NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/soc/feminism/3022

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-23 | 5.3 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!news.claremont.edu!ucivax!gateway
From: [e-mail] (Muffy Barkocy)
Subject: Re: When people cry "Censorship!"
Nntp-Posting-Host: alexandre-dumas.ics.uci.edu
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: Natural Language Incorporated
Approved: [e-mail]
Lines: 99
Date: 23 Dec 92 19:44:40 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
    <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
    <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> uunet!infmx![e-mail] (Robert Coleman) writes:
>[e-mail] (Anna Lubiw) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]> uunet!infmx![e-mail] (Robert Coleman) writes:

>>>    ...Oh, and in general, in a group like soc.feminism, women
>>>tend to be on the offensive, and men on the defensive; that is,
>>>women tend to be demanding that men change their behavior, and/or
>>>blaming men for this-or-that.

>>You must be reading a different soc.feminism from the one I read.
>>How about some examples of posts in which women demanded something
>>of men?

>I'm afraid you misunderstand me, and are reading far too literally.
>Much of the discussion over the years has been criticism of the
>patriarchy; the subtext of criticism is that the target should
>change.  Otherwise, what's the point?  Just a moaning session?

You offer two possibilities here, as if they were the only ones (this
goes back to the discussion of different styles, too, perhaps).
Actually, there are *many* possible reasons why people would spend time
criticizing the patriarchy.  The ones which seem to me to be in force
here are:

1) Informing people of what is going on.
2) Discussing ways to change how our society works.

Informing people of what is going on is not "a moaning session,"
although I can see how you would interpret it that way, particularly
since it is a societal stereotype of women as always complaining and
emotional, while men are stoic and "just deal with things."

Information is very important.  If you examine enough examples of a
problem, you will often be able to find a solution, where you could not
with one example.  If you are not aware that there is a problem, but
then you see several examples of the problem, you will be informed that
there is one.

Discussing ways to make changes to society is not saying that "the
target should change."  I don't expect "the patriarchy" to change.  I do
hope to change our society so that "the patriarchy" does not have so
much power over all of us.  As part of the society, I think that it is
quite reasonable for me to try to change it to suit me better, just as I
can go out and vote if I don't like the laws or government.  Once again,
information is important.  Before we can decide what we think needs
changing and how to go about it, we need to have information about the
problems and potential actions/solutions.

>If you'd care to assert that when people in this group decry, say,
>objectification of women, they're merely complaining, and don't
>really want men to stop viewing women as objects,

Why should she assert that?  That is clearly not the case.  However, the
fact that we would *like* it if men would change does not mean that we
aer "demanding that men change."  It is remarkably male-centered of you
to think that everyone posts on here specifically for the purpose of
influencing men.

>I got confused with all that "No means No!" rhetoric that I was
>hearing that, really, y'know, sort of sounds directed at men (you
>don't recognize a demand implicit in that particular phrase?
>Really?).

I see once again that the root of your confusion is the idea that
everything that happens here is for the benefit of men.  Certainly, if a
man posts something, either a question, or something that people
disagree with, then people will respond to him, in which case it might
well be for his benefit.  Once again, however, this is not a "demand for
men to change."

>If you'd care to characterize feminism, in general, as just a sort of
>quilting bee where everyone talks about their problems, wraps up
>their stuff and goes home, then I've really got to reevaluate.

You do really have to reevaluate.  I'd suggest you start with an
evaluation of the concept that, just perhaps, everything that happens in
the world is *not* meant for men.  Then go on to the concept that
discussion is not the same as "demand for change."  Then try reading
some articles here again and see what you think.

>Then of course, this group is just the version with electronic
>knitting needles.  Me, I've always viewed feminism as a force of
>social change...and this group as the electronic version.

Is that why you are fighting so hard against it?

Muffy
--

Muffy Barkocy                      | ~Can you tell me how much bleeding/it
[e-mail]            |  takes to fill a word with meaning and/
"amorous inclinations"? Aha! I'm   |  how much how much death it takes/to give
not "not straight," I'm *inclined*.|  a slogan breath?~ - Bruce Cockburn

--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to [e-mail].
Questions and comments should be sent to [e-mail].  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.