wisen (03/31/83)
#R:bmcg:-26100:inmet:10900002:177600:282 inmet!wisen Mar 29 11:08:00 1983 Does this belong in net.men ? Gads! what a perfect choice for the Disease-of-the-Month Club. I know some women who show symptoms of testosterone poisoning. Is the treatment for women the same as the treatment for men? ---Bruce Wisentaner (Yeah, I've got XY chromosomes)
jack@hp-dcd.UUCP (06/22/83)
#R:watmath:0:hp-dcd:22900001:37777777600:142 hp-dcd!jack Jun 20 12:05:00 1983 I don't mind if the woman is in a spiffy business suit or nice skirt. What we're discussing here are women in bikinis. -Jack Applin IV
wombat@uicsl.UUCP (08/14/83)
#R:ssc-vax:-38900:uicsl:16400010:000:392 uicsl!wombat Aug 13 14:02:00 1983 I have two brothers who never found it that much of a strain to close both seat and lid, though they didn't seem to pick up much else in the way of courtesy. (Of course, it also kept the cat out if the lid was closed...) And it seems like men occasionally use the seat, too. So why not close up the gaping hole altogether when it's not in use? Wombat pur-ee!uiucdcs!uicsl!wombat
rgh@inmet.UUCP (08/17/83)
#R:bunker:-27000:inmet:10900014:177600:233
inmet!rgh Aug 16 12:51:00 1983
I'm sure it would be better for all concerned if you reversed your
attitudes: support the ERA and don't worry about "manned" tollbooths.
Or at least realize which issue is more important.
Randy Hudson
{harpo,ima}!inmet!rghjames@inmet.UUCP (09/12/83)
#R:mit-eddi:-64500:inmet:10900015:177600:268 inmet!james Sep 11 12:01:00 1983 My companion, who is a child psychologist, tells me that stuttering/stammering (i'm not sure of the distinction) is 3 to 1 more common in males than females. This may be correlated with the observation that learning disabilities are also more common in males. james
jlp@inmet.UUCP (09/18/83)
#R:mit-eddi:-64500:inmet:10900016:000:195
inmet!jlp Sep 17 21:17:00 1983
ight there on your own campus, at WMBR ( We Make Boston Rock), Cambridge,
is a married couple, both of whom stammer.
The Organ Keyboard of
Jerryl Payne
{esquire,harpo,decvax!cca!ima}!inmet!jlpdeb@uiucuxc.UUCP (10/01/83)
#R:pyuxll:-41700:uiucuxc:22800012:000:52 uiucuxc!deb Sep 30 08:28:00 1983 ah my friend, but you were once a child (?!) mom
bsouther@uok.UUCP (10/28/83)
#R:ihuxl:-60500:uok:9500001:37777777600:1696 uok!bsouther Oct 26 01:12:00 1983 Those of you who are using the sequencer to read this probably are wondering "what the #^$*@ is this person doing responding to some- thing as old as this discussion", but I just wanted to stick my little comment in here.... We here at the University of Oklahoma had a similar argument (dis- cussion?) through our local 'msgs' system regarding the way different people signed their messages. Some signed as "uok!login", some as "uokvax!login", some as "AUS:login", some as "login", etc. ad nauseam. The argument that was propigating itself at the time was over which computer system here is "better" -- thus, each user signed with the prefix that suited their opinion best. What it finally boiled down to was this: it doesn't MATTER if there is a "generally approved" idea; there will ALWAYS be *someone* who disapproves. This can be applied in this situation, too. It doesn't matter WHAT prefix we use on our names -- there'll always be someone who thinks that it should be different. We can fuss and fume all we want about using a "common, non-sexist" prologue to our names, but I don't think that there'll be any real change in the way it's being done now by the one fact that there are TOO MANY people with ideas of what the "right way" is, and since we already have something that (somewhat) works, the change is not critical but cosmetic. Are there better places that we can vent our energies?? Perhaps, but we won't -- like I said, there'll always be someone who wants things different from the way they are. I now propose a solution: use the prefix "JPO" -- for "Just Plain 'Ol". JPO Brad Southers Univ. of Oklahoma@Norman uok!bsouther (for identification, not argument)
bsouther@uok.UUCP (10/28/83)
#R:umcp-cs:-273100:uok:9500002:37777777600:1131 uok!bsouther Oct 26 01:30:00 1983 Re: perpetuating stereotypes I don't know what anyone else's opinions on this matter are, but it seems to me that using 'she' in place of 'he' in documentation shows an affirmative attitude toward female "users" in an environment. Granted, the stereotype has been toward the "operates-but-doesn't-think" type, but I think that to those of us on the inside of the business have already discarded this stereotype for the more careful (paranoid) "operates-and-is-damn-good-too--better-watch-out-for-your-job" assumption. Perhaps I'm wrong, but at least here (at OU) there is very little dis- tinction between male and female programmers that I can see. As a matter of opinion, I seem to have noticed that a larger percentage of my classes are female now as a Senior then four years ago when I started. Fewer of them dropping out, or more of them coming in? Who cares? I must admit that I am now more likely to go to classes due to class composition then in previous years. Call me sexist, but I'd rather be in an environment where I'm surrounded by women. Flames? JPO Brad Southers Oklahoma University uok!bsouther
bsouther@uok.UUCP (11/29/83)
#R:umcp-cs:-273100:uok:9500002:37777777600:1130 uok!bsouther Nov 4 04:03:00 1983 Re: perpetuating stereotypes I don't know what anyone else's opinions on this matter are, but it seems to me that using 'she' in place of 'he' in documentation shows an affirmative attitude toward female "users" in an environment. Granted, the stereotype has been toward the "operates-but-doesn't-think" type, but I think that to those of us on the inside of the business have already discarded this stereotype for the more careful (paranoid) "operates-and-is-damn-good-too--better-watch-out-for-your-job" assumption. Perhaps I'm wrong, but at least here (at OU) there is very little dis- tinction between male and female programmers that I can see. As a matter of opinion, I seem to have noticed that a larger percentage of my classes are female now as a Senior then four years ago when I started. Fewer of them dropping out, or more of them coming in? Who cares? I must admit that I am now more likely to go to classes due to class composition then in previous years. Call me sexist, but I'd rather be in an environment where I'm surrounded by women. Flames? JPO Brad Southers Oklahoma University uok!bsouther
notes@ucbcad.UUCP (12/02/83)
#R:umcp-cs:-273100:ucbesvax:10300025:000:673 ucbesvax!turner Dec 2 01:19:00 1983 The he/she controversy seems to be starting it's third cycle in this year alone. (I might be miscounting--after the third time, I stopped reading net.women for awhile.) And, once started, the controversy roars on, despite my willingness to quote a noted socio-linguist to the effect that, as arguments over gendered language go, "he vs. she" has got to be about the least productive and interesting of them all. (The "noted socio-linguist" is Robin Lakoff, prof. of linguistics and women's studies at UC Berkeley, whom I greatly admire. So no flames about me being sexist, OK?) "net.he.vs.she", anyone? Or try "net.nlang". --- Michael Turner (ucbvax!ucbesvax.turner)
mazur@inmet.UUCP (01/03/84)
#R:ccieng5:-20200:inmet:10900023:000:790 inmet!mazur Jan 2 16:11:00 1984 > I would rather go through several rapes that left me unscarred but > frightened, than spend much of my life in prison. Boy, are you going to get flamed for that statement. Do you really have so little conception of what rape does to a woman? I think that many women who have been raped are in an "emotional" prison - which "prison" is worse is probably not worth debating. Haven't you ever been robbed or mugged? Have you ever heard of people saying that it wasn't the loss, it was the sense of violation? Rape is bad news, and I feel sorry (and a little scared) that some people just find it a *frightening* act. Also bewildered, Beth Mazur {harpo,ima,esquire}!inmet!mazur
tower@inmet.UUCP (01/20/84)
#R:inmet:10900028:inmet:10900029:177600:315 inmet!tower Jan 16 07:43:00 1984 In order to continue the net trend towards grouping topics net.men.only should really be titled net.women.men.only . They were here first after all ... -len tower harpo!inmet!tower Cambridge, MA PS: I agree with wisen's comments about us male folk being civilized and keeping out of net.women.only.
mazur@inmet.UUCP (04/06/84)
#R:ubc-vision:-27000:inmet:10900067:177600:619
inmet!mazur Apr 5 23:45:00 1984
ESAD
Convincing some people that the mailing list has a worthwhile purpose is
probably the same as converting a pro-lifer to pro-choice or vice versa.
Here's a news flash though. The mailing list is *not* women only. I
guess we got all the understanding, intelligent, sympathetic, nice,
sensitive men (sorry to those u|i|s|n|s men who aren't on the list).
As far as running away from something unpleasant, those of us who are on
the list are not masochistic. Why should we put up with the sh*t when we
don't have to?
Beth Mazur
{ihnp4,ima,harpo,esquire}!inmet!mazur
Don't send me mail, I can't reply (really).anny@hpdcdb.UUCP (06/15/84)
/***** hpdcdb:net.women / hogpd!keduh / 7:51 am May 23, 1984*/
<<||>>
Well, this whole insurance discussion seems rather interesting,
so I'll just jump right in and risk eating some shoe leather :-)
A certain point of view I find cropping up seems rather perplexing.
A basic premise is proposed to the effect that for car insurance
it is OK to charge women less than men because statistics show
that they tend to have less (or less severe?) accidents than men,
and thereby cost the company less money.
So the basic thrust seems to be that if statistics show a difference
between men and women then it is OK to act upon that information and
treat the two sexes differently. If this is accepted, then how can
one complain that women were/are receiving less money per month
in retirement pay ?? Statistics show that women live longer than
men and thereby cost the company more money.
If it is OK for insurance companies to charge men more money
for car insurance because the companies will have to dole out
proportionally more money to them, then how can it be NOT OK to
dole out less money per month to retired women since they will
tend to live longer ?? Every argument I've seen
against paying women less per month in pension payments would seem
to apply equally well to arguing that men should not pay more
for car insurance.
There seems to be a bit of hypocrisy floating around here. My own
view? [well, noone probably cares, but I'll tell you anyway :-) ]
There should be consistency. If it seems fair that women should receive
equal pension pay per month to men [certainly seems fair to me !], then
by the same token, women's and men's car insurance premiums should
be the same as well.
I understand that various women's groups are taking to the courts
to correct the problem with regard to pension pay. Does anyone know
how one would go about filing a class action suit on the behalf of
male insurer's of automobiles with regard to the unequal and unfair
premiums they are forced to pay ?? [ And a lawyer who will work
REAL cheap ?? :-) ]
* *
\ /
_____
/ \
| ` ' | {ihnp4! or pegasus!} hogpd!keduh
| > |
| \_/ |
\___/
/* ---------- */anny@hpdcdb.UUCP (06/16/84)
Please excuse the previous replication of the base note. I'm new to notes and I screwed up . . . In the following exerp, note reference to "the company": /***** hpdcdb:net.women / hogpd!keduh / 7:51 am May 23, 1984*/ . . . A basic premise is proposed to the effect that for car insurance it is OK to charge women less than men because statistics show that they tend to have less (or less severe?) accidents than men, and thereby cost the company less money. So the basic thrust seems to be that if statistics show a difference between men and women then it is OK to act upon that information and treat the two sexes differently. If this is accepted, then how can one complain that women were/are receiving less money per month in retirement pay ?? Statistics show that women live longer than men and thereby cost the company more money. . . . /* ---------- */ In the first instance "the company" is an insurance company to whom a person personally pays premiums for his or her personal policy. In the second instance "the company" is a person's employer. I contend that this is the point at which these two examples differ in what's "fair". Most companies offer the same basic benifits package for all employees of the same job classification. This means that if my co-worker is a middle-aged overweight smoker and I am a young non-smoker in excellent physial condition, we will still get equal health care benifits, regardless of the fact that my co-worker will (statiscally speaking) cost "the company" more to insure. The "unfairness" in unequal pension payments for women is that women are NOT given the same quality of benifits (see note below). It would be similar to giving my smoking, overweight co-worker less health care coverage. If companies considered things like smoking, weight, and age in their insurance coverage and pensions for employees, then it would be more reasonable to also consider gender (based on the statistic that women live longer). However, companies (at least none that I know of) do not consider these things, and for that reason, lower pension payments for women are discrimanatory and unfair. Note: Definition of "same quality of benifits" Giving women a lower monthly pension payment because they (statistically speaking) live longer is similar to giving an overweight smoker lower health coverage (i.e. only pay 60% of his bills, rather than the standard 80%) because he will (statistically speaking) be sick more times. This is an example of the same quality of benifits. Anny Randel hplabs!hpfcla!anny
anny@hpdcdb.UUCP (06/16/84)
I should add that these are my opinions and not necessarily those of my company. Anny
anny@hpdcdb.UUCP (06/17/84)
Subj: A cheerful counter-example to Ms. Nerads math anxiety anecdote: There is hope for young women in mathematics and you can help. I grew up in a small fishing, logging and tourist town where girls became english teachers, nurses, maids or housewives (not to say any of these are bad vocations, the selection was just a little limited). Until the 9th grade I was a good student in all areas except for, of course, mathematics. In the ninth grade I walked in to my algebra class (which I had to petition to get into since I got a "C" 8th grade math), and was astonished to see that the teacher was, oh my God, a WOMAN. This young woman (she was about 24) had a master's degree in math and encouraged all of us to pursue technical careers, regardless of gender, by talking about her schooling and how much she loved math. I don't remember suddenly thinking maybe I could do math, but I graduated with a B.S. in Computer Science, Computer Engineering, and Math, and an M.S. in Computer Science, and I got straight A's in almost (damn, Diff. Eq.) all my math courses from that day on. In retrospect, I think that actually knowing a woman who could handle math and seeing her perform in her field sold my on my own abilities. I would really encourage all women, particularly those in fields where most positions of filled by men, to make yourselves visible to young girls, so that they recognize that they are not excluded from any profession. My parents always told my I could be anything I wanted to be, but I never belived them . . . Anny Randel Computer Engineer hplabs!hpfcla!anny
tron@fluke.UUCP (Peter F. Barbee) (06/26/84)
We already discussed this once but I liked the topic then too. Anny mentions "the company" in the case of pension plans being your employer but actually it is usually still an insurance company. The benefits plans are purchased at a rate that includes such factors as # of employees, past expenditures by ins. co. for these employees, and probably many more. I think the employer has now done their job of providing equal benefits, they don't care if you smoke, are overweight, or whatever, just get your job done. While the employer has some responsibility to find an insurance co. without a sexist point of view they have an equal responsibility to obtain the cheapest rate. Much has been written about annuities and other financial vehicles but I think we can actually ignore that. To me the bottom line in any pension plan is the more you put in the more you get out. I don't know the correct answer to this in terms of life expectancies and women's rights. Maybe we won't have this problem much longer, as I understand life expectancies are evening out between women and men. Peter Barbee decvax-+-uw-beaver-+ ihnp4--+ allegra-+ ucbvax----lbl-csam-+--fluke!tron sun-+ ssc-vax-+
greenber@acf4.UUCP (11/30/84)
Rel
wisen@faust.UUCP (05/30/85)
>If _Playboy_'s offices are like other magazines', they probably have a good >number of women in think-jobs. I'm not so sure about _Mad_... >-- >Col. G. L. Sicherman Sorry to report, _Playboy_'s publisher is a woman (Christine(?) Hefner). . |\ ------Bruce Wisentaner /| \ cca!ima! \ / | \ esquire! --inmet!wisen o / | \ harpo! / ^_. _/___|===== O\/`O \_______/] \_(
rcook@uiucuxc.Uiuc.ARPA (07/02/85)
Well if you look at it like that, maybe we (men) dont have time to see if the
lid is up or down.
We may splash a little, they may get their butts wet. You have to look out for
yourself in this cruel world.
Rob Cook
UUCP: {ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!uiucuxc!rcook
'Life is just a cocktail party on the street'
-Mick Jagger-richw@ada-uts.UUCP (09/28/85)
***** ada-uts:net.women / uiucuxc!maples / 10:45 am Sep 19, 1985 Speaking as a 24 year old 'female', I too object to being called a 'girl'. On the other hand, 'woman' sounds like I'm a 45 year old woman. But since no alternative exits, I guess I'll have to get used to it. Does anyone object to being called a lady? (I kind of like that). Another question: When does one feel like he/she should be called man/woman? ----------
richw@ada-uts.UUCP (10/07/85)
That's Dworkin and McKinnon (not sure about the latter's spelling though). At least I hope her name's McKinnon. She was interviewed on WBCN's "Sunday Review". I didn't hear most of it, unfortunately, but was interested in her analogies with laws having to do with libel and/or slander. My question is: if women, personally or as a group, feel horribly mis-represented, slandered, whatever, aren't existing laws enough? Why treat pornographic literature specially? These are an honest questions, not flames... -- Rich Wagner
richw@ada-uts.UUCP (10/07/85)
In response to Jamie, yes other men feel frustrated that there
are things "normally" (horrible word, "normal") considered
feminine that men just CAN'T do without social consequences.
Many of those things are pleasing and have nothing to do with
your sexual preferences. And, even if what you do DOES relate
to your sexual preferences, I see nothing wrong with pleasing
yourself and hurting no one else, in the privacy of your own
"weird and decadent" home! Anybody that pressures you otherwise
has got the problems.
Let's face it, this is a clear case of society's having us by the
balls. In my reply to "What makes you feel masculine/feminine",
I only listed the masculine things, but I do enjoy doing "feminine"
things. Those won't be mentioned here because "society" reads
the net -- some other, open-minded people read the net, too,
but I'm not opening myself up to inane mockery from the mouths
of pseudo-intellectual rednecks...
I sympathize...
-- Rich "Proud-To-Say-What-Little-I-Have-Said" Wagner
"I'm just a sympton of the moral decay
That's gnawing at the heart of the country"
-- The THEjudith@proper.UUCP (Judith Abrahms) (10/14/85)
In article <> richw@ada-uts.UUCP writes: > >***** ada-uts:net.women / uiucuxc!maples / 10:45 am Sep 19, 1985 > > Speaking as a 24 year old 'female', I too object to being called a > 'girl'. On the other hand, 'woman' sounds like I'm a 45 year old > woman. But since no alternative exits, I guess I'll have to get used > to it. Does anyone object to being called a lady? (I kind of like > that). Another question: When does one feel like he/she should be > called man/woman? >----------
mcewan@uiucdcsb.CS.UIUC.EDU (10/23/85)
>>>> If what you are trying to tell us is that you are not consistent, I suggest >>>> that you keep your mouth shut until you have some firm idea of what the hell > ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ >>>> you're talking about (by the way, just in case you don't know, this isn't > ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^ >>> >>> Oh come *on*, now. Is this kid stuff really necessary? Isn't the >>> signal to noise ratio poor enough without this? >> >> I don't understand - what are you objecting to? > > > Do you *really* think this kind of stuff is appropriate to a public forum? > That it is appropriate to private correspondence is arguable. Perhaps not, but I'm not the first to make such a suggestion, and it's a lot milder than a lot of stuff that goes through this group (such as anything from Ray). Maybe I should have asked "What is so exceptionally objectionable about this posting that it is singled out for this complaint?" By the way, I would really appreciate it if more people would edit out extraneous stuff when including a posting in a response. It will not only save on transmission cost and readers' time, but also make your response more readable. Scott McEwan {ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!mcewan "There are good guys and there are bad guys. The job of the good guys is to kill the bad guys."
richw@ada-uts.UUCP (10/29/85)
> Not trusting ANY man not to rape you rings of paranoia,..... > .... Your remarks are an abomination to decent men every where. > > ray Personally, I don't like it either when some women choose to not trust men in general. But, it's a price men have to pay for the problem of rape. Trust can not be expected; you can try to "earn" it, but in the end, trust has to be given. Right now, women have every right to withhold trust indefinitely. Especially considering that many (or most?) rapes are committed by men known (and often trusted) by the victims. Remember that the women you're criticizing for not trusting men have less to lose when being overly defensive than when they're not careful enough... -- Rich Wagner
mokhtar@ubc-vision.UUCP (Farzin Mokhtarian) (11/29/85)
Subject: Re: Orphaned Response > My point is that having the manipulation of the media pointed out for > what it is (i.e. $$$) is all well and good. However, resistance to > this manipulation can lead to lack of acceptance by the less-enlightened > majority. And is wanting to be accepted really such a bad thing? > -- Rich Wagner No, wanting to be accepted is not bad at all but does it matter why one is being accepted? Perhaps the question is: Once one knows some of the reasons (or conditions) for acceptance by the "less-enlighted majority", how much does one desire or need such an acceptance? It may be that the underlying need which shapes one's desire for acceptance is not fulfilled by the acceptance offered by many people. Then what? Will their acceptance benefit you or hurt you in the long run? Farzin Mokhtarian ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "How wonderful is light!"