home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky soc.women:19891 alt.feminism:4689 soc.men:19546
- Path: sparky!uunet!ogicse!uwm.edu!linac!tellab5!chrz
- From: chrz@tellabs.com (Peter Chrzanowski)
- Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
- Subject: Re: Self Appreciation (was: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?)
- Message-ID: <1992Nov19.010810.6250@tellab5.tellabs.com>
- Date: 19 Nov 92 01:08:10 GMT
- Article-I.D.: tellab5.1992Nov19.010810.6250
- References: <1992Nov17.234434.18993@tellab5.tellabs.com> <1992Nov18.153348.6594@mr.med.ge.com>
- Sender: news@tellab5.tellabs.com (News)
- Distribution: usa
- Organization: Tellabs, Inc.
- Lines: 85
- Nntp-Posting-Host: tellab3
-
- In article <1992Nov18.153348.6594@mr.med.ge.com>, wendy@sundown.mil.wi.us writes:
- > Peter Chrzanowski (chrz@tellabs.com) wrote:
- > >
- > > Has someone made claims of superiority? Where, when? Or do you mean
- > > that because I consider this book is not only hateful but also laughably
- > > bad then I must be a racist, sexist pig?
- > >
- >
- > Peter,
- >
- > This is turning into a flamewar.
-
- I discussed a BOOK. I attacked a BOOK as hateful and badly written.
- I did NOT attack you or your attributes.
-
-
- > You are showing exactly how males act by having to win this disagreement.
-
- If expressing my opinions is "winning" then I guess I've won. Since you've
- expressed yours as well, then I guess you've also won.
-
- Are you trying to put this into a "win/lose" framework? If so, why?
-
- And tell us, please, exactly how DO males act?
-
- > You want to win???? OK, You win! You can now go off and say that you won.
-
- Where/when did I ever express a desire to "win" ? Why the nastiness?
- I'm sure I didn't say anything about YOU (or where you can go), only about
- a certain BOOK.
-
- > You may well be a racist, sexist pig. I don't know you well enough to say.
- > Maybe someone else here on the net could enlighten us.
-
- I may be a wife beater or a rapist ... perhaps someone could enlighten us.
-
- I was responding to :
- > "I suppose you believe in everything she says is a myth.
- > I would expect that as it maintains your superiority".
-
- As though by saying this book was trash I was claiming superiority either
- for myself or for my gender and/or race.
-
- I made no claims of superiority. For that matter, I don't "believe in
- everything she says is a myth." Actually, I don`t believe in any of it.
-
- From the book, "Women's Reality" (by Anne Schaef) :
- THE FIRST MYTH is that the White Male System is the only thing that exists...
- THE SECOND MYTH is that the White Male System is innately superior...
- THE THIRD MYTH is that the White Male System knows and understands everything...
- THE FOURTH MYTH is that it is possible to be totally logical, rational,
- and objective"
-
- I don't believe in the existence of a "White Male System". Certainly a
- thing which does not exist can neither be "innately superior" nor can
- it "know and understand everything". And I've never heard anyone other
- than a certain Startrek character claim that it is possible to be totally
- logical, rational, and objective (but that's hardly an excuse for being
- illogical and irrational). Thus, I believe in zero of her four "myths".
-
- To me, statements like these appear to be personal attacks:
- > "most males will not understand ... you certainly proved that......"
- and
- > "I would expect that [of you] as it maintains your superiority.
-
- Was it your intent to attack me personally just because I disagreed
- about the worth of a book? If this be "flamewar," who is flaming?
-
- > I will say this. You are looking at this from one side only. I am starting
- > to see it from the other side. Whether you believe it or not, women are
- > looked down upon in this society. Very few men treat them as equals.
- >
-
- This is an assertion which presumably reflects your beliefs, and perhaps
- your subjective experience. While obviously everyone has a right to their
- own beliefs, to convince others it is necessary to present some evidence.
-
-
- > I will no longer discuss the book with you. If you want to discuss
- > transexual issues, I will. But I think it's useless for us to continue
- > discussing the book.
-
- If "discussing the book" means more personal attacks on me, or sweeping
- generalizations and/or attacks upon my entire gender, then I agree. If
- you want to talk about THIS BOOK then I hope you'll do so.
-