  Last time I looked, our disagreement was not over what the process was, but
how well understood it was.

> HOWEVER, it's true that female children are enculturated with the notions that
> sex is bad, motherhood is wonderful, and bearing a child is a duty to be 
> borne proudly, by and large.  The messages have altered somewhat over the years,
> but they remain in force.  Girl children are also subjected to notions that
> pregnancy is punishment is situation A, but a 'blessing' in situation B,
> that they will suffer pain, and that they will undergo hormonal and physical
> changes as a result of a pregnancy.

  Well, then this is quite incomplete, isn't it?  And awfully moralistic.
This is what you consider a true understanding of the demands of pregnancy,
"inculturated" into young women?

> Their estimate of the 'cost' of those changes is a subject for them to 
> decide.

  Yes indeedy.  And as accurately as possible.

> >  I should observe that I find Adreinne's general assumption that ONLY
> >a pregnant woman, in general, has any idea what is going on just a little
> >bit patronizing. 
> 
> That's because it's not Adrienne's assumption.  That's your particular spin
> on it, Jim, and a dishonest one at that.  

  I call them as I see them.  It is clearly labeled as what *I* see.

> I state quite clearly that any
> pregnant woman *can* find out what she needs to know, and is the only one
> in a position to decide how much SHE needs to know and is the only one in
> a position to determine how high the COST is to her.

  So?  Sounds like a case for choosing only that information you want to hear.
You protest too much.

> I further point out that 1.5 Million women, who have some stake in the game
> have made a specific selection.

  There's those numbers again...

[a deletion which I address later]

> >  They (the women) may well have better knowledge.  But I find Adreinne's 
> >faith in that understanding surprisingly naive.  As if to say, "well, they 
> >HAVE to find out, so they will."
> 
> I say that the women who are faced with the choice *MAKE* a choice, and it
> is a choice based upon the knowledge that THEY CARE to obtain and it is
> a choice they make via an examination that is as thorough as THEY CARE for
> it to be.  

  So selective reading of information is indeed okay.  Not the whole story,
not even an accurate story, just whatever they feel like.  Defending this
sort of intellectual dishonesty in unbecoming of you.

> >  Do they?  Maybe.  Maybe not.  Is it important that they do? I know I think so.
> >Sometimes I wonder about Adreinne.
> 
> I don't think it is important that THEY make a decision based upon YOUR 
> criteria, damned straight.  Or the original poster's, either, whose name
> I've lost in deletions.

  MY criteria are not the issue here, this time.  Full and complete information
is.

> And I think it's damned strange that you figure I'm being patronizing in
> acknowledging that people who have to make decisions may become informed
> upon those decisions, but it apparently isn't patronizing for some joe
> blow to decide 1.5 million women per year have their heads up their asses.
> Adrienne Regard

  Actually, I have left this job in your more than capable hands.  Must I do
all the work around here?


semper fi,

Jammer Jim Miller 
Texas A&M University '89 and '91
********************************************************************************
* Aggie in Cougarland -- I just work here.				       *
* Speak for my employers?  They don't even know I exist!		       *
*"Become one with the Student Billing System. *BE* the Student Billing System."*
*             *********************************************		       *
* "Power finds its way to those who take a stand.  Stand up, Ordinary Man."    *
*      ---Rik Emmet, Gil Moore, Mark Levine: Triumph 		               *
********************************************************************************
Newsgroups: talk.abortion