HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Pekka.Pessi@hut.fi (Pekka Pessi)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Kill and Inter the Draft, and "callousness"
Date: 20 Aug 92 04:17:50 GMT
Reply-To: Pekka.Pessi@hut.fi
In-reply-to: Diane Bailey's message of 12 Aug 1992 15:53:55 GMT

[NO MORE DRAFT ARTICLES!  This one is posted as it points out a
fact overlooked in much of this discussion.  But for now, nothing else
on the draft, or on korean comfort-women vs korean drafted-men, as
this subject has been beaten to death.  --CTM]

In article <16bc6jINNp1i@agate.berkeley.edu> Diane Bailey <dbailey@cix.clink.co.uk> writes:
>In fact the original mention that I responded to was by Tom who wrote:
>>>>>In particular I understand when I see the Japanese plan to
>>>>>compensate 100,000 women for being forced into prostitution
>>>>>during the war, when everyone dismisses the fact that millions of
>>>>>boys were seized, taken from their homes, and forced to become
>>>>>murderers (soldiers).

	[ Deleted text. ]

>Since this awful subject regarding treatment of Korean and other
>women had not, to my knowledge been previously mention in this
>conference, I saw its being first used to raise the suffering of
>Japanese soldiers as extremely callous, as well as clearly
>inaccurate, and grossly insulting to the women. It would seem
>that it is not I that have strayed from the subject.  Perhaps I
>might receive an apology?

	You are dismissing something. Subject was not about suffering
	of *Japanese* soldiers. For those who were exempted from
	Far-Eastern history: Korea was annexed by Japan 1910. There
	was a Japanese draft in Korea after 1934. More than 700 000
	Korean men were conscripted by Japan during World War II.

	Now, do you tell also a Korean man that his suffering in
	Japanese army during World War II is not an issue, because
	there was some "comfort women" in every unit of Japanese army?
	Do you tell him that his suffering should be ignored? Do you
	tell him that it is ludicrous to suggest that he was forced to
	his fate? Do you really think that he fighted for his country?

[Personal flame deleted.  --CTM]

				Pekka


--
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: oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu (Sharon O'Neil)
Subject: The Women's 1992 Voting Guide
Summary: New book from the Women's Political Action Group
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Keywords: women, voting guide, election, book
Date: 12 Aug 92 20:35:53 GMT

    For those of you who are concerned with women's issues and plan to
vote, there's a nice new paperback available from the Earthwork's
Press entitled _The Women's 1992 Voting Guide_.  At only $3.95, it's
definitely inexpensive and it includes 11 key issues which directly
relate to women (ie. breast cancer, medical research, domestic leave,
rape, pay equity, abortion, sexual harrasment, etc.)  There are
congressional voting charts, current bills in Congress, notes on
George Bush, Bill Clinton, and Jerry Brown (who was still in the
running at press time), a do-it-yourself local candidate's "report
card" (which you could probably just photocopy and use for any
candidate, really), state legislative summaries, addresses of local
groups, and election resources.  Additionally all eleven issues
include contact organizations for finding out more about those issues.

    Admittedly, the book has a feminist focus, but it is a good place
to start researching candidates.  And some of the issues which are
included (breast cancer, medical research, rape, domestic violence,
sexual harrassment) should be issues which compel *both* conservative
and liberal women.

Sharon O'Neil
oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu


--
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: ah881@cleveland.freenet.EDU (Joyce Brabner)
Subject: Activists Willing to Host 2 Israeli (F) Activists, 1-2 day visit?
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: 20 Aug 92 04:11:54 GMT

I will begin hosting two Israeli teenagers for 3-4 months,
starting this October.  My guests are interested in seeing
the U.S.A. by way of a special AMTRAK or Greyhound pass,
and they want to stay with families-- ESPECIALLY people
who are environmental activists, or working on peace, social/
economic justice issues, towards racial harmony, etc.
They would also like to visit some American university
campuses.

Can anyone suggest ways for my friends to find hosts who
will take them in for 1-2 days per stop?  They want me to
make it very clear that they are both willing to earn their
keep, and they both speak good English.

Do you know of any networks of people interested in having
guests?  I can provide letters of reference from Americans.
One student was my guest last year, and is a lovely person.
Please e-mail any ideas.  Thanks!

The two young women are high school graduates, about to enter
Israel's compulsory military service at the end of their
visit.  When THAT'S done, they may go to college.

--





--
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: gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Basic Instinct Denied
Date: 12 Aug 1992 16:07:35 GMT
Organization: mydog in exile
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

gcf@panix.COM (Gordon Fitch) writes...
[ Theory that homophobia and heterosexism derive from
patriarchal values ]

goid@zooid.guild.org (Will Steeves)
[ doesn't think so....]
| This is one of the many reasons why I have many problems with "theories of
| patriarchy," and the fact that so many problems are being ascribed to it.
| And as to the comment that there is no implication that only men are capable
| of "holding patriarchal values," I think that it is *quite* apparent in the
| terminology that the views are considered to be *male-ORIGINATED*, which is
| why I feel that the very term "patriarchy," when used to ascribe negative
| characteristics to a belief system or to a system of actions, is nothing more
| than a vector for the morally bankrupt philosophy of female supremacy and
| female moral supremacy. ...

Apparently, Will Steeves does not believe there are such
things as patriarchy, patriarchalism, or patriarchal values,
for he says:

| This is one of the many reasons why I have many problems with "theories of
| patriarchy," and the fact that so many problems are being ascribed to it.

On the other hand, he thinks there does exist 

|               ... [a] morally bankrupt philosophy of female supremacy and
| female moral supremacy....

which is apparently quite active in the world, for it
requires a "vector" -- the aforesaid chimera patriarchy.

I must confess that I am staggered by the prospect of now
demonstrating the existence of patriarchy, etc., to one who
has surely noticed that almost every name in history, and
almost every body sitting in a seat of power, is male.  I
think I must demur.  I have written many an article taking
issue with those who say there is no patriarchalism, or that
there is no such thing as economic oppression, or that 
minorities are responsible for racism, or that the Earth is 
flat; I will do so no longer.  Someone else can do it.

It would be amusing, though, to fill out the picture begun
above: a morally bankrupt coterie of (I presume) females
plotting for no apparent reason to take the world and the
moral world over, and inventing patriarchy as their
instrument, their tool, their vector.  Go to it. 
-- 
Gordon Fitch | gcf@panix.com | uunet!cmcl2!panix!gcf 
*       1238 Blg. Grn. Sta., N.Y., N.Y. 10274      *



-- 
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: danoc@earlybird.Eng.Sun.COM (Dan O'Connell [CONTRACTOR])
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Gender differences
Date: 20 Aug 92 04:07:33 GMT
Organization: Subvert the Dominant Paradigm

I wrote:
   . . . . In every person's life perhaps especially at adolesence, but
   also at other critical times, we need to be exclusively for some
   short period, with those of our gender -- people who can "truly
   understand" where we are and have been. Hence the need for safe
   space to be a woman among women or a man among men.

     (Ronnie Falcao) writes:

     I disagree strongly with three notions put forth above:

     1) A person's most important characteristic is their gender.
     2) All people of the same gender "truly understand" each other.
     3) Anyone of your same gender is more sympathetic and safer
 	than anyone of another gender.

I do not say in the paragraph above that a person's most important
characteristic is their gender, nor do I assert (2) or (3). I think
you are "reading that in to the text". (2) and (3) imply "always" which
was never my point ("at...cricital times", i.e.: sometimes)

     I can hardly imagine what it means to be a "woman among
     women" or a "man among men".  What is it like if there's
     no consensus about what it means to be a man or woman or
     if everyone else agrees that it means something that
     doesn't apply at all to you?

It is precisely BECAUSE there is:

     no consensus about what it means to be a man or woman

that (I believe) it is important for those of the same gender
to (if they wish) find a "safe" place/space where they can be
together to discuss these things. As a man it has been important
in my life to be able to seriously discuss with other men what
it means to be a man in this society, what our hopes/fears/
challenges and beliefs are. It has been good to use this format
in order to empower ourselves to resist the dominant paradigm of
what Madison Avenue tells us men "ought to be" and to do so by
ourselves first.

     People are amazingly unique.  Why keep trying to squeeze
     them into such narrow definitions?

I guess I don't understand what definitions you claim I am
trying to squeeze people into.

Dano

--
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: jaya@aic.co.jp (Jayanthi Krishnamachari)
Subject: Re: Preventing Female Children - in India
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Date: 20 Aug 92 04:00:35 GMT

I am an Indian woman, and was active in women's groups in
India 8 years ago, before coming to Japan.

Yes, there is female infanticide and definitely foeticide,
about which we had debated - what could be done to prevent
this.

The basic problem is this: there are people who do *not*
want girls. How do you persuade them that not only should
they have whatever girls they conceive, but also bring up
these girls for a minimum of 18 years without discrimination?

I really do not see what UNICEF can do: or how India
signing some more conventions will help solve this problem.
There are enough laws in India; many of them not followed,
and there are not enough resources to see that people
follow them.

As to whether there are groups and publications in India
actively working on this, yes, there are. There are women's
groups (FAOW of Bombay for example), women's journals,
(Manushi from Delhi for example) and so on.

However, in my opinion, if you want to donate money, donate
it to Mother Teresa. Though I do not agree with her views
on abortion, she and her group is doing very good work
at the grass roots level to at least take care of
abandoned girls (and boys too, of course).

Beyond this, education at the grassroots level, that girls
*can* be an asset, is necessary. This is the work of
more than a lifetime.


--
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: mas1!kens@apple.com (Ken Showman)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: male/female joy of sex
Date: 21 Aug 1992 22:50:04 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

Muffy writes:

>In fact, it is not clear that women, in general, enjoy sex nearly as
>much as men.  It's only lately that men have even been that concerned
>about women having orgasms, and there are many women who have had sex
>many times and never had one, which is *very* rare with men.  In fact,
>look at what constitues "sex," to most people.  It starts with a man
>getting excited, proceeds to intercourse (most other forms of sex are
>not really thought of when you say "sex"), which has, as it's goal, the
>man having an orgasm.  Once he does, "sex" is over, regardless of what
>has happened to the woman.  There is very little concern for her getting
>excited, for any form of sex other than intercourse, which is generally
>the most difficult for women to enjoy (vs. oral or digital sex), or for
>further effort once the man has had an orgasm.

I am male, and for me having an orgasm does not constitute success
in a sexual encounter.  The "goal" of a sexual encounter is not _my_
orgasm; it is mutual pleasure, preferably leading to orgasm for both
of us.  If it happens that I have an orgasm but my partner does not,
I am terribly dissatisfied and do not consider the encounter to have
been a success by any means.

The most exciting part of sex for me is my partner's pleasure, especially
orgasm.  If, during the course of a sexual encounter, it becomes clear
that she isn't, in fact, going to be able to come, I find I lose the
most pleasurable part of sex--the mutual bonding, the mutual pleasure,
of _emotion_ of sex, and I may or may not be physically able to continue.

Perhaps the difference here is I'm talking about "making love" while
you're talking about "having sex"... ?

-Ken


-- 
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: bgarfink@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (beth diane garfinkel)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Patterns...
Date: 13 Aug 1992 22:47:26 GMT
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: anableps.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@anableps.berkeley.edu

In <92Aug9.202144edt.24481@zooid.guild.org> goid@zooid.guild.ORG (Will Steeves) writes:


>And in Mik's hypothetical case, all other things being equal, and
>without knowing the husband's motivations, one *does* have to wonder
>why the wife was "systematically ignoring" the husband's preferences.
>Indeed, if the husband had been systematically ignoring *her*
>preferences, then it would seem more like revenge, but on the other
>hand, if the wife was doing so in the absence of any apparent
>motivation, then I would say that the reason is most definitely one of
>control.

What about whether the wife has preferences of her own?  Women are often
expected to make foods that their husbands like, and foods that their
children like, and rarely end up making the foods that they like, which
is probably one reason why there are so many women on diets.  This is
just one example.
-- 
"Hold stick near center of its length.  Moisten pointed end in mouth.
Insert in tooth space, blunt end next to gum. Use gentle in-out motion."


-- 
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: falcao@felix.metaphor.COM (Ronnie Falcao)
Subject: Gender differences
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: Metaphor Computer Systems, Mountain View, CA
Date: 16 Aug 92 14:29:05 GMT

 <@earlybird.Eng.Sun.COM (Dan O'Connell [CONTRACTOR]) writes:
> . . . . In every person's life perhaps especially at adolesence, but
> also at other critical times, we need to be exclusively for some
> short period, with those of our gender -- people who can "truly
> understand" where we are and have been. Hence the need for safe
> space to be a woman among women or a man among men.
>
> I do not think this will ever change.  . . .
> Dano

I disagree strongly with three notions put forth above:

1) A person's most important characteristic is their gender.

2) All people of the same gender "truly understand" each other.

3) Anyone of your same gender is more sympathetic and safer
	than anyone of another gender.

Although this may be true in a culture where children are
indoctrinated in distinct gender tracks and are incapable of
original thought, it is hardly a universal truth.

Even in my life, where most of my contemporaries were raised
to conform to strong gender roles, I would be making a serious
mistake to assume these things.

I can hardly imagine what it means to be a "woman among
women" or a "man among men".  What is it like if there's
no consensus about what it means to be a man or woman or
if everyone else agrees that it means something that
doesn't apply at all to you?

People are amazingly unique.  Why keep trying to squeeze
them into such narrow definitions?

	- Ronnie

falcao@metaphor.com


--
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: julie (Julie Wright)
Subject: Re: NY Senate Race: Liz Holtzman
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: Center for Biomolecular Simulation, Department of Chemistry,
	Columbia University
Date: 12 Aug 92 20:39:27 GMT

In article <16bd2fINNp52@agate.berkeley.edu> mgflax@phoenix.princeton.edu (Marshall G. Flax) writes:
   In article <156qcdINNpk5@agate.berkeley.edu> Julie Wright <julie@cucbs.chem.columbia.edu> writes:
   >Ferraro voted to recriminalize homosexuality in Washington, DC

   Really?  When/where/citations?  How come I haven't heard this before?

   marshall


	This editing makes it appear that *I* made this claim
directly, so I wanted to clarify -- as I said in my post, all the
information on Holtzman's and Ferraro's positions that I listed came
from Holtzman's campaign literature.  I assume it has some truth, but
I don't know any details myself and certainly can't give you a
citation (other than Holtzman herself).  As I pointed out, most of the
information on the handout I got was quite vague (big surprise), and
if anyone knows more details, I'd be happy to hear them.

--- Julie
--
I wonder why it is that when I plan a route too carefully it goes to pieces,
whereas if I blunder along in blissful ignorance aimed in a fancied direction
I get through with no trouble.
				--- John Steinbeck (Travels with Charley)


--
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.
Xref: sparky soc.feminism:2033 news.answers:2485
From: sinix!tim (Tim Bissell)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Kill and Inter the Draft Issue Today!!!! (or not)
Date: 13 Aug 1992 17:03:48 GMT
Organization: SNI AG Muenchen, STO XS
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: anableps.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@anableps.berkeley.edu

In article <memo.557156@cix.compulink.co.uk>, dbailey@cix.clink.co.UK (Diane
Bailey) writes:
> For those of you who still hang on to this draft issue,
> pretending that male draft registration balances women's issues,
> may I be permitted to kill the arguement by pointing out that in
> other parts of the world (which do exist, even on the net) there
> is no draft, and no registration.

Fine.  And in Norway, ~50% of the Cabinet are women, so can we stop any
more discussion of under-representation of women in politics.  I don't
think so.

Tim
-- 
Tim Bissell		|      best...	tim@athen.uucp
Work:+49 89 636 49542	| 	hmm...	tim%sinix@germany.eu.net
Home:+49 89 692 5263	|   UK only...	uk.co.uel!sinix!athen!tim



-- 
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: dawn@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Dawn Owens-Nicholson)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: excerpts from a new book....
Date: 13 Aug 1992 17:04:57 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: anableps.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@anableps.berkeley.edu

holzman@fnalno.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman) writes:

>The 1990 census shows that fathers with joint custody are over 90% likely to
>pay the full ordered child support.  

This is an absolutely FALSE statement.  I work with the 1990 census daily
in my job, and I can tell you that there is NO question on the census,
either the long or short form, that asks anything about custody arrangements
(joint, sole, none, or otherwise) or about child support payments (court
ordered, or not) with respect to whether or not they are paid in full. 

The ONLY place where child support is mentioned in the 1990 census, is on
the long form, question 32, item H.  Question 32 is the income question and
item H is the catchall last item reading something like: "Are there any
other sources of income RECEIVED regularly, such as VA payments,
unemployment compensation, child support payments, or alimony?"

There is absolutely NO way this question can be used to tell us what
percentage of fathers with joint custody pay full child support.


-Dawn



-- 
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.
Newsgroups: soc.college
From: marklz@ilx057 (Zusman Mark)
Subject: Re: Computer Science Program
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 16:56:06 GMT
Organization: Intel
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

	On my first day in Intel I was given i860 assembler PRM,
	and I had to learn this in a day (that day I worked 16
	hours). Next day I started to debug trap handlers (any-
	body who has any experience with i860 knows tha this is
	tough ).

	Now, talk about 'science' and 'languages to learn'...


--
Zusman Mark
IDC2-30	 x5563 
marklz@iil.intel.com

Newsgroups: soc.college