NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/alt/cyberpun/5811

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-15 | 3.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!ornl!sunova!linac!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!netcomsv!matrix!mykel.alvis
From: [e-mail] (Mykel Alvis)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: Re: ROBO-COPULATION
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Nov 92 05:27:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The MATRIX BBS - Birmingham, AL - 205-323-2016
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mykel Alvis)
Lines: 57

[Lots of stuff deleted .... sorry]

J>    This is not a flame, this is me expressing my frustration at you and
 > other men on this newsgroup who, as members of the more powerful party,
 > have consistently refused to *listen*-- not to register knee-jerk
 > agreement for political correctness, not to accept the argument without
 > question, but to *listen* to it and understand the emotions-- consistently
 > refused to listen to a representative of the injured party, preferring to
 > engage in rebuttals composed mostly of "progressive" macho denials.  If
 > things are to change for the better in this world, it is the groups with
 > power, and not the groups with less or none of it, that need to do the
 > listening first.  That is the only way that the historical conversation to
 > heal human civilization is going to start.

This is interesting.  Jesse made some very valid points in the huge post
that this is just the tail end of.  But my question is, what are we doing
if not listening?  My responses to Paula's post (if said person even exists)
we not contemplated for hours, but I did think about them.  I happen to belong
to the male part of this discussion.  I read the post and probably would have
just chalked it but for the ensuing banter.  The anger of an individual is
always welcome here, but I will *NOT* be treated in a manner such as this
without activating my "knee-jerk" responses.  The post was ludicrous.  It
assaults men in general, thus me in general.  I do the best I can to help
equality in my life, but last I checked, I didn't put my name on the "Please
Abuse Me 'Cause I'm a Guy and Am Incapable of Equitable Treatment of Women"
list.  If she has this kind of anger, she needs counseling, not flaming.  If
it was just a pissy day for her, then that's cool, too.  We all get them at
one time or another.  But there seems a trend in activism that seems to think
that because someone is in the majority, they have a greater duty to
defend/bolster the minority, and this doesn't make sense to me.  I'm not
completely white, my black friends, gay friends, girlfriend, all the others I
contact who aren't WMASP's don't get a major chip because of oppression.
When people do, and advertise it in that manner, it sounds more like the
beginning of the Holy Grail ("Oh, now we see the violence inherent to the
system...").
For clarification of the reflexive nature of the replies, consider this:
A force appears external to your group.  It's manner is hostile, and
appears to be somewhat unreasonable.  Do you invite it in for tea and
hope it isn't rabid?  Not likely.  I hate using violence metaphors since it
only bolsters the dissenting opinion, but it's the most explicit thing I
could come up with at 5:30am.
I only see radical versions of this behavior outside my peer group, and so
deal with it like any outside entity.  It appears, is threatening, and
so is treated with at least a degree of wariness (sp?).
I think another choice of words would have been more appropriate, that's
about all.  Really.

 >    Ugh.  My jeremiad for the day.  Hope some women post on these threads
 > and enlighten the discussion.

Odd choice of words?

Mykel


 -- SPEED 1.20 [NR]: We now commit this program to Write-only memory...