daemon@decwrl.UUCP (12/12/83)
From: Lisa Chabot <amber::chabot> Some questions about the content of net.women (61 lines, but I think the conclusions are worth your time): I am confused as to why someone named "Larry" is reading net.women.only: I've never met any women named Larry. :-) By the name of the newsgroup, it seems to me that it might contain articles of interest to women only. If net.women.only is to be criticized for its content, well, frankly, so may other newsgroups--for instance, what does net.cooks contain that may not be found in magazines like Family Circle? Should the fate of net.women.only be discussed in another newsgroup? I'm not being sarcastic--I'm curious about the mechanics of the death of newsgroups. Perhaps Larry Welsch's comments were designed to spark net.women.only into a little more action? If one strongly feels the need to aggravate others, like stevens who felt "like pissing some people off", perhaps these energies could be better directed (to, for example, seeking professional help (only sort of :-) )). I was not pleased to see posted in net.women a response to a letter I'd written to net.singles (the response quoted a sentence from my letter and asked if I was crazy). I was discussing attitudes in dating. This topic is appropriate to net.singles, possibly net.women. But if I thought it was relevant to net.women I would have posted it here. And if it was relevant to net.women, why wasn't it also posted to net.motss, which is probably a more appropriate place. Do I detect an MCP and a MHeterosexualCP attitude blaming women because someone is tense about asking someone out for a date because they've been turned down in the past? Why don't we carry on this discussion in net.singles where it is currently--those of you who don't subscribe there, please do, we'd enjoy your responsible opinions. The article on affirmative action in the Detroit Police Department made mention of race and not gender. I realize this topic could include gender, but because it does encompass both race and gender, the generality of this topic seems more appropriate to net.politics. I'd like to discuss this issue myself, but net.women does not seem to be the appropriate newsgroup. But I dislike criticizing the affirmative action topic, because it is one of the few that seems worth the time to even scan. I've only been subscribing a few weeks, but I've seen very little here worth the title of this newsgroup. What is the purpose of this newsgroup? Is it a place to put women down? I have been very offended by a couple of letters in this newsgroup, and have considered cancelling subscription. But wouldn't that be strange--if women stopped subscribing to net.women because they found it useless or insulting to participate in? (You could rename it net.boysclub :-) or net.killthecastratingbitches :-) .) But tenacity and orneriness encourages me to stay and not let those unthinking ones get away with it. If people feel the need to be insulting, well, go jump up and down in the parking lot for awhile until you cool down; or get articulate and wordy and submit something to net.flame instead. In summary: let's keep the topics relevant to the title and let's remember the rules of net ettiquette. And let's make this a meaningful newsgroup. Never met any men named Lisa, Lisa Chabot ...decvax!decwrl!rhea!amber!chabot DEC, Marlboro, MA