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: <460@timeinc.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 23-Aug-85 22:17:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: timeinc.460
Posted: Fri Aug 23 22:17:47 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 25-Aug-85 00:12:33 EDT
References: <175@drutx.UUCP> <231@whuts.UUCP> <2674@sun.uucp> <448@timeinc.UUCP> <5626@tektronix.UUCP>
Reply-To: greenber@timeinc.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg)
Organization: Time Inc. (Edit Tech), New York
Lines: 129
Summary: 

Moiram@tektronix.UUCP (Moira Mallison ) writes:
>
>Ross, of course, needs no provocation to attack Sunny.  Any (every?)
>article is provocation enough.
>

Nope. Only those that seem to generalize, that seem to be sexist, that say
that everything that I am is wrong, and that everything that I am not is
good.  Lemme see....I'll examine Sunny's articles.....yep.....seems like
each one fits the mold.  Take anyone of Sunny's articles.  Use your
global replace and replace every "man" with "women", etc.  Now read
the little gem.  Does it get you angry?  Does it seem to over-generalize?
Does it seem sexist?  If *I* were to post some of her stuff, I'd get
lambasted all the way to net.wobegon.  Yet it seems that if a woman
decides to attack men as a class, then it is okay.  Oh, I forgot: this
is a *women's* newsgroup:

>> Besides, are you
>> asking for any special privs due to women because they are women?
>
>What we asked for was a newsgroup where we could discuss what *we*
>wanted to discuss without certain men twisting the discussions to
>fit their interests, because our interests were too petty.  A newsgroup
>where we could express ourselves without being blasted to kingdom
>come by the flames, without being told that our ideas are worthless.
>But Sunny said all that and you didn't listen to her, so why would
>you listen to me.
>

Well, I'm not all that unreasonable.  You've posted some pretty thought
provoking articles, you seem to be open minded, you can flame with the
best of them, you have an exquisite Color Sense....so I can listen to
you.  I'm open minded, too, although I must admit that some of my
more bone-headed pieces don't seem to show it.

That still doesn't get around the idea that *you* are asking for
special privs due to your genitalia: you want a place where you
sit around and discuss things without the aweful interference of men.
Well, the world is full of men.  Doesn't it seem a little silly to
insist upon equality, as long as you get a little special treatment.
As I've said before and I'm forced to say again: "If you demand special
treatment, due to your sex, then you may get special treatment due
to your sex.  It may not, however, be the special treatment you had
in mind.  But it will be just as sexist as what you demand.  Just not
always to your benefit."

>What we asked for was the courtesy to allow us our space on the net.
>But because of a few men like you, Ross, who would rather open our
>doors (in the name of courtesy) than give us our space, we have
>retreated to the mailing list.  Because only in an atmosphere where
>we could control submissions have we been able to avoid the domination
>of power-mongering males.

Whoops!  Next thing you know, I'll be a "macho-asshole".  Some already
consider me one or the other, but not both.  Oh, well.  So when you
sense something blatantly wrong posted to the net, and you decide to
stand up and yell "HEY! That's bogus", then that makes you a
power-mongering woman?  Nah....as Sunny will tell you, only men are
power-mongering.

So what does it make you when you see something blatantly wrong posted
on the net that makes you sit up and yell?

Righteous? Holier-than-me?

What kind of mood does it make you feel if some asshole on the net
says "All women suffer from PMS!" (Nobody *I* know), or "Women are
inferior to men!"?  Probably makes you want to flame the asshole, as
my mailbox is witness to.  So how come it is wrong for me flame a
sexist asshole myself?

Oh.....this is net.women.  The place where admitting to holding a door
open for women is like admitting to a crime against Nature Herself.

>
>net.women.only did not collapse under its own contradictions!  It
>was flat-out abandoned because it didn't work.  I did not see one
>vote for net.women.only in the recent poll  prior to its demise.
>Where do you think all of those women went?  Into the woodwork?
>

No. Into their own mailing list, where the nasty world won't bite.
The reason that net.women.only didn't work (in my opinion) was
that it was a public admission of women seeking special privs.
So it wasn't posted to very frequently.  So the mailing list was
built.

>I'm not sure where you get off calling net.women.only a special
>privilege.  It seems any time we want something for ourselves
>you deem it a special privilege, and I guess that's the problem.
>Equality is not a special privilege, dammit.  IT IS OUR RIGHT.
>

Read the above for yourself.  When there is a net.men, and a net.men.only,
then it will be equality.  Until then --- watch your contradictions.
Utilizing the net as anyone else does is your right. Asking me
to step down, based on my sex, from whatever position I hold is not
your right.  It is just sexist.

>I never heard any votes about net.men.only.  I can't imagine that
>the women arguing for our space in net.women.only would have denied
>the space for a net.men.only.  There is a mens mailing list and I
>haven't heard any women denigrating that.
>

Well, some have said there is no need for net.men.* because the
whole net is overrun by men.  I disagree --- we just don't seek
any special treatment due to our sex.  The mens' mailing list
just got reborn, so I don't know how long it will last.


>(just a hint, Ross.  What you represent to me is quickly changing :-)
>

Hmmmmm.  What am I to make of that?  I dunno...what did I represent
before?



-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
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