Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site randvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!randvax!edhall From: edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall) Newsgroups: net.women,net.singles Subject: Re: Rape: The Unresolved Trauma Message-ID: <2196@randvax.UUCP> Date: Fri, 14-Dec-84 16:46:54 EST Article-I.D.: randvax.2196 Posted: Fri Dec 14 16:46:54 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 19-Dec-84 00:14:31 EST References: <1855@sun.uucp> <2182@randvax.UUCP>, <1863@sun.uucp> <211@ahuta.UUCP> Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica Lines: 27 Xref: watmath net.women:3829 net.singles:4964 > REFERENCES: <1855@sun.uucp> <2182@randvax.UUCP>, <1863@sun.uucp> > > > Women may be catty and bitchy, but they seldom wreak the physical havoc men do. > > They don't run out and build bombs capable of destryoing the earth 1000 times > > over the way men do in their civilized version of "my thingy is bigger than > > yours", "I'm the dominant buck, and I get to run the herd". > > If they don't/haven't, it's more because they haven't (as a whole) had the > technical training required because society has prevented them from becoming > scientists. (Isn't this one of the standard "feminist" claims?) > > Golda Meir was just as willing/unwilling to go to war as any of her male Of course! It's all part of a conspiracy of men to keep women from getting The Bomb! ( :-), if you couldn't tell.) On a more serious note, I have to mention that the women I know who are involved in strategic analysis aren't particularly squeemish about considering nuclear issues--no more than men, for that matter. They *do* tend to have a fairly feminist outlook, however, in more personal matters, though hardly in the sense of ``trying to be men''. Of course, my sample might be biased, since no one I know has any desire vis a vis nuclear war other than to prevent it from ever happening. -Ed Hall decvax!randvax!edhall