travis@gardens.cs.columbia.edu (Travis Lee Winfrey) (09/19/90)
>In article <653402616@lear.cs.duke.edu> gazit@cs.duke.edu (Hillel Gazit) writes: > In article <9009122207.AA10780@houston.cs.columbia.edu> > (Travis Lee Winfrey) writes: > >Although you apparently feel feminist activists are solely > >concerned with "women's issues," perhaps you should not be so > >sanguine about a system that gives men gender roles that cannot > >be sustained without an early death from "natural causes," e.g., > >higher rates of violent death, alcoholism, heart disease, among > >other things. Don't be so quick to defend a system that is > >killing you and your male friends and relatives. > > If to judge by what the feminist movement has done in the last 15 years, > then it is pretty obvious that a feminist-dominated system will be even > more oppressive toward men. If it is "pretty obvious," then you can do us the kindness of detailing whatever you mean. The feminist movement -- inchoate monster that she apparently is -- did not create the existing masculine roles. (Yes, people can counter with the dialectical arguments if they want. It would beat more girl/wimmen discussions.) I know you have many complaints about issues emanating from child support and affirmative action, but this really has nothing to do with them. There was even a very funny performance-art piece about it in New York over the last two years, called "Men Die Sooner." The monolithic "feminist movement" you continuously decry has almost nothing to do with the things that I want or am working for. There are people with different purposes in the world, and different understandings of the world. As a matter of rhetorical convenience, I see the need to group all the "opposition" into one homogenous lump, but I don't see how anyone can justify thinking about the opposition as if it actually were that simple. t