Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utcsrgv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!west
From: west@utcsrgv.UUCP (Thomas L. West)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: More on crossing streets
Message-ID: <611@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 22-Dec-84 12:23:07 EST
Article-I.D.: utcsrgv.611
Posted: Sat Dec 22 12:23:07 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 22-Dec-84 12:42:12 EST
Distribution: net
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Lines: 49

<>
   This bantering is getting a little overlong.  Might we face some facts?

(1)  A fair number of women *do* view a strange male as a *potential* threat.
   There is *nothing* that can be done about it in the short run.  Whether it
   can be construed as paranoia, natural caution, or whatever is totally
   irrelevant.  The fact is that in certain settings, (eg deserted streets)
   we males DO cause fear in a large number of women by our very appearance.
   This is fact.

(2)  There is no way that we can allay this fear with a smile or phrase.  Our
   physical presence is the cause of fear, and in fact, a smile or phrase is
   likely to *increase* what fear exists.
   This is fact.

(3)  The only means of relieving the fear is to remove ourselves from the
   close physical proximity.  This usually entails crossing a street.
   This (appears to be) fact.  (Nobody has come up with an acceptable (to the
   women) alternative.)

      Given these facts, the outrage of various males about being viewed as
*potential* assailants is pretty pathetic.  They ARE viewed a potential 
assailants and there is nothing that can be done about it (in the short
term).  They can rant all they like, it's NOT going to change the fact.

      The other postings about flipping back and forth on streets are silly
as well.  I think it was very obvious in the original posting that what was
meant was deserted streets.  Because this wasn't made EXPLICITLY clear is
no reason to assume that the author was nuts and expected men to weave through
traffic for every female.  Going on about scaring women on the other side or
being hit by traffic is irrelevant to the discussion and an attempt to push
the request into the absurd.  Let's assume that the author was rational, shall
we?

      What it comes down to is this.  In the face of these facts, we are 
*requested* to cross the road.  NOT demanded. NOT expected.  Just requested.
We may do so or not do so as we wish.  To flame about this request and the
reasons behind it is silly.  Arguing can't change the existing facts.  I too
dislike being viewed as a potential assailant, but I am.  Therefor I might
as well adjust my behaviour to take this fact into account, and, because I
*do* try to make other peoples lives easier, I will cross the road on 
deserted streets.

      The original posting was well merited.  I was unaware of this fear that
existed (yes, and dismayed that it exists).  I thank the poster for the
(albeit unpleasant) insight into one aspect of women's lives.

     Tom West
 { allegra cornell decvax ihnp4 linus utzoo }!utcsrgv!west