Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    
    
     Mr Kupton,
    
      I inderstand what you have stated, but I can hear the other sides
    response before it is even written. It would go something like this"
    We do not mind the mutual respect(ladies and gentelman) but what we
    want is equality, we want to be able to share in the power and not have
    your superior physical ability as a road block." How do you respond to
    this arguement?
    
    David

    David, what 'other side' are you talking about?
    
    (What you said wouldn't be my argument at all, just to let you know.)
    

    
     
     Well then why don't you take the bait ant represent the other side??
    
    
    David

    David, I don't see that the whole question of how our species deals
    with gender issues can be boiled down to two sides.
    
    Please don't put words in the mouths of people you see as being on
    the 'other side,' ok?
    
    My first impulse here was to respond to your characterization rather
    than K. Upton's words such as pointing out to you that so-called
    'superior physical ability' is relative.  Gorillas (male and female)
    have the kind of superior strength and dexterity (not to mention having
    4 thumbs!) that make the strongest humans look weak, yet I don't see us 
    all rushing to give world power to gorillas for these gifts.  On the 
    other hand, women live substantially longer than men, so in one sense, 
    women have superior physical ability.  (See what I mean?)  :>
    
    Never mind.

    
    
    ok.. I will not put words into your mouth. My apologies. No I do not
    see your point. Please explain it again..
    
    thanks,
    David

    i think the last week or so noting here made more clear that men and women 
    are drifting more apart, and that they dont understand where the other is 
    coming from, i think we need a very big computer to find out why and how 
    to fix this. iam not smart enough to even give a clue on this!

    /nasser
    

>    i think the last week or so noting here made more clear that men and women 
>    are drifting more apart, and that they dont understand where the other is 
>    coming from, i think we need a very big computer to find out why and how 
>    to fix this.

 I think you have a very naive way of looking at things.

    
    
    Personally, I think the last couple of weeks worth of entries in this
    notes conference have made it abundantly clear that there are certain
    men who are determined to widen the gap between men and women and that
    certain women are determined continue down that same path.  Lord,
    folks, don't you have any work to do?  (kind of 8-))
    
      GJD

    
    I think it's obvious that there is a gap between what one or more women
    and one or more men think, and how they feel about their values,
    differences, and expressions in this notesfile and in the world.
    
    However, I think it's important to get value from the discussion, and
    still see that not every woman, and not every man, feels *that* way.  
    
    -Jody
    

Re: .9

Exactly, Jody, which is why I don't want to exclude any one group from
participating in the discussion.

			Steve

    
    -1
    
      And were not you asking you to Steven. Were asking that(hence forth)
    you enforce the " Notes must be in response basenote topic."
    
    David

    RE: .9  Jody
    
    > However, I think it's important to get value from the discussion, and
    > still see that not every woman, and not every man, feels *that* way.  
    
    In the recent discussion about child support (topic 837.*), I disagreed
    with a lot of what was written - but I didn't voice any objections
    because I know it's a touchy subject for some men (and I could see that
    some men were letting off steam about their strong beliefs that they
    are treated unfairly.)  Of course, thanks to Mennotes, I agree that
    men are treated unfairly in family court (although I still disagree
    with a lot of individual discussion points in 837.*).
    
    In the same way, workplace prejudice is a touchy subject for some
    women and minorities, so someone is bound to *voice* an objection
    to seeing them in a workplace notesfile.  It shouldn't be such a
    big deal to have these objections, but it is (and probably always
    will be.)  It seems inevitable.

    RE: .11  David
    
    > And were not you asking you to Steven. Were asking that(hence forth)
    > you enforce the " Notes must be in response basenote topic."
    
    Keep in mind that notes that say, "Hey, you're not talking about
    the basenote!!!" are not talking about the basenote, either, and
    would have to be deleted if such a policy were enforced.
    

    Suzanne,
    
    Perhaps it's not so much prejudice and hatred you see, but anger
    and frustration that men are feeling.  
    
    Many men don't feel they belong to the group who actively works
    to suppress minorities.  Although many would argue that the patriarchy
    is responsible for all said suppression, I personally know many
    men who are as much a victim of oppression as any minority group
    member.  I have seen attitudes which express to men who point this
    out that it doesn't matter (their anger and frustration), that by
    virtue of being born male, they belong by default to said catagory
    and that despite their own life experiences, these men have been
    told that by being male, they inherently have received or benefitted
    from the misery of others.  If I were a man, I too would feel angry
    and frustrated when confronted with such attitudes.
    
    In the -wn- file, it's ok for women to express their anger and fear
    and frustration with men.  There seems to be a feeling that it is not
    ok for men to express their anger, fear and frustrations they have/are
    experiencing with women.  Why in one case is it 'ok' but in the other
    termed to be hatred?
    
    Christine

    re: .14
    
    
    THANK YOU    THANK YOU    THANK YOU
    
    
    Reason does prevail!
    
    But the sad thing is that it takes a woman to say this.  If it were a
    man that wrote this, it would immediately be torn apart, but because it
    was written by a woman it will be perceived differently.  WHY??? 
    Because men are afraid to say what they feel for fear of retribution.
    I still think that most of the problems in society today are of the
    rights over responsibilities attitude in society.  Let's take
    responsibility for our own circumstances for a change and not try to
    find someone to blame.  If there is a problem with me, it's my problem
    and I can fix it.  If it means that I have to work harder than person
    X, or Y or Z than so be it because in other areas I have the advantage.
    That is how life works folks.  You don't always win, you don't always
    have things as you would like them, you do the best you can with what
    you have and hope to the good Lord that he helps you to make the right
    decisions. 
    
    Tom

    We need a Hall Of Fame.  .14 can be first in.

    RE: .14  Christine
    
    > Perhaps it's not so much prejudice and hatred you see, but anger
    > and frustration that men are feeling.  
    
    Why didn't you direct this to the people (not me) who first started
    accusing others of showing "hatred" in the topic?  Why is it 'ok'
    for some men to accuse a woman in a discussion of showing 'hatred,'
    but it's not 'ok' if she responds by pointing out the 'hatred' she
    sees?  Why didn't you tell them, "Perhaps it's not hatred you see,
    but anger and frustration at seeing the same old workplace prejudices
    yet again"?
    
    > Many men don't feel they belong to the group who actively works
    > to suppress minorities. 
    
    If a particular man is making statements implying that minorities
    are inferior in the workplace, then he's actively working to suppress
    minorities, in my opinion (even if doesn't run out and try to get
    every one of us fired.)
    
    > Although many would argue that the patriarchy
    > is responsible for all said suppression, I personally know many
    > men who are as much a victim of oppression as any minority group
    > member. 
    
    I agree men are sometimes or often "victims," although it's become
    another nasty word used to describe minorities.
    
    > ...these men have been
    > told that by being male, they inherently have received or benefitted
    > from the misery of others.  If I were a man, I too would feel angry
    > and frustrated when confronted with such attitudes.
    
    Is it necessary to express this anger by promoting workplace prejudices
    in a notesfile where we all work, though???  Not all women and minorities
    have contributed to the pain of white males, so why should they be the
    targets for white male anger and frustration?
    
    > In the -wn- file, it's ok for women to express their anger and fear
    > and frustration with men. 
    
    Like hell it is!!!  Women take an incredible amount of heat for almost
    any expression of anger (even when it's about CRIME, which is a societal
    problem for everyone.)
    
    > There seems to be a feeling that it is not
    > ok for men to express their anger, fear and frustrations they have/are
    > experiencing with women.  Why in one case is it 'ok' but in the other
    > termed to be hatred?
 
    Where have you been???  The practice of describing someone's discussion
    as "hatred" is almost exclusively directed at WOMEN.  When it was
    started yet again, I tossed it back.  As I expected, people objected
    right away (I mean, how dare a woman describe a male as acting in
    hatred when it's surely just something women do.)  Yeah, right.

    
    
    Suzanne,
    
        Read the title of this topic lately??
    
    
    David

    re .17
    
>    Is it necessary to express this anger by promoting workplace prejudices
    
    You've got it wrong again.  Nobody was promoting anything of the sort.

    
    
    841.14(Christine)
    
     Yes!!! Excellent note..
    
    
    David

    RE: .18  David
    
    > Read the title of this topic lately??
    
    I responded point by point to Christine's note.  If I'm off the
    topic, then she must have been off the topic, too.
    
    Make up your mind.

    RE: .21  Mike Smith
    
    > You just don't get it.  I have recently reached the conclusion that you
    > never will. 
    
    I suppose it would be impossible to simply say, "We disagree.  I have
    recently reached the conclusion that we never will agree."
    

    RE: .24  Mike Smith
    
    > No, Suzanne.  We cannot disagree, as that implies that you understand
    > the issues about which I have been trying to discuss and that we merely
    > disagree on their import. 
    
    Obviously, you do not understand what I've been saying.
    
    > So far, I have seen no evidence that you do,
    > indeed, understand.  Hence my recent comment.
    
    I see no evidence that you understand.  So what?
    

    
re: .12  (oh well...)
    
    RE: .9  Jody
    
>    > However, I think it's important to get value from the discussion, and
>    > still see that not every woman, and not every man, feels *that* way.  
>    
>
    .
    .
    .    
>    In the same way, workplace prejudice is a touchy subject for some
>    women and minorities, so someone is bound to *voice* an objection
>    to seeing them in a workplace notesfile.  It shouldn't be such a
>    big deal to have these objections, but it is (and probably always
>    will be.)  It seems inevitable.
    
    
    I'm not sure you understood what I meant above.
    I *really* meant that it was important for people to get value from the
    discussion....
       *AND*
    see that not every woman and not every man feels that way.
    
    
    There is value in both sides of the discussion, and there is even more
    value as people grow to listen more, express their insights in
    different ways according to where the conversation is leading, etc....
    
    AND it's important to see that not all men or women feel the same way
    as the people posting at that particular time.
    
    I'm sorry if what I said felt invalidating (as I felt it might when
    your title read "oh well....")
    
    -Jody
    

    
    
   Dearest Suzanne,
    
    I don't ofter recommend this to people, but here goes, start using
    drugs soon, lots of them :-)
    
    David

    RE: .27  David
    
    You didn't make up your mind, I see (but that's ok, too.)  :>
    

    
    
    Suzanne,
    
      About what???????
    
    David

    David - see reply .22 - ok?
    

    
    
    Suzanne,
    
    and you be sure and read 841.13 again please?? I think you may have
    misunderstood me.. I was pointed out the title of this topic to you
    in order to show you that this was the correct topic to discuss tangent
    from the other one..errr, I think something like that, its all such
    a blur now...
    
    who am I, why am i in this conference
    
    David :-)

    Suzanne-
    
    Perhaps I am wrong, but I did think that you were the first to bring
    up what hatred you had seen in the other note in response to Fred
    Haddock.  I thought  the ensuing tangent in the string dealt with 
    objections to your use of the word hatred in objection to why Fred is
    glad to be a man.  That is why I directed that part of my note to you.
    
    
    As to all the rest, I just disagree.  I don't have time to go point 
    by point to show you that I'm right and you are wrong or vice-versa.
    Take note .14 to be my opinion on the subject and that by not responding 
    to your point by point dissection of my note in no way implies agreement 
    with your points.

    RE: .32  Christine
    
    > Perhaps I am wrong, but I did think that you were the first to bring
    > up what hatred you had seen in the other note in response to Fred
    > Haddock. 
    
    You're wrong.  Fred was the first to use the term (in 840.67):
    
    	  "Is there any difference?  Do you dare say anything good about being
          a man without getting thoroughly trashed by the envy/hate groups?"
    
    My first use of the term was in direct response to this note.
    
    > I thought  the ensuing tangent in the string dealt with 
    > objections to your use of the word hatred in objection to why Fred is
    > glad to be a man.  That is why I directed that part of my note to you.
    
    Now you can fix it (and direct future such notes to others,) ok?
    
    > As to all the rest, I just disagree. 
    
    Well, it's ok for us to disagree (without fighting to the death over
    it.)  But then, we're women.  :> :>

    re .33
    
>                  <<< Note 841.33 by CSC32::WSC641::CONLON >>>
>
>    RE: .32  Christine
>    
>    > Perhaps I am wrong, but I did think that you were the first to bring
>    > up what hatred you had seen in the other note in response to Fred
>    > Haddock. 
>    
>    You're wrong.  Fred was the first to use the term (in 840.67):
>    
>    	  "Is there any difference?  Do you dare say anything good about being
>          a man without getting thoroughly trashed by the envy/hate groups?"
>    
    
    And so far Suzanne, you've done a magnificent job of proving my point.
    
    fred();

    RE: .34  Fred
    
    > And so far Suzanne, you've done a magnificent job of proving my point.
    
    On the contrary - other men have listed good things about being a man
    without getting any negative comments from me (or anyone else) at all.
    Even YOU listed something good about being a man (after your initial
    entry) that I didn't regard as a problem.
    
    As mentioned before, I only objected when you (and one other person)
    described the 'good things' about being a man in terms of negative
    characterizations about another group.

    re .35
    
    Sure could'a fooled me.
    
    fred();

    RE: .36  Fred
    
    > Sure could'a fooled me.
    
    You fooled yourself, Fred.
    

    on a mostly unrelated note:
    
    if i think about what i like about being female, much (maybe even most)
    of it is the result of direct comparison to what i think it would be
    like to be male.  ex: i am very glad that i will never have to wonder
    who my children are (or if i have any children).
    
    yes some parts of what we like about our gender exists without
    comparison to the other, but much of what we like is *not* being that
    other gender...
    
    lt