Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lanl.ARPA Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!cmcl2!lanl!crs From: crs@lanl.ARPA Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: American women in Iran (abc's 20/20 12/13/84) Message-ID: <18437@lanl.ARPA> Date: Fri, 21-Dec-84 09:29:33 EST Article-I.D.: lanl.18437 Posted: Fri Dec 21 09:29:33 1984 Date-Received: Sun, 23-Dec-84 06:17:22 EST References: <182@usl.UUCP> Sender: newsreader@lanl.ARPA Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory Lines: 35 > "Men and women are not equal... you can not compare > apples and oranges" It seems to me that this is a matter of semantics. The question becomes "are you talking the same kind of equal?" But that is not why I followed up (follow-uped? |-) this article. an incongruity struck me further on: > > Or another shot: > > "Islam gives respect to women -- The veil makes people > look at you, not your appearance, this is freedom" > > . > . > . > > Is this what some girls want?? freedom in four walls and a black > veil??? We got some specimen around here as well, but they do not > (dare not) wear the full apparatus.. They just use handkerchiefs > on the head instead of the veil. (I mean American women) > > --- Spiros Triantafyllopoulos The obvious thing is, of course, if that's what she wants, who's business is it but hers. But, I digress. What bothers me is: ...but they do not ** (dare not) ** wear the full apparatus... [emphasis added] This is freedom? Not daring to wear what they would like? Charlie