Conference turris::womannotes-v1

   
   As a recent lecture by Dr. Jean Baker Miller pointed up, women tend
   to think of power as something negative and unfeminine. Where
   does that come from?  
   
   I would speculate that we come by it pretty honestly, but would argue
   that it isn't an adaptive reaction for us anymore. 
                                                                
   I suspect that we've come to make that association because in most
   known societies (maybe even all) power is used by individuals and
   groups to exploit other individuals and groups.  We seem to have a
   tendency as a species to suppose that if we can do something then
   we've a god-given right to use it to our personal advantage and to
   hell with anyone else. Maybe it's just that we're short-sighted by
   nature, still not far enough evolved from our early hand-to-mouth
   existence to take a longer or wider view.  Hard to tell.  But I'd be
   willing to bet that the first definition of power was based on
   muscles and gross-motor skills, and that more than one primitive male
   suddenly worked out that he could have all the goodies he wanted by
   *taking* them.  Since primitive societies seem to favor sharp
   gender-role distinctions, I'd be also willing to bet that hard on the
   heels of that power-is-muscle definition came one that said
   power-is-masculine.  And while societies have evolved slightly since
   then, the basic motivations and justifications for their rules
   haven't, particularly, and the personal cost of violating those rules
   can be too much to pay. 

   But power is neutral, really, neither masculine nor feminine.  It's
   simply what motivates action, any kind of action.  It doesn't have to
   be used to exploit others; we can use it to make a better world for
   everyone, instead. 
                               
   This is our challenge in this community.  To gather our power and use
   it to change our world to be what we want it to be. 
   
   And the place to start is here.  Our =womannotes= file.  For if we
   cannot *act* *together* to meet our needs here, where the cost of
   failure is low, how can we ever hope to make any changes in the world
   outside, where the risk is often higher and the cost of failure
   always is! 
   
   I'm not arguing for the existance of any "party line", or for
   giving up our right to argue or dissent.  The environment of the
   notefile is unique in that we are only a community by choice,
   not by economic or political commitments that are hard to unmake
   if they become burdensome.  The individual will always have enormous
   power whether or not aligned with others on any given issue.
   
   I am arguing for a spirit of trial-and-error cooperation in service
   of our common needs.                                         
   
   						(continued...)--->

   
   How do we do it?   
   
   Avoid taking up entrenched positions, talk about our *needs* instead.
   (In marketing terms, talk about the *benefits*, not the *features*)
   Propose possible ways to meet those needs.  Lobby our friends and
   colleagues to support us. Support other people's proposals whenever
   possible. Go on record. Quantify support or discomfort levels (try a
   -5 to +5 scale) so that we can have a better understanding of what's
   at stake. Talk about alternative ways to meet needs. Say *why*. Get
   non-members to become read-only members. Get read-only members to
   introduce themselves and become voting members. Say a loving
   "Goodbye, come back when you can" to members who feel they need to
   leave the community for awhile.  Be open to new possibilities, to
   experiment. Don't be quick to take offence.  Support people even when
   confronting them.  Give others the benefit of the doubt ...sometimes
   even when there isn't any!  Don't respond to the less-important part
   of what someone is saying (in other words, don't nit-pick).  Ask
   questions to clarify what's really going on.  *Take* *responsibility*.
   
   Understand that no decision is cast in concrete for all time. We can
   experiment!  We can make a trial of something for a month (or just a
   week!) and if it isn't working, *we can change it*. 
                                                            
   						(continued...)--->

   
   Want this to be a "safe place for women"?  Decide what that means.
   Talk about how we can do that.  Can we make it *completely* safe? Do
   we need to?   Figure out what we should try first.  Work out how we
   can judge whether it's meeting our needs.  Set a time limit for the
   test. Decide what to add/try next, if this wasn't enough/right. 
   
   Want trashnotes out of the file?  All of them?  Some of them? Empower
   the moderators to take whatever action you think will meet your
   needs.  The authority can always be rescinded or modified later if
   it's too much or too little or not the right flavor.  Right now the
   only people who are happy are the ones doing the trashnoting! 
   
   Want more diversity of viewpoints in the file?  Then *write*. Get
   your friends to write.  Mend the balance.  Speak out!  But don't
   expect other people to speak out if you won't:  what's scary for you
   is probably just as scary for them.  And remember, no matter how hot
   the flames get, at the end of the day they're just words and you are
   *just* *as* *important* to the community as anybody else who
   participates.  Probably even more important, if you hold a minority
   view...there might not be anybody to take your place if you fall
   silent. 
   
   Want this file to be moderated in the "conventional" way, with the
   moderators taking all the decisions and being very interventionist? I
   fervently hope you don't, but if you do then tell us that explicitly.
   Surrender your power into our hands.  But do it *explicitly*, with
   your eyes open and knowing what you're giving up. 
                                              

   Once we have ourselves organised and have a sense of how to use our
   power for constructive purposes, we can --as a community-- begin to
   work on conditions outside the file.  *We'll know how*. 
   
                                         	(continued...)--->

   
   What is the will of the community?  The moderators will enforce it,
   whatever it is.  If necessary, we'll empower "special moderators" to
   take on tasks that require more energy than we ourselves can spare. 
   
   What are we going to build here?  Let's start now.
   
   						in Sisterhood,
   						=maggie

    1) trashnotes: if all it takes is a vote, I'd vote for having all
    trashnotes [by the specific trashnoter we ALL have in mind]
    categorically deleted period.  If that individual wants to put in
    a note/reply, it goes to a moderator first, and anything submitted
    without using the moderator's permission is summarily and immediately
    deleted.  I trust the judgement of our moderators in deciding whether
    or not that individual is merely trashnoting or has anything of
    value [including a good joke] to say.  
    
    2) women-only: one vote against it here.  My opinion: men are
    permitted, *allowed* here.  They may speak.  They may yell.  This
    is a privilege and should be treated as such.  No, strike that,
    there are individuals (of the XY sort) who I don't mind monopolizing
    the file.
    
    3) moderator intervention: bleich, ptooey.  Conversations ramble
    and that's okeydoke; we'll get back on track if we feel like it.
    
    4) one loud vote for this being a forum for ALL, ALL, ALL women
    (regardless of current genitalia or dress).  ONLY exception would
    be female trashnoters, and I don't think any of them exist yet.

    For all the screaming about a party line, there isn't one here.
     Right now we're pretty "pro-feminist", "radical" whatever.  We
    weren't always, and probably we won't always be.  The file grows
    as do the individuals contributing to it, and it regresses as do
    the individuals.  I agree that we should encourage people to
    contribute.  Give the address out.  Show people how to note.  Ask
    them what they think of particular issues.  Cite references to this
    file when recommending someone attend a course or event listed here.
    
    I like this file the way it is, would prefer it w/o trashnotes,
    liked it last month, will like it next month, there IS power in
    Sisterhood.
    
    Lee

    I like Lee's response format, and will use/adapt it for my ramblings.
    
    1)  Trashnotes.  I've been watching this phenomenon on and off for
    a few months.  With a bemused expression.  Because the people
    responsible for their continued existence are us, the responders.
    If you don't like the note, *don't answer* !!  

    2)  Membership.  Open to one and all.  I want to hear what everyone
    thinks who thinks they have anything to say, female or male, tolerant
    or rigid, new englandite or foreign, uncomfortable with the opposite
    sex or easygoing buddy.  I guess I would like to see some restraint,
    some self-evaluation of our notes and responses.  Why am I writing?  Is
    it worth saying?  Have I already said this thing before?  Are my
    notes/responses concise, or are they so long that people will skip/skim
    and then misunderstand me? 
    
    3)  Moderator intervention.  Open forum, please, as little as possible.
    When there's little controvery, we don't need it.  When there is,
    I like to watch the give and take.
    
    4)  Power.  Great stuff, power!  I love it.  Listen, getting older
    is great.  I'm 36 and nothing intimidates me much.  When I have
    an opinion that's reasonably complete, I voice it.  (Give me a drink
    and I'll say it sooner, but that's another story.)  I don't have
    or want management-type power, fiat from above.  Influence power
    is a lot more fun.  You press your ideas as much as the situation
    will bear, you don't always win, you don't always even try to win.
    But people will listen to you.  I also like to watch people who
    have and use power - I'm just a neophyte at this game.
    
    5)  Sisterhood.  Now, how do we create a group power? 
    We squander much by bickering among ourselves, but we wouldn't want 
    a overbearing, individuality-quashing dogma either.  This is where 
    we need to get to work. 
    						- Dotsie

    I'm going to go out on a limb here: I'd like to leave in trashnotes
    by women.  Well, sort of.  Keep reading, have patience with me for
    awhile.
    
    In my experience, if a male tells a female "That's stupid!!", she'll
    clam up (and quietly fume); if a male tells a male "That's stupid!!"
    he'll yell back.  OK--this is a *generalization*; and I know a lot
    of people who don't behave like the above: they either wouldn't
    say something like that, or they would or wouldn't react that way,
    not to mention situational modifiers (such as if the first person
    is your boss and it's review time :-), etc.).  Yes, lots of them
    even post here.
    
    I don't really know what happens when a female tells a female "That's
    stupid!!".  I went to the wrong school, I've worked in the wrong group
    at DEC (there was only 1 engineer who was female for 3 of the 4 years
    I've been here, and I'm not sure there were any before that).  I
    haven't always been around a lot of women since I left home and
    my two sisters: even in most of my shared households, all of my
    roommates were male (in houses of 3 to 7 people).  
    
    I also don't think saying "That's stupid!!" is a worthwhile rhetorical
    technique.  But it can be a powerful one, especially, in my experience,
    when used against women--if it shuts them up, then that's points
    for your side; for many who use this, that's all they want, is to
    win.  For some of the rest of us, we're careless (at least we hope
    that's all it is).
    
    You need to practice so that you won't clam up and let the bullies
    beat you with such an easy line.  And the slobs need to be reminded
    that they're not being polite (but please don't let this get back
    to embarass our parents :-) ).
    
    Now, we should also know by now that trashing is in the eye of the
    beholder, sometimes.  Some people, on all sides, act an awful lot
    like they're threatened by postings by people who only disagree
    with them; we have to remember to be tolerant of other people's
    opinions as well as our own :-). [And I don't just say this because
    I get the giggles over postings which labor to imply that a lack
    of femininity is rooted in someone else's feminist or non-feminist
    leanings; my humor has too much of the sarcastic mixed in to be
    very kind, some days.]
    
    I also don't mean to be really encouraging hurtful postings either.
    [I can laugh at other things, after all :-).]  What I mean is that
    one has to get good at dealing with hurtful things, often on one's
    own.  At least, this is how I've been learning to live.
    
    And I am a subversive.  I'll come out and say it, for any who haven't
    gotten irritated by it already: I'm advocating a method of changing
    your behavior.  (So much for subtlety.)
    
    Now, why exclude trashing by men?  Mostly because women get it so
    often.  Yeah, trashing from women too, but I don't see nearly so
    much of it.  So, I thought, learning to deal with trashing by women would
    be a bit less overwhelming.
    
    But, when you think of it, there have been few incidents of trashing
    by men, most of them by one individual?  So maybe the restrictions
    don't have to apply...as long as we learn how to deal with trashing.
    
    --------------------
    
    I realize I'm a scrapper and may have no place in a new, supportive
    notesfile.  More likely, my dilletantism will cause me to drop out
    if membership rules are enacted.  's'okay: I find other arenas.
    Beware!  :-) :-) :-)

    re -1:
    
    I think that "trashnotes" doesn't refer to men who disagree with
    women in this file, but rather the string of notes that we've seen
    in the last couple of weeks that were subsequently set "hidden"
    by the moderators and the bunch of base notes by a certain unnamed
    individual a couple weeks back that had (to me, anyway) no value.
    
    "Trashnotes" doesn't refer to arguments and heated disagreements
    (I don't think).
    
    	-Ellen

    Right, Ellen, by "trashnotes" I mean the sort of note or response that
    could be considered  "verbal flashing", intended to excite the writer
    while annoying the reader.  Other notes, trivial or provocative
    or whatever, are designed to be enjoyed by all concerned; they are
    not, to my mind anyhow, trashnotes.
    
    I guess I should also make it clear that my list of possible issues
    that might be addressed by us was not intended to be exhaustive.  Those
    were just examples of some areas of recent (continuing?) concern to us.
    
    						=maggie 
    

I prefer an unauthoritarian moderating style, but I confess that the
trash notes are a pet peeve of mine.  I resent seeing them take up
so much space, even with a comma key at my disposal.  After my first
encounter with one, I refused to respond and I strongly suggest that
others do the same. The irritation to me is great enough, though, that I
would be happy with a policy that empowers the moderators to put a stop
to it.  Trash noting amounts to harassment of the entire body of noters,
and should not be tolerated any more than individual harrassment should
be tolerated.  

    Re. .0
    
    > Others aren't, but they often do us a service by providing the
    > (metaphorical) rough surface on which we can hone the edges of our
    > thinking and argument.

    I like this metaphor allot.  That rough surface is necessary.  When
    I was trying to decide for myself what my stand on religion was
    I would spend time auguring with a person from one fundemaltalist
    church or another.  You really don't know how good your argument
    (or vision of the world) is until you try to defend it against
    and equally skilled and dedicated member of the opposition.
    
    I can see how the participation of skilled opposition could be
    bad before you have had a chance to decide for yourself what your
    position is.  Salesmen use this weakness all the time.  I would
    guess that many of the members of most cults where moved to the
    thinking of the cult because they did not have a preexisting idea
    of their own or did not want to defend their ideas.
    
    Is the existence of men here too disruptive of the process of
    forming a position (a vision of the world)?  Only you can
    decide if you are ready to start defending your ideas.
    I hope you decide that I can stick around.
    
    					MJC O->
    
    

       
    I've said before and I will say again:  I like the open, free-wheeling
    format that allows us to work through our feelings, express anger
    and frustration that maybe can't be expressed anywhere else, and
    come to a deeper understanding of ourselves and each other.
    
    I now understand a great deal about women and about sisterhood. I have
    never used that term before in reference to myself, except when talking
    to or about my own brother. I never knew what the term meant.  Now I
    know it means that whatever our differences, whatever our arguments, no
    matter how much we yell at each other and even hurt each other,
    underneath we are all human, we are all part of the same human family.
    And that includes all of us, men and women alike.  Nice and nasty
    alike.  
    
    I don't think I could have reached this understanding in a forum that
    was more carefully monitored.  This freedom to explore a topic where it
    leads, even if it isn't the direction set by the base note, and follow
    it through to its logical conclusion, is the main thing that sets
    womannotes apart from all the other notes files I participate in. 

    Growth is painful.  We need to be compassionate to one another's pain,
    but we have to recognize that in many cases, the only way to stop the
    hurt is to stop the growth.  I, for one, don't wish to see that. 
    
    --bonnie

    p.s.     Trashnotes?  I ignore them if I find them offensive.
    Unfortunately I've got a pretty high (or low?) tolerance for grossness
    and other offensiveness, so I've only had to ignore a couple.  I don't
    want my standards to determine what others with less, er, crudity in
    their background can tolerate. 

            <<< RAINBO::$2$DUA11:[NOTES$LIBRARY]WOMANNOTES.NOTE;1 >>>
                        -< Topics of Interest to Women >-
================================================================================
Note 378.14                      =womannotes=                           14 of 14
CEODEV::FAULKNER "Mr Manners"                        10 lines   9-JUL-1987 16:31
                            -< trash r people too. >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thanks for all the encouragement folks.
    Hey I did what I could.
    I lot of Joanie come latelys are attending wn party as a result
    of a certain noting style. (I won't name names, or make stupid smiley
    faces designed to make a stupid statement "appear" humorous).
    but ask yourselves this.
    if you dislike them so much -
    why do you copy them and reinsert them?
    why bother to respond to them?
    and how in HIS name can you possibly take them seriously?

.14>    if you dislike them so much -
.14>    why do you copy them and reinsert them?
    
    
    Well, I think I can answer this one :-)...
    
    Why am I copying "some" notes and re-inserting them... so they don't
    disapear...
    
    I had 1000 unseen last week... in trying to catch up, I found a
    LOT of base notes deleted, and people seeming to look sorta foolish
    and I for one GOT SICK AND TIRED OF IT!
    
    This same noter had the same style (hit and delete) in another
    conference... I have taken this style (of reinserting) now from many 
    other noters who have had to adopt this style to preserve the 
    integrity of a conversation.
    
    If you don't like it, then don't write anything I will have to recopy!
    
    GLK

    re .16  Way to go !!! 

    I've got my asbestos flame suit on, so let me add -- 
    
    I would hate to lose Kerry from this notes file. (See, I'm not going
    to use euphemisms like "I think we all know who.") 
    
    For one thing it violates my deeply held principle that all voices
    have a right to be heard, no matter what they say.  Politeness may
    be easier to tolerate than bluntness or deliberate offensiveness,
    but politeness is not a moral virtue and it has nothing to do with
    the correctness of what is said.
    
    For another, his moments of insight are worth it.  I can ignore the
    stuff that's meant to be deliberately offensive.  
    
    I like having someone around who doesn't pull any punches.  It's a
    valuable counterpoint to my tendency to over-qualify and over-classify
    and over-label.
    
    And finally:  if we throw him out, how are we ever going to get through
    to him? :) :) :) 
    
    --bonnie
    

    
    Considering the long intro note and the responses here and elsewhere
    Ide say that what I set out to accomplish back a few notes ago,
    has occurred.  I am really glad that a few eyes have been opened
    and that may people have expanded their thoughts and vision
    on and about this file. Eve even noticed a few new names pop
    up here which is good also in that there sure more voices to 
    be heard and views to contemplated on the subjects.
    
    As far as MR Faulkner goes ...let him stay...In his own way
    at times he actually has something of value in what he does.
    True, many times hes the only one that understands it, but
    all voices need to be heard for a totaly rounded forum.
    
    My only objection to the discussion so far, is the reference 
    to " guns being left at the door and other references of the 
    nature RE . 6. Since I am a "pro gun person" and theres enough
    bad connotations about firearms I dont believe that the reference
    to guns should be used in this context.
    
                              Bob B

    I have previously communicated by mail my full support for Maggie's
    vision for this conference.  While I have some reservations about
    a general hands-off moderation attitude, I would be delighted to
    see that it actually works.  The cooperation of ALL the community
    is needed to make this happen.  (Certainly, I'd be thrilled if I
    never had to use the SET MODERATOR command in any of the conferences
    I moderate!)
    
    As for "throwing anyone out", I would hate to see this happen. 
    I believe in looking at each contribution individually, no matter
    whom it is from, and deciding on a case-by-case basis whether or
    not it is a problem.  Yes, there are individuals, of whom Kerry
    is only one, that seem to offend more often than not, but I'd rather
    try education than exclusion or punishment.  It is the responsibility
    of the moderators to decide how best to apply their views and
    best judgement to each case.  I can tell you from experience, it's
    sometimes no fun and a heck of a lot of work to be a moderator of
    a conference like this one, but there's a great deal of satisfaction
    there too.
    
    In the case of "trash notes", the best medicine is to simply not
    rise to the bait.  This gets hard, especially if the author keeps
    raising the stakes by making even more obnoxious statements, but
    eventually they'll give up if they see that nobody is responding.
    I really like Maggie's imagery of a "verbal flasher", since that's
    exactly what these noters are doing.  Just shrug your shoulders,
    say "ho-hum", and go on your way.
    
    I believe in this conference, and believe that it is and ought to
    be "owned" by women.  I also believe that the participation of men
    in this conference is valuable and that any form of segregation
    is the wrong answer.  But I also recognize that I, as a man, should
    restrain myself and only write when I feel I have something relevant
    to the issue and to women - just adding my opinion on any question
    would be not in the best interest of this conference's goals.
    
    So you won't see me write as often as I have in the past.  But I'll
    read every day, and will perhaps send mail to you if I want to
    discuss a particular issue.  My hope is that by reducing the obvious
    male presence in the conference, women will feel more comfortable
    here.
    
    In the spirit of togetherness....
    
    				Steve

    re: .14
    
    %SYS-E-NORESPONS, t'ain't wuth it.
    
    To each their own opinion.
    
    -Jody
    

            <<< RAINBO::$2$DUA11:[NOTES$LIBRARY]WOMANNOTES.NOTE;1 >>>
                        -< Topics of Interest to Women >-
================================================================================
Note 378.22                      =womannotes=                           22 of 22
CEODEV::FAULKNER "Mr Manners"                         3 lines  10-JUL-1987 11:45
                                   -< hunh? >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    please explain how it works 
    .21 was a circle within a circle within ....
    

    
    Perhaps I am not the first in responding to 1.*, but this seemed
    like the right place to talk about it.  I find it very troubling
    that a note was deleted from *Woman*notes because men were
    uncomfortable with what the note said.  (Perhaps we should ask
    the people of China to please learn English so that American tourists
    will be more comfortable when they visit.)
    
    I'll stop now because I'm angry and likely to say something sarcastic.
    
    Justine

    Go ahead and be angry.  Give yourself a break.  What's the worst that
    can happen?
    
    DFW 

    Justine, the original note is still in the file. The copy was
    removed from the policy statement because it was not achieving the
    purpose for which it was originally placed there.

    Bonnie J

       re .24:
       
       > I find it very troubling that a note was deleted from
       > *Woman*notes because men were uncomfortable with what the note
       > said. 
       
       It looked to me as though the note was removed because one of the
       moderators removed it.  
       
       Lots of other notes in lots of other conferences upset people, yet
       the notes are not removed.  The moderators of this conference seem
       to be extremely active in removing, moving, organizing, and
       reorganizing notes.
       
       Is your gripe with the people who said they were offended, or is
       it with the moderators? 
                              
       --Mr Topaz 

    >  The copy was removed from the policy statement because it was not 
    >  achieving the purpose for which it was originally placed there.
                  
    
    I stand corrected.  So you removed a copy of the note from the
    policy statement (even though many of the women in womannotes
    thought that the note beautifully articulated their concerns 
    and feelings) because some of the men that you know said that
    it did not foster communication?
    
    It's true that the note did bring about some conflict, but I would
    argue that some of the most meaningful growth that has happened
    in this file has been a direct result of conflict.  I also want
    to reiterate that I am uncomfortable with the fact that men's reaction
    to a note in womannotes has determined where that note would appear.
    
    Justine

    The note, or the copy of it in the policy topic, was keeping
    people (mostly men) away. Now if it pleases you to have men
    keep out of this conference then I can understand the objection
    to it's not being there. The message that that reply had when
    put in the context of the policy topic was (to many men myself
    included) that men were not wanted here. No matter how many women
    felt that those words articulated their feelings it doesn't hide
    the fact that the message in it was being interpreted differently
    by men and women.
    
    My understanding was that it was there (in the policy topic) to
    increase communication with men. As it was having the opposite effect 
    then I for one am glad to see it go. Conflict does often lead to 
    communication but when the conflict reaches a level where one side 
    is driven away then the chance for communication is lost.
    
    			Alfred

    I guess I should poke my head in here.
    
    For the record, I do not OPPOSE the deletion, but I am not terribly
    comfortable with it either.
    
    Also for the record, I did not OPPOSE the reposting (in to 1.28),
    but I wasn't terribly comfortable with it either.
    
    When I was asked, I was about to delete the original, hopefully
    before it hit the fan.  I was very happy that it was getting read
    the way I meant it, rather than the way it COULD be taken if careful
    attention to context was not made.  Pretty suprising, actually.
    
    Well it later DID hit the fan.  I thought we were actually making
    some progress in the understanding, but then a couple people left
    mad.  I never know what to think when that happens; dismiss it 'cause
    they'll be back when they cool down, dismiss it 'cause they're not
    very important to my life, care about it and try to make them
    understand?
    
    I dunno.  Still think what I said was valid, for once I said EXACTLY
    what I meant without words getting in the way, using the strength
    of the words to clarify rather than muddle my message.
    
    Think we need a party, and to drag some of the people who got mad
    at me to it.  I'm not an evil witch, honest!
    
    Lee

    re .29
    
    >   No matter how many women felt that those words articulated their 
    >   feelings it doesn't hide the fact that the message in it was being 
    >   interpreted differently by men and women.
                                
    	And when men and women interpret things differently, which
        interpretation do we usually use?
    
    It's no secret that I am one of the women in this file who feels
    that men are guests here, that they should not have a central role
    in the agenda of a file called womannotes.  (There are probably
    some men who feel this way, too, but we hardly ever hear from them
    ;-)  I'm not sure that the message was placed in the policy topic 
    in order to "increase communication with men."  If it was, perhaps
    that was our real mistake.  Addressing a note to men does, obviously,
    put them in the center.
    
    As I said to another member of this conference earlier today,
    Womannotes is a political forum (as I see it), and in any political
    forum, people with different opinions and issues will lobby for
    change.  So I guess that I (and others who may feel as I do) lost
    this time.  But I still feel that I have a right to express my
    anger and disappointment at the decision that was made.  Perhaps
    there were other alternatives available.  Maybe the moderators could
    have written a disclaimer of some sort, I don't know.  I also think
    that here in Womannotes we've been spoiled.  In other conferences
    that I've seen notes get deleted or moved quite frequently.  Maybe
    Because it hardly ever happens here, I feel the pain of this more
    accutely.  Some of us will just have to agree to disagree.  There
    are so many situations in the world where how men see things
    is the sole criterion for decision making that I shuddered to see
    that happening here.
    
    Justine
    
    

    	This whole thing has made me sad, more than anything.  I know
    	for a fact that Lee meant her note in a positive way (and I
    	knew it from the moment I read it) even if some of the individual
    	words were a bit strong.
    
    	I regret that it was taken so badly by some men (and hope that
    	we can all learn from this somehow.)
    
    	In the original spirit of Lee's note, I still agree with her
    	and support the good that she tried to do (and feel sad that
    	her words were so badly misunderstood.)
    
    	I hope that, by now, the real message behind her (and others')
    	words has been received.
    
    							Suzanne...

    Well, my motive in posting it to 1.* was indeed to let people --yes,
    mostly men!-- know where rather a lot of women are coming from. I
    thought that Lee expressed the whole thing beautifully, with a
    poignancy and clarity that's rare anywhere.  
    
    I knew very well that it would draw fire from men who felt threatened
    by it because they couldn't bear to recognise that yes women *are* in
    conflict about the multiple relationships we have with men.  I did
    hope, though, that it would produce more understanding than it would
    fear and loathing.  It's still not clear to me whether that's what
    happened, because we've only heard from the men who felt the fear
    and loathing.  Representative sample?  Hard to tell.
    
    But in any event, when Bonnie raised the point with me yesterday that
    if the purpose was communication it didn't seem to be working as
    intended, I had to agree.  Both of us considered the problem that
    Justine pointed out so eloquently:  it seems wrongheaded to delete a
    woman-written and women-supported note in a women-oriented file because
    _men_ feel threatened.  It does seem wrongheaded.  Yet we couldn't get
    around the point that the reason I re-posted it there in the first
    place was in aid of communicating our position to men, and it seemed to
    have failed of its purpose. 
    
    So Bonnie decided to delete it, and I concurred.  BUT the original
    stays (unless Lee decides to delete that one, which I sincerely hope
    she won't!!).
    
    						=maggie 

        I had one of the replies following Lee's note, and suggested it
        should be required  reading  - maybe as a non-American male, my
        perception of her words/intent  is different;  I don't know.  I
        do know that her note  was  well  written,  very expressive and
        definitely (in my opinion) non-threatening to men in general or
        in particular. I'm glad it's still around, even if not in 1.28.
        
        Quietly...
        
        Andy
        
        
        
        

    
    
    I feel as Justine does - I think - and I think I understand the
    moderators point  but I still would like the note to be required
    reading for anyone "looking" at WOMANNOTES.  It says so much so
    well and does not pull any punchs.
    
    _peggy
    		(-)
    		 |	<-- Is one of the symbols of the 
    				Ancient Goddess
    

    Is this an appropriate issue for a formal vote of the community?
    If so, then I suggest that we consider whether to limit the vote
    to those members currently registered rather than let ad-hoc
    registration take place as happened with the trashnotes vote.
    
    						=maggie

    maggie, it seems to me there are a lot of read-onlys who haven't
    registered but probably check in as often as I do and care about
    what happens.  I'd suggest warning that a vote will happen soon
    (if it really comes down to that... ick), that people should register
    before the polls open at which time the registration notes will
    be write-locked.
    
    You probably thought of that already, huh.
    
    An alternative I favor is modifying the present 1.28 to include
    a pointer to the original and saying that a large fraction of the
    members consider this to be required reading (almost as icky, but
    a little less brouhaha).
    
    Lee

	Many times in this file we've seen a man say something, with
	good intent and no intention of hurting anyone, which
	aggravates many of the women participants. Rather than simply
	deleting the aggravating note, he tries to make clear his
	intention.
	
	The women in the file are upset that the fact that the note is
	aggravating isn't sufficient in and of itself for him to
	delete or modify it.

	He (along with other men on his behalf) is upset that the
	women don't understand that his intent was good.
	
	Lee's note, with good intent and no intention of hurting
	anyone, aggravated many of the male participants, who took the
	talk of "men" as the "enemy" personally. She and the other
	women who agreed with the note have tried to make clear the
	intention.
	
	Now the men were upset that the fact that the note disturbed
	them didn't lead to it's removal from the conference policy
	note (until now), while the women have been upset that the men
	didn't understand they shouldn't take it personally. Hasn't
	anyone on "either side" learned anything yet, having seen
	these useless discussions from both sides?

	Aren't we all tired of wasting our energies (and Digital's
	network resources) on discussions about the semantics ("He/she
	didn't modify 'women/men' with 'some' or 'certain'! I'm hurt
	and offended:-(!") of our fellow noters? The participants in
	this file do have something in common: male or female, we're
	participating in this file because of our interest in sexual
	equality, because we want to see people treat each other as
	people rather than "men" and "women". If we can't even achieve
	that amongst ourselves, if all we can do is bicker about the
	conference itself when there are so many real issues out
	there, what use is this file?
	
	Mike (probably about to be flamed by everyone regardless of
	intent:-)

    <--(.38)
    
    Well said, Mike!
    						=maggie

I was another of the people who felt that Lee's note was inappropriate
as a policy statement.  This because of the unique nature of the
introductory note: it defines the purpose and sets the ground rules
of the conference.

Lee's note seemed to me to be a statement of discussion -- a point
of view.  As such, it is worth further discussion, which it cannot get
in note 1.

Perhaps note 1 could contain a directory of especially interesting
topics (date rape, abuse, Cheryl Tiegs, get-togethers, etc.) with specific
pointers to notes such as Lee's that are central to the dialog.

Martin.

    Reply to .41; Martin,
    
    I agree. Statements of policy should be discussable in an appropriate
    form. 
    
    And, if the policy is needed it should be inforced, regardless of
    what men may say.
    
    I'd like to see the note reposted in a new topic for discussion;
    and after discussion it could be reposted as a policy if need be.

    re .42 Mike
    
    The original note can be found at 479.13, discussion follows.

    
    I am one of those who believe men should be quiet,
    deferential guests here. A strict adherence to that principal would
    seem to suggest I keep my mouth shut about some questions; certainly
    policy questions. And normally, I would have complied with the
    moderators' request that concerns on this subject be mailed to them.    
    But on this issue, I must risk over-stepping my bounds. That being
    said...
    
    Although I realise that Ms. T's note is still findable, this was
    nowhere clear in the replies to 1.*. Thus, the whole impression
    is that a note found to be upsetting some male noters (who, as far
    as I'm concerned, if they don't like something they should either
    ask a few discreet questions or quietly leave- see above) was removed
    in the interest of placating these obnoxious, ill-mannered guests.    
    Words cannot express how flabbergasted, saddened, outraged and
    confused I am by such a decision. It is further unfortunate that
    the moderators seem to have gotten the impression that the men who
    whole-heartedly agree with Ms. T's fine prose are rare, un-involved
    folk. Is it not more likely that, feeling that Ms. T had said it
    so well nothing more need be said?? (especially if one is trying
    to be a polite guest?) I seem to recall an old principle of British
    parliamentary law that might apply here: 'silence implies consent'.
    
    Hoping this remains...
    

I CAN'T believe you are sitting here, and arguing about a note that was 
once reposted, and then deleted, but is in its original position...

Heck lets not worry that Bork could be confirmed, that Rape still occurs,
that people are making strides in their careers, and that the world is 
still spinning and that people need "our" help!... I mean if we sweat the 
small stuff... Lord help us when we get to the "big" stuff!

Geezzzummmmm!

GLK

    I'm not positive, Gale, but I think what's being argued is principle
    rather than the merits of the precipitating event as such. 
    
    Which certainly isn't meant to minimise the point you're making about
    Bork, rape, et al., but rather to suggest that sometimes even the
    smaller issues are worthy ones.  Maybe especially when they're issues
    we ourselves can actually deal with conclusively.
    
    I'm open to alternative argument, of course.
    				
    						=maggie  

I am outraged that Lee's note has been deleted from 1.28.  I know it 
exists elsewhere in the file, but the very notion that it could be 
removed because of MEN's objections leaves me almost speechless.  I usually 
refrain from noting in anger, but I'm having a hard time with this one.

Lee's note is well-done and very, very true to the experiences and 
sentiments of the women in this file.  This conference is supposedly 
WOMANnotes, by, for, and about women.  I expect the men who respect that 
are mostly silent readers, or very occasional contributors.  It's 
amazingly ironic that the men who lack the courage to honestly examine
themselves and the privileges of their gender roles, and to listen to 
the centuries-silent voice of women are the ones whose power has been 
deferred to in making this decision.

There will be a lot of smokescreen argument about how such an "opinion" 
does not belong in the "policy" section, and sanctioning of the action 
on that basis.  That's a lot of nonsense.  If that note is as true as 
statement as anyone is likely to get about the feelings women have about 
the role of men, in this file or in the world, why does it have no
place?  That endless roundabout concerning women and men is probably the
most insistent theme of this entire conference.  I think it is very 
appropriate for new readers to know where the WOMEN are coming from in 
this file.  If men get frightened off by it, then $#%^&*()!, they don't 
belong here anyway.  

While were at removing all the potential controversy, why don't we just
make this PEOPLEnotes, or better yet, MANKINDnotes (everyone knows that word
means women, too) and to hell with having a conference for WOMEN. 
I mean, the idea of women doing anything special, or having anything
unique or meaningful to say is so absurd...

    RE .47

    Catherine,

    For the most part the men who are involved in this discussion were
    able to deal with that note.  There are those that can't YET deal with
    such ideas so clearly worded.  Would you like to chase them away
    before you get the opportunity to change there way of thinking?  Your
    previous reply gives me that impression.

    SET FLAME ON

    If ONLY men you want to talk to are the ones who ALREADY agree with you,
    you will not make much change in the world.

    SET FLAME OFF

    Dick Schoeller

    re .48         -< Don't scare away a potential pupil >-
	
    >  Would you like to chase them away before you get the opportunity 
    >  to change there way of thinking?  Your previous reply gives me that 
    >  impression.

    	Some of us get tired of explaining the same things (over and
        over) to men, and would like an opportunity to spend some of 
        our energy on ourselves and each other.  It's true that meaningful 
        social change will only happen when the ones in power see things 
        differently, and as members of the disenfranchised class, we
        have a lot to gain by working and teaching.  But must women
        take *all* the responsibility for men's education?  And must
        it be a full-time job?  To extend your pupil-teacher analogy, 
        teachers usually get summers off.  
                                         
    	Justine
               

    <--(.48) 
    
    The only thing that worries me about the "don't chase them away, teach
    them" philosophy...with which I agree in general...is the history of
    the Black struggle for equal rights.  To our eternal shame it is
    incomplete to this very day! 
    
    What was it that got change started at all in that struggle? It damned
    sure wasn't the many unacknowledged Black contributions in science and
    the arts.  Nor was it the spectre of Blacks bleeding and dying in WWI,
    WWII and Korea for a society in which they were even less than second-
    class citizens. 
    
    It was Rosa Parks saying "No, I won't move".  It was people saying "I
    have money, I expect to be served".  It was women trembling in their
    shoes while they said to their white employers "No Miz Johnson, m'am,
    we colored folks aren't all that happy with the way things are". 
                                                                       
    It was "truth...and damn the consequences!"                   
    
    						=maggie

    
    But if it makes men uncomfortable to hear that women are "not all
    that happy.."  they should just complain.  Someone will make sure 
    that they don't have to hear about it.  So many of the introductions
    from men say, "I wanna learn about women."  It seems like the
    underlying message is "but I wanna write the syllabus."
    
    Still Pi**ed,
    
    Justine

    Now Bob Holt (sorry to be so formal; there're too many durned Bobs
    around), if you aren't one example of a man about who I would have
    thought, "oh don't bother about him, he'll never change" a few months
    ago, I don't know who is.
    
    But you have provoked discussion, you seem to have understood and
    accepted a good deal of "the message", and I was certainly wrong.
    
    We are ALL occasionally offensive (some of us more so and more often
    than others...).        SO?      Does that mean that neither the
    offender nor the offendee have something to gain or learn from the
    interaction??
    
    Lee

    Catherine, I did not remove the note because of "men's objections".
    I removed it from the policy statement because it was not achieving
    the purpose for which it had been placed there. Bonnie

    I cannot believe that some noters here do not want men to participate
    in this notesfile!  One of the points raised by ex-note 1.28 was
    that women do not understand how/why men are the way they are. 
    It also states that some men ("honorary women") are able to deal
    with the way women feel.  I would think that dialog between these
    men (and others) and women would help men to see how women feel
    and visa versa.  To exclude men (or to make them feel unwelcome)
    defeats part of the purpose of this notes file.  How would/do
    you feel if you are told "We don't want you here because you are
    a woman".  It would seem to me that would upset you.  That
    "injustice" is exactly what you are suggesting.  
    
    I am not asking to be educated by this file.  However, I am learning
    some things from this file.  I am not asking to "write the syllabus".
    I am only participating in the "class discussion".
    
    If you close the door on the dialouge between Men and Women in
    this file (by making men feel unwelcome) you are closing
    the door on understanding and communication which can help you
    understand and deal with the way things are.
    
    BTW - I was not offended by 1.28, but I was taken aback by some
    of the hostility expressed in this note toward male participants.
    
    Dave
    "Lighten up, you'll live longer"
    

    
    I think Catherine summed it up very well.  We can go round and round
    about the purpose was this, and it didn't achieve that... ad nauseum.
    I can understand why and how this decision was made, but I'm still
    unhappy about it.  To me (and maybe to others of us, as well) it
    feels like in order to appease the men in this file, the needs of
    the women in this file were subordinated.  But what's the big deal,
    only the "strident" women will make a fuss?  And we just couldn't
    bear it if even one of the men in this file felt for even a second 
    that his needs were not the most important thing in the world.
    I mean, women sharing concerns and issues is one thing, but, Ladies,
    lets not forget our true purpose on this earth! 
    
    Justine                                                              
    

    Justine,
    
    You know I don't feel that way, and I wish that you would stop
    insisting that your interpretation is the same as my motives
    for deleting the note.
    
    Thankyou
    
    Bonnie

    Bonnie,
    
    I don't mean to attack your motives.  And I'm having a hard time
    being angry at your decision because I like and respect you.  But
    I am angry.  And how things look to me are just that:  how things
    look to me.  It's going to take a while for the dust to settle on
    this one.  I don't think I'm alone in feeling that over the course
    of the last year, the men in this file have assumed an increasingly
    large role in what gets talked about and how.  In response to
    complaints about that, men often say, "Well, don't let us run the
    show, then."  So for some of us, having the moderator move a note in
    response to complaints from men is a painful thing, and it feels
    unfair.  And remember, Bonnie, I'm only responding to these 3 
    observable events:
    
    	1. Lee writes a note that most of the women and some of the
           men think is really swell, so Maggie posts it as an opener,
           as something that all who come here could read, to see how
           many of us feel.
    
    	2. Men start complaining about how wounded they feel about this
           note.
    
    	3. The note gets moved.
    
    What I want to say to you, Bonnie, is that it doesn't feel very good.  
    I'm sorry if you're feeling ganged up on, but it's important to me not 
    to back down, not to say, "Oh, well, it wasn't that important anyway."
    It is important to me, and it hurts.  You have a tough job, and you 
    made a tough choice, one which I believe you felt was right.  
    Unfortunately, taking heat for the decision you made is one of the
    things that makes your job tough.
                               
    Justine
               

    Well I am quite willing to take the heat, I knew that I was going
    to get it when I made the decision. I just wanted people to
    realize that what I was thinking might not be how they interpreted
    things.  Personally I would like to put as much effort as I can
    into expanding the base of women who write in the file.
    
    Bonnie

    Methinks that Bonnie's action looks to women like the removed
    note looked to men. Interesting thought.
    
    			Alfred

    I think the moderators did the right thing by removing the note
    from it's second location.  It was not serving its purpose.  
    If a note had been entered into MENNOTES to help women understand,
    and the note failed to do this, then I would support removing that
    note, also.
    
    We're not talking about an entire file, sisters, only a single note.
            
    		In sisterhood,
	                        Carol

    Re: .60
    
    Thank you, Bonnie.
    
    I am one of the women who felt uncomfortable with 1.28 in the welcoming
    note.  I had just screwed up my courage to admit in my introduction 
    that I had had a hard time relating to women in my past, and then I 
    went and read 1.28.  When I read the original, I wept--for Lee, for 
    the experiences of life that have happened to some of us.  It _was_ 
    moving, and very well written.
    
    It in no way reflects any of my attitudes or experiences.
    
    Having it in the welcoming note made me, a woman, feel anything 
    but welcome.  I felt that since my own life experiences and attitudes
    did not match it that I had very little to offer this file.  After 
    unburdening myself of a very tender point, I then spent an entire 
    weekend feeling "not like a woman", and that I didn't deserve to 
    join a community of women all over again.
    
    ENABLE ATTITUDE/PASSIONATE
    
    Good riddance to me, you may say, if I don't feel exactly like 
    many of you?  Let me put it to you, the women, that it is not the 
    men of the world you have to convert to your cause of social
    revolution, it is the women, who can be your partners and comrades
    in this cause.  You must treat _them_ as important, worthy of your 
    time and effort; spend as much time and effort responding to them,
    _especially_ new voices, as you do responding to the men who raise
    your hackles.  
    
    Why should any woman join this file as a contributor if her first 
    tentative replies are met with total silence?  She's reaching out 
    to you!  Here's a potential ally!  Are you so wrapped up in your 
    conversations with your 'best noting friends' and the men who raise 
    your hackles that you don't hear her, don't recognize her value,
    don't feel a warmth at another voice joining your chorus, however
    faint and far away?
    
    It is not, in my opinion, the "men run this notesfile" feeling that
    keeps women away.  It is a "this is where men and women are continually
    duking it out, and I'm not interesting in boxing" feeling.  I don't
    know.  Are there others of you who have felt like I do?
    
    DISABLE ATTITUDE/PASSIONATE

    Anyway, Bonnie, thank you.  I second one of the ideas to have pointers
    to significant notes and replies, like Lee's, in the welcoming note.
    When I first became a reader of this file, I would have loved to
    have that.
    
    Marcia

    Marcia,
    
    Every now and then a woman introduces herself with "I never got
    along well with women" etc.  I never know what to say to this. 
    Maybe I think "you'll learn"; hell Suzanne wouldn't call herself
    a feminist for quite some time.  I know it took some time for me
    to get mad.  Though I must admit I saw a lot more garbage aimed
    at my friends in high school than many others may have seen.
    
    Maybe I just think that it's something you need to find for yourself,
    listen, read, whisper a reply, then scream, LOUD.
    
    When I hear and read discourses on rape and violence, I too feel like
    "what the heck am _I_ complaining about."  Just because others have
    worse wounds, that does not mean that your (and my) scratches don't
    hurt bad too.  _you_ don't have to suffer.  I think you _do_ need
    to help those who do, but that's my stupid attitude.  I'm sure I'll
    get tired of the altruism.  The Goddess knows, _I_ don't have the
    courage to volunteer in a women's crisis center.  I think we all
    have done well if we notice the women we know and help them when
    they hurt.  (still gets me in trouble)
    
    You are right, and I think many of our more vocal sisters should
    read your reply through a few times.
    
    Lee

    Bonnie shouldn't be taking all the heat for killing 1.28, gang. Be
    fair.  She and I talked it over and I supported her decision, so if
    you're going to give her heat then I get halfsies. 
    
    But y'know, I'm glad I posted it and I'm glad we killed it, because the
    two events have sparked some of the best, most poignant discussion
    we've had here.  I've no idea yet what we'll all decide to do about it,
    or how things will work out, but some of the things that have been said
    since...Marcia's note, for beautiful example... have been worth the
    agony we're going through as we try to find our communal way.
    
    						=maggie  

    By the way, the note everyone's screaming about is 479.13 (I've
    gotten a few requests for location).  I would suggest reading a
    lot of that note... JimB's reply .64 has gotten me to tears twice
    now.
    
    If you are a newcomer, there was a real BIG battle on pornography
    in the 180's, 181 I think.  For those of you who have rape stories,
    date rape seems to be the locus of all rape stories, and maggie
    or bonnie will post it for you if you don't want your name associated
    with it.  That was 189, I think.  There have been some heated battles
    on custody in divorce, but I forget the address of the latest note
    on that (ask Jim Baranski).  There was just as much fighting, just
    as much chaff as there is now.
    
    I would strongly recommend wading your way through all the replies
    on these notes as there are some very good ones, good issues, some
    shocking stories, etc.  I would recommend any man wanting to reply
    to them get his flame proof suit on first, cause we are understandably
    a bit touchy on those issues.
    
    Maggie, Bonnie, what do you think of having a list of all the notes
    with more than 100 replies?  Most of the meaty ones seem to get there,
    and it would help, I think.  When I joined the file (january? feb?) I
    remember not being able to even skim through half of the old notes. 
    
    Lee

    Well Lee, what I was thinking about was trying to list some
    of the good notes that have almost no replies or that have
    died but are worth taking up again.
    
    If a new noter has trouble with doing a directory or doesn't know
    how to set seen so that they can keep up with the current discussions
    I'd be glad to show them how....but if someone does a directory
    the real long notes are easy to find. (Which doesn't mean that
    it wouldn't be a good idea to post a list of some of the more
    interesting discussions somewhere (:-) ).
    
    But I would like to see some of the other issues that relate to
    women that have been entered given further discussion...like
    Joyce's note on relateing to our grown children, or mine on
    displaced homemakers, or on menopause or perhaps a separate
    note on how we feel about our bodies, or.....there are lots of
    topics we haven't even begun to discuss ....and sometimes I
    dispair that we ever will.  
    
    I would also wish for a discussion between a wider variety of
    women. There are times when I feel like I am the only moderate
    voice in the file, and sometimes take a moderate position just
    to try and address another side to issues....I would like to
    see moderates and conservatives and liberal and radical women
    discussing issues .....and I don't see that happening very much.
    
    Bonnie

    
    Lots of thought-provoking responses here..
    I agree with you, Maggie, that this discussion is all part of what
    we're trying to do here. I'm glad that some women have come forward
    and said that they were uncomfortable with the note's location.
    If more women had raised objections before (not a criticism of those
    who didn't just a description of my thought process on this.), I
    would have felt ok about the note being moved.  Someone mentioned
    that it wasn't men-running-the-file that kept folks away but the
    bickering between men and women.  Well, I see the 2 as very much
    related.  After all this time, I think we're still struggling over
    turf.  
    
    It seems to me that the women in this file (both liberal and 
    conservative) want to be able to express themselves freely.
    I also think that men (whether they realize it or not) sometimes
    get in the way of that expression.  It strikes me that tradition-
    ally, women have avoided confronting men when they get in their 
    way; they learn to get around them (leading, I think to all kinds 
    of descriptions of women as devious manipulators).  I think the
    way that women relate to men is changing but not over night and
    not at the same rate in every person.  So some of us avoid
    confrontation, and others of us don't (leading to another set of
    descriptions).  To some of us standing up for this tiny piece of
    space is very important.  It would be nice if we could spend more
    time talking about other things like those that Bonnie mentioned,
    and I'm sure we will, but I think some of us feel compelled to speak
    up when we feel mistreated, or devalued, or dismissed.
    
    So here we are: men are here to stay in this world, in this file.
    Some of them are swell, but some of them have hurt us and will hurt
    us again.  It would be more comfortable, I suppose if we could deny
    our differences and not speak up, but I can't.  And I think there
    are others who can't.  I hope that those of you who don't feel as
    I do will respect my need to push back when I feel a lack of respect
    for women's experience.  As long as we stay in this community (and
    it does feel like a community to me) where there is a wide range
    of experience and opinions, there will be conflict.  Maybe we can
    learn to manage it better here.
    
    Sometimes if I'm driving or riding somewhere on the subway, I think
    about this file, and in my fantasy, I imagine women talking to each
    other (more often than not) and men saying stuff like "Gee, I never
    imagined women felt that way.  I wonder if I ever did or said anything
    that might have.."  or starting most of their sentences with, "I
    think that," or "My sense is.." or even "What do you think about...?"
    
    Such wild imaginings on a Tuesday night,
    
    Justine

    	RE:  .68
    
    	Those are the same sorts of daydreams that *I* have about
    	the file.  :-)
    
    	Meanwhile, in spite of all the effort it takes to keep from
    	losing control of this space, I love the community here and
    	cherish the friendships I've made here.
    
    	I think all the struggles in the file have made many of us
    	close.  We have common experiences in the outside world and
    	in our jobs (but we've also been through quite a bit together
    	*right here in the file* and can share these things, too.)
    
    	For a fairly loud voice here (and not even a TAD hesitant to
    	confront when I disagree :-) -- I'm actually very moderate in
    	my views of the world.
    
    	But I am so impressed and so fiercely proud of the strength
    	and intelligence that I see here -- I'm grateful to all of you
    	for being here and showing me what sisterhood is all about.
    
    							Suzanne...
    
    	

    I don't think we can expect this conference to be that different
    from society as a whole. After all, we are all members of that society.
    If there are X members, there are X ideas of what this file is all
    about. I would like to think that new readers could read Lee's note
    and think "Gee, that's really interesting.I didn't know that. I'd
    like to get involved here and learn more."
    
    Unfortunately, the note in question does not seem to have that effect.
    And I can understand why, at least in the case of the potential
    male reader. To call a man in this society anything feminine or
    female is considered an insult. (If you don't perform well, for
    example, in the softball game or the sales game, you're a "pussy".
    (No, not kitty-kats). Until that is no longer true, saying a man
    is an "honorary woman" will cause many men to run like hell.
    
    SO the note did not serve the purpose.
    
    Maybe that's why we're all here - to try to effect whatever will
    change that situation. This is one of those days when a little door
    in the back of my brain opens, and a cuckoo pops out saying "Fat
    chance" "Fat chance" "Fat chance"....
    
    Dawn
    

    Dawn, 
    
    It wasn't a problem with understanding the phrase 'honorary woman'
    that made me feel that the message wasn't getting across, but then
    maybe we have been talking to different people.
    
    Bonnie

    Bonnie, 
    
    I'm sure there are other reasons - that was an example. I got the
    idea from one of the noters here who objected to "having" to be
    an "honorary woman" in order to be a "good guy".
    
    Dawn
    

    Bonnie:
    
    From your position, just what was the the main objection expressed
    by the majority of men?  I don't see it.
    
    Cheers,
    Marty                                                           
    (An Invited Male who liked being referred to an an "honorary woman".)

    Well what I meant to say was that I talked to some men that did
    like being called an honorary woman (or as I am want to put
    it with the men I am especial friends with "a girl friend").
    My feeling about the notes that responded to Lee's original
    note was more that they had problems with the war imagry...
    
    but again I deleted 1.28 for neither of those reasons....as
    I have said above.
    
    Bonnie

    I love Notes. I love Womannotes!! 
    
    I'm also a relatively new noter. As a still somewhat
    objective observer, I see a lot of dissection of messages, sometimes
    to the point of making me want to be able to gather the people involved
    into one room and have them speak face to face. (I guess that's
    one of the reasons we're having a party!) I just feel that sometimes
    the main message in a note gets lost because words and phrases are pulled
    out and analyzed for several notes after, rather than the message
    itself generating a debate with perhaps movement toward some sort
    of agreement or solution. 
    
    When we speak face to face we give and get more of a "well-rounded"
    message to and from the other person(s). We speak with our bodies,
    our eyes, our tone, the volume of our voice, as well as with our
    words. Even then, there are misunderstandings. But trying to express
    so much in a relatively short note - words on a terminal screen
    - is obviously a major task. It is also a major task trying to read
    and understand the real meaning of a note.
    
    My question is - is there a way we can spend more energy in this
    conference giving the strength and sharing the insight and knowledge
    I've read in so many of the notes? I guess I just get frustrated
    sometimes when I see a note that may not be entirely agreeable to
    all people being torn apart beyond recognition until any original
    contribution it may have had is lost. I'm not saying we should not
    react to notes we don't agree with - even if that reaction is anger.
    I guess, again as a somewhat newcomer, I have seen more and more
    "arguments" in this conference. I guess I get an ache in my heart
    when I see any people and in particular women who have a mutual
    goal of giving strength, knowledge, and caring to each other, arguing
    so much. Then again, I may be misunderstanding the "words on the
    terminal screen" I'm reading!! Correct me if I'm wrong... 
           
    In peace,
    
    Elisabeth

    I think someone already said this (I'm still catching up from being
    sick with 200 notes unseen), but I do think that the strong, secure,
    healthy, happy, and well-adjusted men of this file will not/have
    not taken offense at Lee's note.  I'm *real* tempted to say that
    I do not care about the rest of them.  Which brings me to the next
    point....
    
    To follow up on the "education" theme - it really takes a *very*
    receptive mind to see and understand some of the things that we've
    talked about in this file.  "Walking a mile in someone else's shoes",
    so to speak.  I know that there have been times when things went
    "click" in my mind on issues of class, race, and gender.  It is
    truly a rare thing to be able to do.  Those men in this file who
    can do that (and I'm sure there are many that we do not hear from
    who do) are very special and talented indeed.  The rest, well, one
    can hope.
    
    I felt the same way as Justine did at first, and I am glad that
    she continues to note on a regular basis.
    
    	-Ellen, who likes mennotes better these days