kfk@ccieng2.UUCP (11/07/83)
I was recently discussing male/female discrimination with a friend of mine, and an event from a couple of years ago occurred to me. I'd like to find out what the general feeling is from people on the net on the subject. When I was a junior in college, I took a class in the use of nuclear energy, both in power generation and weapons systems. As part of our look at weapons, we got a rather detailed tour of F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Cheyenne, WY (I was attending U of WY in Laramie). During one of the question/answer sessions in which we participated, one woman from the class made a rather indignant statement that she had noticed that only men are assigned to the underground launch substations where the Minuteman III missiles are controlled. She went into quite some de- tail on her feelings that this was a serious case of discrimination, and that the Air Force should change this policy immediately, etc. The major who was running our session answered her complaint very suc- cintly by saying that those people assigned to the launch substations go there for 48 hour periods; that to have both men and women assigned there could create problems for both in terms of privacy; and that for one person who is married to be in such close quarters with another person of the opposite sex for such extended periods could create problems for the first person's spouse. He went on to say that putting women to work in such situations had been considered, but had been thrown out on these grounds; after all, men were already trained and assigned. What I would like to know is how readers of the net (male or female) feel about this? You could either just post your responses, or if enough people are inclined to mail to me, I'll summarize myself in a week or so. Karl Kleinpaste ...![seismo or allegra]!rochester!ritcv!ccieng5!ccieng2!kfk
walsh@ihuxi.UUCP (11/08/83)
Re: Karl's request for views:
That sounds like a pretty weak argument to me. It's the same type of hype
the police used for years to prevent women from patrolling with a male
partner. (They'd be too confined and close for long periods; the spouses
would object; blah, blah, blah...) I'm sure adults can be trusted to work
together without turning animal (at least I'd hope so). The people working
there aren't necessarily married, either. Even if they were, men and
women work together all the time in offices, stores, airplanes, etc.
Are the spouses going to object? People have to grow up and realize that
men and women can be together without SEX being the main objective!
(I also don't think 48 hours is all that long) Let's learn to trust each
other a little.
B. Walshsteven@qubix.UUCP (Steven Maurer) (11/09/83)
Three thoughts come to mind in this case:
1] The excuse the air-force gave was probably a lame one. After
all, TWO women could stay in that bunker, if single sex was deemed
a requirement by the military.
2] It seems to me that the woman who was objecting, was objecting
as a metter of principal, and not that she was dying to be one of
the select few people in this country who are prepared to initiate
global holocaust.
3] You never hear feminists complaining about sexism in garbage col-
lection, or in sewage maintenence. So I have to laugh every time I
read about "discrimination" in the high-pay, high-enjoyment jobs, because
you never hear about the males who were "discriminated" against.
Steven Mauererwalsh@ihuxi.UUCP (11/09/83)
Steven: I don't know of any sexism in garbage collection. I've seen a few female garbage collectors. Besides, you're missing the point. Do you hear MEN complaining about not being able to get a job as a garbage man? Would YOU settle for such a job instead of a high-pay, high-enjoyment job? There are certain jobs in every sector that are high pay and selective simply because of the nature of the work, eg., dangerous, dirty, repugnant, or requiring certain physical or other special abilities. They are high-pay because not everyone wants to do them. Including some men. B. Walsh
mason@utcsrgv.UUCP (Dave Mason) (11/09/83)
The problem is that everyone sees the world as ruled by sex. Now
I'm not above a little indulgence myself every now & then, but I don't
understand why people think a man and a woman cannot work together in
close quarters without sex being a question, let alone an issue. I think
that the main problem is that (depressingly) women are still viewed as
sex objects & children producers, servants to the 'real' workers, and I
despair of this changing soon. But, in answer to your question, I think it
clearly is discrimination, and that things aren't going to get better unless
we start making them better. In the extreme case, one could say that having
women associating with any men not their husband or blood family will lead
to sex problems, and treat women as they do in Iran. There are 2 remaining
problems: women are not blameless in the view of male-female relationships
presented above, there are too many women who are looking to 'catch a man';
second, if women were added to the job, some problems would doubtless arise.
While these could be disciplined, and eventually the problem would go away,
in the meantime many people would be (mostly psychologically) hurt.
-- Dave Mason, U. Toronto CSRG,
{utzoo,linus,cornell,watmath,ihnp4,allegra,floyd,mhsta,decwrl,
decvax,uw-beaver,ubc-vision}!utcsrgv!masonkfk@ccieng2.UUCP (11/10/83)
An intermediate contribution from the originator of this discussion: I have noticed one rather remarkable thing. Of those responses which I've seen so far (4 on the net, a couple in my mail, not enough yet to bother summarizing), one attitude has been exceed- ingly clear: people are concerned about a MAN who is married, and the effects on him and his WIFE. (I'll step way [WAY!] out on a limb, and suggest that people may have a societally-reinforced fear of "the other woman.") During the original question/answer session (and it was a long time ago, I may not be remembering entirely accurately), there was more concern expressed about the married WOMAN assigned to the launch substations, and the problems for her and her HUSBAND. (Another long, weak limb: men's egos lead to too much jealousy? [Pulling on my asbestos gloves.]) As I said, just an intermediate contribution, no real conclusions drawn yet. Enjoying this particular discussion immensely, Karl Kleinpaste ...![ [seismo, allegra]!rochester!ritcv, rlgvax]!ccieng5!ccieng2!kfk (can anybody parse the options in that path?) P.S. Immediately on leaving 'vi' on this article the first time, I discovered to my pleasure that 3 more opinions had arrived in the mail. Thanx! The volume is definitely increasing; I'll summarize next Tuesday or Wednesday if this keeps up.
laura@utcsstat.UUCP (Laura Creighton) (11/11/83)
next question. do they let homosexuals man the bunkers? Do they think that they will show more restraint than the heterosexual men and women? Or do they think that homosexuals just don't exist? Or do they ask those sorts of questions as well and divide people up accordingly? I really don't know. Does anyone? laura creighton utzoo!utcsstat!laura
walsh@ihuxi.UUCP (B. Walsh) (11/11/83)
Re: Originator's observation: I disagree. I'm sure my response said NOTHING about man vs. woman being married. I used the term spouse. I purposely am very careful about using non-gender terms. B. Walsh
walsh@ihuxi.UUCP (11/12/83)
Re: Laura's question on homosexuals in the USAF: As far as I know, unless they've changed something recently, the military doesn't even ALLOW homosexuals to be in the military! Therefore, they weren't even considered in this case. B. Walsh
kmw@iheds.UUCP (11/12/83)
References: <631@qubix.UUCP> Steve Mauerer comments: > You never hear feminists complaining about sexism in garbage collection > or in sewage maintenence. Steve, you aren't reading the right papers and magazines, listening to the right news, etc., etc.. There have been numerous publicized cases of sex discrimination fights over non-high-tech jobs. Ones I remember reading about off hand include coal mining, road construction (specifically the signaler's job; waving a flag about surely does not command big bucks), loading dock jobs, and, yes, gabage collection. In fact, most of the stories I've read about have been over jobs I'm glad I don't have. Now it could be that the main-line press doesn't cover the fights over non-glamour jobs and that I learned about all of these (and many more) in feminist magazines. Or, it could be that your memory of such news is filtered through your preconceptions. In either case, your comment isn't accurate. -- K. M. Wilber iheds!kmw or mvuxt!kw
stanwyck@ihuxr.UUCP (11/12/83)
The USAF does not knowingly have any homosexual members. it goes to great effort to remove them. Since it assumes it is successful, the question of dealing with homosexual men in the bunkers is moot. -- ________ ( ) Don Stanwyck @( o o )@ 312-979-6667 ( || ) Cornet-367-6667 ( \__/ ) ihnp4!ihuxr!stanwyck (______) Bell Labs @ Naperville, IL
chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (11/13/83)
h boy, a new way to avoid the draft! Just claim you're homosexual.
Only works for men, but then, that's not a problem, is it?
Seriously, I think it's just amazing that people can discriminate
so obviously (I mean, if it was subtle, at least they could claim
they weren't doing it) based on sex, race, religion, sexual preference,
brand of mouthwash, etc. ad nausem.
--
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci
UUCP: {seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!chris
CSNet: chris@umcp-cs ARPA: chris.umcp-cs@CSNet-Relaytjt@kobold.UUCP (T.J.Teixeira) (11/15/83)
Oh boy, a new way to avoid the draft! Just claim you're homosexual.
Only works for men, but then, that's not a problem, is it?
1) This is a very old dodge -- even Doonesbury suggested it back around
1972.
2) Well, women still are subject to the draft, but the armed forces are
already have equal rights for women homosexuals -- they won't let
them in either.
--
Tom Teixeira, Massachusetts Computer Corporation. Westford MA
...!{harpo,decvax,ucbcad,tektronix}!masscomp!tjt (617) 692-6200steven@qubix.UUCP (Steven Maurer) (11/15/83)
The point is that you don't hear the word "DISCRIMINATION" bandied
about for jobs that people from "minorities" don't want; even if
the ratio of "majority" to "minority" favors the "majorities". It
seems like a quota imbalance can exist in an industry, just as long
as it does not provide good enough jobs for the "oppressed".
Steven Maurersteven@qubix.UUCP (Steven Maurer) (11/15/83)
x
Admittedly I should not have said "NEVER", this is inaccurate.
How about 80% of the discrimination cases being "desirable" jobs??
(That is about the most accurate ratio I have seen). I do not take
the argument about "the media" screening out discrimination cases
very seriously, (not in this area of the country anyway), any such
charges are covered gleefully in the 6 O'clock news. As far as your
example of "roadside flag waver" as being an example of an undesirable
job, realize that the most sought after jobs in this country today are
in the Unskilled Unionized, or Unskilled Government category: any idiot
can wave a flag, and there are far too many idiots in this country as
it is.
Steven Maurersip@amd70.UUCP (Steven Passantino) (11/16/83)
The guys that I discussed this issue with at work felt that the possibility for problems in such a situation would not be any different with a man-man, woman-woman, or man-woman together in the room.
pvl@houxh.UUCP (P.LAMASTER) (11/16/83)
Being a regular contributer to net.rec.nude, I hesitate to point this out, but I feel that the discussion has missed the fact that a missile silo, as opposed to an office situation, could have more problems with a mixed crew due to bunk/dressing areas not being separate (if, indeed, they aren't). I believe that the original statement was that crews are on duty for 48 hours so sleeping arrangements must be included, yes? Pete LaMaster (sorry, *not* a woman posting to net.women)
dnc@dartvax.UUCP (David Crespo) (11/26/83)
it onlay takes one case to cause a problem, one marraige broken, one cse, but!: why not arange shifts such that men go with men, women with women. that way all we have to worry about is discrimination against gays, which just means supplying enough towels :-> in jest, dnc