Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site timeinc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!timeinc!greenber From: greenber@timeinc.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: men dominate net.women (flame-ish) Message-ID: <448@timeinc.UUCP> Date: Wed, 21-Aug-85 12:41:48 EDT Article-I.D.: timeinc.448 Posted: Wed Aug 21 12:41:48 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 24-Aug-85 13:24:44 EDT References: <175@drutx.UUCP> <231@whuts.UUCP> <2674@sun.uucp> Reply-To: greenber@timeinc.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) Organization: Time Inc. (Edit Tech), New York Lines: 87 Summary: In article <2674@sun.uucp> sunny@sun.uucp (Ms. Sunny Kirsten) writes: > >Thank you, Andy, for providing the example I need to make a point: > Thank YOU, Sunny, for such an entertaining article! >Power is the domain of men. I was gonna keep track of the sexist generalizations that Sunny makes, but they quickly exceeded the limits of an unsigned int. > >The entire net is dominated by men struggling for power. The one area >where women *might* have had a chance to talk together, net.women, has >from its inception been dominated by men. Interesting OPINION stated as fact, Sunny. Besides, are you asking for any special privs due to women because they are women? And we've already been over more times than anyone wants to state. > >And that is why, after net.women failed for this reason, that >net.women.only was created.. to keep the men from "dominating" the >converstaion... from changing the nature of the conversation from >sharing to contention. And when men again refused to respect the >charter of the newsgroup known as net.women.only...Most of the people {male-type} who posted to net.women.only did it for one of two reasons: either they didn't understand what that particular group was about, or they resented the fact that women were demanding equality in *this* group, but seeking special privs in others. I recall a lengthy argument I had with a poster of the second class, where I stated that (although I disagreed with the special privs provided to the women based on their sex), he still should have adhered to the net.announce.newusers postings until the group collapsed under its own contradictions. >... I love this kind of male. It's the >macho assholes like you who have to turn everything into warfare or >games of dominace that I can't deal with, and who are destroying this >planet. Uncalled for generalizations,Sunny! If you disagree with a male posting, do they automatically become "macho-assholes"? > >... Because so >many people are filled with hatred and the need to compete and dominate >and have power over other people. And most of these people are men. >Ones with an overdose of testosterone. > I'm sure you have clinical proof of this, right? Perhaps you had a problem with overdoses of testosterone? Perhaps you had a problem with agressiveness which you attributed to testosterone? Perhaps you are over simplifying matters, or at least projecting your perception of yourself (as a male) to men-as-a-class? That would be sexist, which you like to claim you're not. > >It's not that I hate men, or that there's something wrong with the male sex. I disagree with the first point, and affirm the second. Hey!! You and I actually agree on something? Almost by definition, that means that something is wrong. >It's dominant and powerhungry individuals who are the problem... (Andy) >It's the males with an overdose of agression producing testosterone, >who are causing the biggest of problems in the world. Yeah, Andy certainly is power hungry. I mean, all of his postings show this. He doesn't display the love, warmth, and affection that you do. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Ross M. Greenberg @ Time Inc, New York --------->{vax135 | ihnp4}!timeinc!greenber<--------- I highly doubt that Time Inc. would make me their spokesperson. --- "You must never run from something immortal. It attracts their attention." -- The Last Unicorn