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