NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/soc/men/21878

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-31 | 11.1 KB

Xref: sparky soc.men:21878 alt.feminism:6616
Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!rpi!usc!news.cerf.net!proton!galaxy!starbuck
From: [e-mail] (starbuck)
Newsgroups: soc.men,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: [misc.activism.progressive] Feminist group disrupts men's meeting
Keywords: Campus NOW Brownshirts, Enough for Dinesh D'Souza's next book
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 29 Dec 92 20:45:29 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Followup-To: soc.men
Organization: University of California, Riverside
Lines: 192
Nntp-Posting-Host: galaxy

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave Gross) writes:

>Feminists Integrate Men-Only Rape Talk
>Jenny Brown, The Gainesville Iguana

>GAINESVILLE, FL (NLNS)--Nearly twenty years after feminists busted into the
>men-only Blue Key Banquet, Campus National Organiziation for Women members
>forced their way into a Dec. 10th rape talk which was to allow only men.
>"Groups of priviledged people aren't going to meet alone and figure out how to
>end their priviledge." concluded Campus NOW after several women representing
>the group entered and asked questions during the Rape Awareness Week forum
>that had been billed as "men only."

The key to understanding this article is to examine the statement "Groups
of priviledged people aren't going to meet alone and figure out how
to end their privilege."  One notes that this seems to imply that these
feminists think rape is a privilege ie.  NOW's unwritten policy of seeing
"all men as rapists."  This statement shows a motive for control and not
the crime of rape.  As I have said before in my critisms of feminism that
RAPE is THEIR ISSUE and they don't like it when other groups discuss it.
It is their stats and their theories that count.  Rape to radical feminists
is a political tool and a very powerful one they don't want to loose their
control over.

>    Feminists' discomfort at the increasing emphasis on men-only rape
>talks became alarmed when Campus NOW member Bill Stephenson attended and taped
>a men-only rape program last year. After listening to the tape, Campus NOW
>activists concluded that the forum was not only not helping to stop rape, it
>was perpetuating sexist beliefs and behavior, and they decided to integrate
>this year's program.

ONLY THEIR OPINIONS AND DOGMA COUNT ... says NOW leaders!

"Men-only rape talks", is the real disconfort the NOW feminists feel.  It is
the fact that they are not consulted nor included that they don't like.
There is no doubt that the feminists of NOW are more like the John Birch
Society bent on bigotry and fear of men than a true humanitairian group
with noble goals.

From the feminist perspective, they will be the one's to judge weather a
forum for discussion of rape and the content are valid.  What they call
sexist is those beliefs that are not of their invention.  It seem these
feminists of NOW believe that their dogma is the standard by which sexist
beliefs and behavior is judged.  Their dogma is based on a purly selfish
and self-centerd belief that they are the center of all things good.

>    The formal presentation was short and boring. The discussion following
>it centered around what constituted rape and women raping men, Stephenson said
>he thought that the main point of the questions about what constituted rape
>was to figure out how to get away with it.

Stephenson is a male feminist.  It is not likely that he would have a clue
to what was going on.  Note how the (male?) feminist thinks that these men
were gatthered to discuss how to rape and get away with it.  Why would he
think that?  Could it be he see what he wants to see?  Could it be that
growing up he had problems of rejection from his playmates and now he
has a way to get even ?

NOW members who attended were
>amazed that the facilitators allowed the audience to go on and on in
>misconceptions and distortions.

Misconception and distortions by whose standards?  Note agian the strong
desire for control.  Allowed?  It was a public forum in a FREE country
not a facist feminst s tate.  One has to consider the source of such
statements before we accept them as truth.

When it became clear that the obvious answers
>would never be given (such as the legal definition of rape, or why women don't
>report rape) NOW members raised their hands and contributed their comments.

Note that it was obvious to the NOW members.  Note that the uninvited and
unwanted used good manners and raised their hands to contribute their dogma
to the dicussion.  What the NOW feminist have to learn is that they are
not the first and last word on anything.  It is not up to them what other
people accept.

>    Another theme, which consumed a large portion of the program, was
>women raping men. When the woman moderator, Liz Kretzedemas, pointed out that
>this was a vanishingly small portion of all rapes, she was ignored and the
>audience continued to talk about it for several more minutes
>
Agian, in a public forum no one has to listen to a moderator, especalliy one
who was forced on the group.  This is a key point.  As stated earlier in the
article posted by D. Gross the moderator choice was a consession to NOW.
If feminists wish to have women-only groups then they are going to be compelled
to accept men-only group.  It is not a question open to discussion.  Men will
have men-only groups and it does not matter if the feminist likes it or not.


>    And while a woman co-presenter is a step forward, the audience members
>simply ignored what she had to say on more than one point.

Maybe she was a shitty co-presenter.  Maybe the fact she was forced on the
group was a reason.  Maybe her ego hurt after her feminist dogma was not
accepted verbatim.  Maybe she had the "all men are rapists" attitude.

>    It is odd, too, that organizers will play tapes of women in the role of
>victim, but will not admit women themselves, who might be angry or manifest
>other signs of fighting back.

Maybe they didn't want to play NOW type games.  And games they are.  It is
clear that these women are angry at not being allowed to play.  It is not
RAPE that is their motivation it is hate and fear of men.  Pure and simple.

>    At a time when budget constraints and the tendency of the university
>to want to hide rape have severely curtailed victims services, it's shameful
>that UF is spending money and energy on men-only programs of doubtful
>effectiveness.
>
Agian this is just feminst speculation.  RAPE is thier issue and they need
it as a political tool to control women.  If men discuss rape and work for
a solution of an age old problem then where does that leave them but out
of the action and it is being part of the action that counts most with them.

>Reasons to do the action were: Experiences with men in groups being worse than
>individually--not wanting a group with priviledges talking about an issue of
>vital importance to your life while exluding you--the tape of the previous
>year's talk--the analogy of black people being exluded from a talk on racism--
>that there aren't enough gus who are feministsb if it messes up women will pay
>the price--it's better to organize the most effective thing.

Here we go agian.  Note the anti-male feminist perspective -- "Experiences with
men in groups ...".  Note the attitude about men in groups.  Does that sound
anti-male.  Change the words to "with women in groups" if that helps to see
my point.  "If it messes up...", what bullshit.  It time to let NOW know that
they do not speak for everyone.  It is time to turn our backs to NOW and their
programs and dogma.  They are over the edge and are the ones who are messing
up.

>    Stephenson said he used to defend all-male groups and that in his case
>it had to do with men wanting to feel good about how great they are and not
>wanting to believe that there are some issues men can't resolve on their own.

That is Stephnsons opinion ONLY.  His statement is not a truth it is feminist
dogma and NOTHING more.  What Stephnson does not know is that most people
will not let NOW tell them how to think, how to feel, and how to live.

>Board stated "Just as women must live with men's sexism towards us every day,
>men who care about women in their lives are going to have to bear it when we
>tell it like it is, not cringe and say they're scared and that we're hurting
>their feelings... men who truly want to fight rape will welcome us into their
>forums so we can tell our side and so we can confront them on their oppresive
>attitudes and actions." While men could change, a men-only forum was not the
>way to achieve that change.

Agian most of this is poor me type of thinking.  When they say men who care
about women they are mistaken.  What they mean by "men who care about women"
is how they define how men who care about women are.  Agian the control of
the political question of RAPE can be seen in the self-centered statement
"are going to have to hear ....", and "welcome us into their forum.  So
to care about women is to let the NOW feminist become our gurus.  NOT.

>have been integrated only through organized and militant feminist action. It
>is ironic that men-only clubs are coming back in the guise of being "for the
>good of women."

It is ironic that they make such a statement.  One men-only meeting on
the campus and it is a slew of men-only clubs comming back.  Looks agian
very much like these NOW feminists are into control of men, very much
like chasing a windmill.  Note how negitive theses NOW feminists are
toward anybody having a forum on rape that they cannot control.

Now how smoothly they create rumor to add to the fear and distrust
of men.  It is clear what their intention is.  And don't forget
all the free publicity they get for their cause and dogma.  They
take something that is a step in the right direction and make it
look bad and as a bonus they get to bash men in the bargain.
k
>    The Campus NOW Board editorial states: "Based on our experience with
>men-only groups--fraternities, men's sports, groups of men screaming at us
>from cars--men in such groups frequently and openly display sexist attitudes
>and tend not to object, but rather reward one another for sexist actions.
>Because of this, Campus NOW stands against men-only groups."

Note it is only their experience with men-only groups.  Note how they
have brought all kinds of anti-man language into this issue of their
own creation.  It is a mouthful isn't it.  Note how they define us
when we gatther as men who reward one another for sexist actions.  Now
tell me is this not male bashing or what?

If their is any reason to form men-only groups, NOW has provided it.  This is
a clear attact on men.  It is anti-men.  It is negitive toward men.  They have
taken an event that seems to be motivated by a desire to end rape and USED it
to bash men.  Thoughout this article every statement by feminists has been
anti-men.  That much is clear.  Can one truly feel that RAPE was even
part of the motivation of these women to create a situation like this out
of nothing.  And they wonder why many of us don't give a shit what they
have to say.   Feminists of NOW are using RAPE as a forum to bash men and
promote their anti-man dogma.

starbuck