era@killer.UUCP (Mark E. Smith) (12/23/87)
In article <14152@oddjob.UChicago.EDU> pooh@oddjob.uchicago.edu.UUCP (obsequious, purple, and clairvoyant) writes: >In article <2530@killer.UUCP> era@killer.UUCP (Mark Ethan Smith) writes: >>Thank you Emmi. It was interesting that the pooh person >>characterized lawsuits in which employment rights were established >>for all future women, with no personal benefit to the woman who >>brought the case, as having accomplished "nothing." >This is absolutely, totally wrong. I said nothing of >the sort. But nice try. Here's the reference: In article <14146@oddjob.UChicago.EDU> pooh@oddjob.uchicago.edu.UUCP (obsequious, purple, and clairvoyant) writes: >In article <2509@killer.UUCP> era@killer.UUCP (Mark Ethan Smith) writes: >>The most >>frequent result of a "successful" case is that a company that has >>refused to hire women or treat women equally, signs a consent decree, >>without admitting guilt, and promises to hire andor promote women >>in the future. Often the woman who brought the case spends a fortune, >>undergoes enormous stress, and the only result is that the company >>institutes an affirmative action plan that will benefit future >>women employees, not the one who brought the case. >Here you go, like a broken record. Nothing can ever be done, >it's hopeless, life is terrible. Do you remember writing that, pooh, or was somebody using your password? In article <14144@oddjob.UChicago.EDU> pooh@oddjob.uchicago.edu.UUCP (obsequious, purple, and clairvoyant) writes: >It is immensely unfair to the men.... Pardon me, but aren't you in the wrong group? ;-) --Mark
pooh@oddjob.UChicago.EDU (obsequious, purple, and clairvoyant) (12/24/87)
In article <2543@killer.UUCP> era@killer.UUCP (Mark Ethan Smith) writes: > >>>Thank you Emmi. It was interesting that the pooh person >>>characterized lawsuits in which employment rights were established >>>for all future women, with no personal benefit to the woman who >>>brought the case, as having accomplished "nothing." > >>This is absolutely, totally wrong. I said nothing of >>the sort. But nice try. > >Here's the reference: > >In article <14146@oddjob.UChicago.EDU> pooh@oddjob.uchicago.edu.UUCP (obsequious, purple, and clairvoyant) writes: >>In article <2509@killer.UUCP> era@killer.UUCP (Mark Ethan Smith) writes: >>>The most >>>frequent result of a "successful" case is that a company that has >>>refused to hire women or treat women equally, signs a consent decree, >>>without admitting guilt, and promises to hire andor promote women >>>in the future. Often the woman who brought the case spends a fortune, >>>undergoes enormous stress, and the only result is that the company >>>institutes an affirmative action plan that will benefit future >>>women employees, not the one who brought the case. > >>Here you go, like a broken record. Nothing can ever be done, >>it's hopeless, life is terrible. > >Do you remember writing that, pooh, or was somebody using your password? You're the one who was saying that the "only" result is stress, expense and no personal reward for the person bringing the suit, just a vague benefit to women in the future. First of all, I don't believe that's true. I say that the person bringing the suit, provided that she wins, gets recompense of some sort. She gets the job, she gets punitive damages, whatever. But you don't want to acknowledge that; you'd like to denigrate that as much as possible so she'll look altruistic; so let's move on. FROM THIS VICTORY, which started out as a personal one (she experienced injustice, she started the suit), a precedent is established which benefits all of us. I have been saying this from the beginning. You, on the other hand, have been trying to go on about how terrible life is and must be, and how therefore anything we do MUST be altruistic because we can't possibly be GETTING anything out of it. Wouldn't you say that's a little discouraging for anyone who wants to succeed in life and has to fight to do it? >In article <14144@oddjob.UChicago.EDU> I write again: > >>It is immensely unfair to the men.... > >Pardon me, but aren't you in the wrong group? ;-) Oh, pardon me, Mark. I FORGOT THAT WE AREN'T SUPPOSED TO TREAT MEN WITH THE SAME FAIRNESS AND CONSIDERATION THAT WE'D LIKE FROM THEM. <--- heavy sarcasm Fine, I'll leave you to your reverse discrimination in the form of a holy war on men. It's too bad that you're so bitter that you can't recognize progress and achievement when it's in front of your nose; that you can't see how many women AND MEN in this electronic community have gained an understanding and enlightenment that makes me proud. Pooh pooh@oddjob.uchicago.edu "Supercharged!"