HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: harikuma@enterprise.ifp.uiuc.edu (G. Harikumar)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Expression of attraction
Date: 13 Dec 1992 17:24:58 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:

>In article <1gbs6aINNpf4@agate.berkeley.edu> harikuma@enterprise.ifp.uiuc.edu (G. Harikumar) writes:
>>Also, in any sport where physical fitness
>>and athletism are involved, the women's
>>level of play is "a zillion years behind the men's", to 
>>quote John McEnroe. Women atheletes should be paid
>>as much as men if and only if competitions are
>>made gender-neutral. That is,  Martina Navaratilova 
>>should have to beat Boris Becker before she wins
>>the US Open. 
>>
>>Else, it is just more quotas. 

>I'm curious if you think the divisions in men's boxing are quotas.
>Since the heavyweights could probably win in every division, does that
>mean that Sugar Ray Leonard should never have become a champion?  Or
>that he should have been forced to box the likes of Mike Tyson to win?

Not at all. But I would understand it if the 
middleweight champion of the world is remunerated
less than the heavyweight. (Note: I do not know
for sure whether this is so).

Look at it this way; suppose they split the 
football league into weight categories.
League A  - Less than 150 pounds
League B  - 150-200 pounds

and so on. Would you support the cause
that all the leagues have the same payscales?
I would not.
Also, think of different basketball leagues, classified
according to heights. 

Harikumar.

  


-- 
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: celeste%express@freedom.msfc.nasa.GOV (Celeste)
Subject: Re: Motivations for Gender-Neutral Terminology
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: AEGIS
Date: 17 Dec 92 18:05:18 GMT
Followup-To: soc.feminism

In article <1gis4pINNt4e@agate.berkeley.edu>, wagner@hp800.lasalle.edu (Jon
Wagner) wrote:
>
> I have been wondering about the motivation behind gender-neutral
> terminology.  There have been many changes to classic works (such as
> the Bible) to conform to this idea.  I am not against these
> transformations but I wonder where the roots of the movement began.
> I have three ideas, which are probably wrong, but I invite
> discussion on them.
>
> 1) Gender-neutral terminology attempts to establish equality by
> 	using the same words to describe both sexes.  In my opinion,
> 	this motivation is invalid.  Aren't there other ways to
> 	achieve equality?
[stuff deleted]

It is though language that women are constantaly reminded of
their "second class" status. That "He" and "Mankind" are implied
inclusions of women projects a feeling that women are included
only as an after thought. There is no equality in that. Being
"baggage" to another is not equality.

I suggest you read "The Left Hand of Darkness" by Ursle leGuin.
It is about and androygenous race and their culture.
It was the first time I was forced to think in gender-neutral language.

Love and hugs,

Celeste

--
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: kaarts@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Kenneth John Aarts)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: A Safe Place
Date: 16 Dec 1992 00:57:34 GMT
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In <1g5r51INNk2f@agate.berkeley.edu> ramoss@rpi.edu writes:

>	Men have more than one safe place.  They are safe in the open.
>  This (unfortunatly) is a MAN's world.  They can say and do alot to us
>and get away with it.  If a man is agressive at his job he is a mover.  If a woman is agressive she is a bitch or "is in need of a man to put her in
>her place".  

>	We as women will not be taken seriously unless we lead the fight for changing attitudes in the workplace and in society which means being able 
>to get together and talk about the problems and some of the solutions that 
>we have conquered.  Also, it is impossible for someone to know what is like
>being a woman (or at that a minority) unless they are a member the oppressed group.  One can sympathize, but they can never know what it feels like.

>So this safe place for (white) (heterosexual) men exists so now its time wethat care of ourselves

	In the same way, it is impossible for women to know what it is like to
be a man.  Women can only see male experience through a fairly cloudy window.
An obvious extension to this is that we can never know what anothers existence
is like.  However, the number of sets of simular experiences people can share
is very large.

Ken




-- 
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: "Henry (H.W.) Troup" <hwt@bnr.ca>
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Motivations for Gender-Neutral Terminology
Date: 18 Dec 1992 17:43:46 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
               Fri, 18 Dec 1992 12:07:21 -0500
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

Someone wrote:

> I have been wondering about the motivation behind gender-neutral
> terminology.  There have been many changes to classic works (such as
> the Bible) to conform to this idea.  I am not against these

And a little bell went off.  There are cases where the original,
non-english source is gender-neutral, but the lack of good english
equivalents creates a different message.  Case in point, Latin has two
words both translated to English 'man': homo and vir.  But homo, as in
homo sapiens, means human, the human race.  Vir (root of virile) means
a male human being.

Which puts a different light on "Ecce homo", for instance.

Henry Troup - H.Troup@BNR.CA (Canada) - BNR owns but does not share my opinions
	       Legislated morality is the enemy of true morality





-- 
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: chuckies@cs.mcgill.ca (Charles J. Savoie)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Expression of attraction
Date: 16 Dec 1992 01:01:57 GMT
Organization: SOCS - Mcgill University, Montreal, Canada
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <1g43adINNani@agate.berkeley.edu> cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
>
>The thing that I found offensive was thinking about how most of those
>men (and I've been in locker rooms before) have pictures all over their
>locker doors of obscenely degraded women splayed out lke they were
>created to do just that, and yet when a woman walks in and sees their
>nekkid bEEhinds, all of a sudden that's wrong.  It was the hypocrisy I
>disliked, not the action itself.  

  I can't believe that you honestly think this way.  So what you're saying
is that people who like to view pictures of naked people should be ready
and willing to expose themselves to members of the opposite sex? C'mon...
Hypocritical?  Give me a break.

[Also note the shaming of men's bodies evident in the phrase `nekkid
 bEEhinds'.. ( half-:-) ) ]

>Besides, when women's team sports make as much money as men's do, we can
>talk about turning the tables.  Until then . . .

You're ignoring the question, using a very typical dodge.  Now would you
mind explaining what salaries of players have to do with their right to
have their locker rooms free of members of the opposite sex?  Do you
honestly think there are female team sport players out there thinking
"Sure... pay us the same as the men, and you can have men in the locker
room anytime."?  Puh-leeze.  It's just one more double-standard to add
to the long list.

It's talk like this that really puts a profound fear into me.  The fear
that maybe, the person who wrote this actually believes it.  Now *that's*
scary.

>Regards,
>Janis C.

Reluctantly,
Charles


-- 

,.. .  . .  . ,.. . . ... ,.. ,..   =====================================
|   |--| |  | |   |<   |  |-  `-.   Charles Savoie  chuckies@cs.mcgill.ca
`'' '  ' `''' `'' ' ` ''' `'' '''   =====================================


-- 
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: rgvdh@vtrl.src.mei.co.jp (R. van der Heide)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: female athletes
Date: 14 Dec 1992 02:06:48 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

rhb@world.std.com (Robert H Brueckner) asks
>Why don't women support female athletes to the extent that men support theirs?

I want to change the question a bit.  Or just point out that it's
unconsciously narrow.  

About a year ago, while I was riding the subway here in Osaka, I ran
into two six-foot-tall african-american women on the train, and we
started chatting.  It turned out they they were over here to play on
the Sanyo Co. professional women's basketball team.  Both had what
sounded like pretty impressive college carreers (not that I would
know, I don't follow sports much).  One of them had previously played
on a pro team in Italy.  I asked her if she liked traveling around the
world, and she said that if you want to be a professional female
athlete, you pretty much have to leave to US to find work, and that
Americans payed less attention to women's sports than any other
country she know of.  So:

Why don't Americans support female athletes?



-- 
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: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Mythopoetic ritual (a possibly Very Weird topic)
Date: 13 Dec 1992 03:12:10 GMT
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <1g969kINN9vv@agate.berkeley.edu> vanhoek@bend.UCSD.EDU (Karen van Hoek) writes:
>It does seem very sad that the notion "phallus" has become
>so strongly identified with "weapon" that the thought of a
>men's movement which emphasizes celebration of the phallus
>is scary.

The problem I see is that for a long time, it's been the male side of
our culture that has been identifying the phallus as a weapon.  When
feminists note this and use the same language, it's suddenly
misandrist and male-bashing.

Take, as one example, much of Norman Mailer's work.  Would anyone,
male or female, want to be on the receiving end of the penis of most
of his male characters?  His characters do seem to see the phallus as
a weapon, only rarely used in acts of love, usually used as a means to
power and domination of partners, whether male or female.  Is Mailer
misandrist to see the phallus as mostly a tool to dominate others?

There is also the simple fact that during a rape by a man, often the
penis is used as a weapon, along with fingers and objects.  If as many
women are sexually abused as some studies suggest, no wonder some
view the phallus as a weapon, at least some of the time.  When a male
rapist is using it as a weapon, of course it is.

>  What if,
>as part of the Great Phallus celebration or whatever, the men 
>took some time to mourn the way that the penis has been
>identified as a weapon, and how that way of thinking about
>masculinity has separated men from women? 

This seems reasonable to me, but I hope that the men involved in these
groups are identifying the source of "phallus as weapon" and not just
putting the blame on feminists and women who complain about rape.  If
our culture celebrates the phallus as a weapon and the expression of
male (hetero)sexuality as a god-given right (regardless of what his
partner wants), it's no wonder that women and feminists consider this
celebration as shameful.

I'm not much of a "woo-woo" type, but I find it interesting enough to
put Bly on the top of my reading list for my winter break.



-- 
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: harikuma@enterprise.ifp.uiuc.edu (G. Harikumar)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Expression of attraction
Date: 12 Dec 1992 05:09:30 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

rhb@world.std.com (Robert H Brueckner) writes:

>As far as the "equal money" argument goes: Why don't women support
>female athletes to the extent that men support theirs? God knows
>there are more women than men. Maybe it's time for women to stop
>whining and get out there and start cheering. And paying. 

>RB

Also, in any sport where physical fitness
and athletism are involved, the women's
level of play is "a zillion years behind the men's", to 
quote John McEnroe. Women atheletes should be paid
as much as men if and only if competitions are
made gender-neutral. That is,  Martina Navaratilova 
should have to beat Boris Becker before she wins
the US Open. 

Else, it is just more quotas. 

G. Harikumar.




-- 
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: mvwjf@mvgpf.att.com (William J Fallon)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: American athletics: An issue of gender
Date: 18 Dec 1992 16:03:46 GMT
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <1glei7INNn1b@crcnis1.unl.edu> sandoval@unlinfo.unl.EDU (steve sandoval) writes:
>Strengh, endurance, flexibility, and speed are the four primary
>characteristics that athletes possess..........
   
Well that's a subject for debate. I'd bet that if you did a study of success-
ful athletes, male and female, that you'd find that the characteristics
they had most in common are ones like drive, dedication, mental toughness,
goal-orientation, etc. I think it's an important point whether you're talking
about sports or business or academics, etc. Most of the reading I've done about
women's sports, much of which is extensible to other areas of life seems
to indicate that attitudes of both women themselves and society as a whole think
it's unfeminine for a woman to possess the mental qualities that are actually
most important to succeed in many areas of endeavor. Boys are encouraged 
when they are young to push themselves, to go out and compete, to excell, etc.
However if you're a girl it's not quite seen as "ladylike" to push yourself,
to try to win, etc. Even women who have succeeded in sports (that's where I
do most of my reading) report that fathers, friends, lovers, etc. while
being generally supportive still express doubts when they see women putting
lots of time and effort into endeavors and postpone marriage, families, etc.
These attitudes transfer to the women themselves who develop secret doubts
about whether they really ARE unfeminine, "different", worry about not
pleasing those important to them, etc. And all this applies not just to
women who want to run marathons but women who want to break sales quotas
or become partners in law firms or earn advanced degrees. It's ATTITUDES
that cause the problem. Women are told not only that they can't but also
that they shouldn't.




-- 
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: levine@symcom.math.uiuc.EDU (Lenore Levine)
Subject: Should Women Support Other Women?
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: 17 Dec 92 18:09:13 GMT

A few days ago, I asked the question on soc.feminism, "Should women
support each other in the sciences? Or should such support be governed
by merit, and other variables independent of gender?"

I was surprised by the responses; particularly, that so many responders
had experienced blatantly sexist academic institutions. I have
not encountered such open and unsubtle bigotry, at the University of
Illinois; and I am not surprised it fosters an interest in the
particular needs of women.

I am still uncomfortable, though, with the idea that, "Women should
support other women."

My reasons:

1) It is true that, if I were deciding who to mentor, I would count
not only a person's paper qualifications, but my intuitions about
their character, potential, ability to work with me, and the obstacles
they have had to overcome. But these intuitions would not automatically
lead me to favor a woman. In particular, I would tend to favor a gentle
person over a slick social predator, regardless of gender. (And I
certainly don't notice that all the gentle otherworldly souls are
women, and all the slimy opportunists are men.)

I think it is important for people involved in an academic life to
cultivate an intuition about people's true characters; not to favor
those with a slick facade, but those who really bring positive
energy to a situation.

2) I feel very strongly, that graduate students, when choosing
an advisor, should think not only about the person's character, but
about the area and style of work they are getting involved in.

A very nice person, who is completely nonsexist and supportive
of you, may get you involved in a field that is essentially
a gilded trap. In today's job market, you have to find an area
where you, personally, can distinguish yourself by your achievements.

--
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: turpin@cs.utexas.EDU (Russell Turpin)
Subject: Is pornography uniquely attack?
Summary: No.
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
Date: 17 Dec 92 18:00:09 GMT

------

In article <1giqsvINNso0@agate.berkeley.edu> dwelch@devnull.mpd.tandem.com (Dan Welch) writes:
> Why should pornography have to be defended, anyway?  Why is there this
> unspoken assumption that it *is* bad, and must be proved worthwhile? ...

Given that I have posted a defense of pornography here, I think
the need to defend it stems from the fact that it is frequently
attacked.  Its alleged iniquity is neither an "assumption" nor
"unspoken," but rather the claim of vocal arguments (though not,
I think, very good arguments).

> ... We don't see this with other "vices", television, alcohol,
> etc. ...

*We* may not see this, but *I* frequently see similar attacks on
television and alcohol, and corresponding defenses of them.  To
mention but one example, there was a debate between Camille
Paglia, defending TV, and another writer attacking it in an issue
of either Atlantic Monthly or Harper's not too many months ago.
Perhaps Dan Welch does not frequent the forums where these other
alleged vices are attacked and defended.

Russell

--
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: mckenney@cims.nyu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Safe space for men
Followup-To: soc.feminism
Date: 14 Dec 1992 21:48:26 GMT
Organization: Courant Institute, NYU, NY, NY, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <1ggq8cINNhd2@agate.berkeley.edu> rhb@world.std.com
(Robert H Brueckner) writes:

> In article <1ge9o5INN6hd@agate.berkeley.edu>
> karen.van.hoek@um.cc.umich.edu writes:

> >  This general issue -- that many or most white men don't
> >  realize how bad it is to live in fear of violent assault --
> >  is extremely painful and angering to many women.
> [MUCH DELETED]
> >  ... Advice like "go for a walk at three a.m." isn't
> >  just stupid, it's downright _cruel_ -- like taunting someone
> >  in a jail cell about how good it would be for them to spend
> >  a week at the beach.  The fact that the cruelty is
> >  unthinking doesn't make it much better; all that means is
> >  that these men are oblivious to the reality of our lives.

 ....

> So: Are you saying that there is nowhere women can feel safe in
> our society being out alone?

	That's *exactly* what *I* hear women saying.  Again and again.
	In this group.  In conversations.  In newspaper articles.

	More particularly, in the article you quoted, I hear
	Karen saying that she is afraid in situations that
	many/most men wouldn't think twice about, in particular
	going out *anywhere* alone at night.

	This is what "take back the night is about", if I
	understand it right.

> [I]f the answer is "nowhere," then I think maybe a
> good topic for discussion in this group might be what can be
> done about this sorry state of affairs.

	I agree.

	I would like to point out, however, that women have been
	bringing this up, and they are hit with (IMHO
	off-the-wall) criticisms like:  it is unfair to men to be
	afraid of them, or, men are afraid of things, too.  In
	fact, Karen's article was a response to what she regarded
	as a trivializing response to this very fear.


	(For those who missed it, the thread ran thus:

	(A: women are afraid of being attacked by men, just
	    because they are women.

	(B: well, men are afraid of being unjustly accused
	    of rape.

	(Karen:	women's daily lives are bent totally out of shape
		because of the (well-based) fear of being
		assaulted.  Are men's lives bent totally
		out of shape by their fear of being
		falsely accused of rape?)


	I think that many male posters here show a remarkable
	resistance to believing the things that women report
	here about their experience.  IMHO, this would be
	a good topic for a Men's Movement: why so many men
	are so resistant to accepting experiences of life
	that differ from their own.  (It's not just
	women's experiences that they deny.)


-- 
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.