Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihlpl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ihlpl!zubbie From: zubbie@ihlpl.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) Newsgroups: net.women Subject: RE:Last Nite ( a LONG) letter to men Message-ID: <177@ihlpl.UUCP> Date: Tue, 25-Jun-85 14:37:01 EDT Article-I.D.: ihlpl.177 Posted: Tue Jun 25 14:37:01 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 26-Jun-85 07:26:06 EDT References: <569@usl.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 115 > > My feeling is that 1), positive reinforcement is highly preferable > to intensely negative strokes, 2) name calling should be saved for > net.flame and avoided in serious discussions between supposedly > intelligent persons, 3) it is insulting to think that other people > (me in this case) must be viciously treated in order for them to > consider some issue, and finally 4), if Jeanette's hostility was > merely a device, as she says, well, I think it's really a bad idea to > lay such an attack on someone unless one really mean it. > > I think Jeanette's attitude is wrong and preclusive to her espoused > cause. OK, My intent stands - I want men and women to rethink their attitudes on the "women's place" I have to admit that I was probably more caustic then I needed to be - I get wound up and engage my keyboard before engaging my brain fully to wit I owe some people an apology. Since I may not be aware of all I'll make it here. I am not backing off on my opinion but I do admit that my approach was stronger and less amenable (sp) to acceptance than it could have been. > > > The truth is there and you can feel it but you never thought about it that > > way before. > > It seems to me quite condescending to assume that someone would never > think of something unless it was pointed out to them. The operative word is WAY not meaning that it was an idea /concept which had not been noticed and given due thought but simply that perhaps the view- point needed to be different. Each of the 3 blind men saw an elephant differently - only a sighted person could tell that all 3 were correct ** as far as they went**. The same generic applies here. > > > > Perhaps the hardest thing in the world to do on this net or via > > a keyboard is to convey the depth of emotion which women must deal with > > which has no male analog. > > This is bullshit of the most sexist nature. I cannot believe that > women possess deeper emotions than men. > I didnt say women have deeper emotions then men only different ie no male analog. I have never said nor implied that men do not have emotions and very powerful ones at that only that by natural difference there are emotional areas which are different for each and that it was very hard to convey these via the net. I do imply that the same set of difficulties pertains to men and men's emotions as well. > Perhaps the single most annoying part of Jeanette's article is > excerpted here: >. >. >. >. >. >. > Now it seems, from my vantage point, that Jeanette is suggesting that > I would rape a friend in Ellen Eade's position. I think this is > *MOST* revolting. It is hard for me to imagine that this is just > another device to get me to think about the issue. No, I'm not suggesting that you would do such a thing (other men have but even that is not the issue here) What I am suggesting is that society as a whole presents very little compassion for the victim which leads to several very bad ends: 1) The woman presses charges, goes to trial and public opinion both supports her on the one hand and implies tacitly that perhaps she did bring the episode on herself. 2) The woman refuses to go to court out of fear or something inside her and then she has to reconcile that feeling of fear of a return of the attacker and public sentiment that maybe she really wasn't raped at all - After all in practically any other crime the victim has all the laws and rules on their side why not prosecute. All to often with rape the victim simply can not face the strain of a trial, > > > I consider the day a total waste less I catch hell from someone. > > I find this a pretty shitty attitude, but what's worse is that > Jeanette is apparently willing to assume that everyone else feels > that way. Perhaps it is only shitty because only part of the concept is quoted here. the rest of it goes something like this: There is no reason to bother to pay any attention to the efforts of someone you care nothing about, unless your the boss person. If someone takes the trouble to correct me or even get upset with me it must be because they see something of value being wasted in me and by me. Than I have a chance to change and hopefully improve myself or at least to evaluate myself and my position to see if change is warranted. Thanks for caring and helping me learn more about myself as others see me. > Here's my answer Joe. I'm not the "obscurant " person you think I am and hopefully someday I will learn to temper my toungue. I get mad like anyone else, I just happen to be more vocal than most. jeanette l. zobjeck ihnp4!ihlpl!zubbie