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