NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/soc/women/23161

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-28 | 3.6 KB

Xref: sparky soc.women:23161 alt.feminism:7709 soc.men:23410
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
Path: sparky!uunet!news.univie.ac.at!scsing.switch.ch!univ-lyon1.fr!ghost.dsi.unimi.it!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!llyene!eddie!julie
From: [e-mail] (Julie Kangas)
Subject: Re: What feminists believe (was: Re: Male Men Bashers)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: eddie.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Distribution: world
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 16:17:33 GMT
Lines: 64

{...}

I'm beginning to believe this conversation is less about women
and more about the morality/immorality of the draft.  I'll admit
I'm one of "those old people" (by 4 years using your figure of
26) so I'm not eligable.  But I felt exactly the same way 4
(and more) years ago.

GA>
GA>How is this different from saying that since women are going to be
GA>raped anyway, we might as well have the men raped too so that they
GA>don't get "better" treatment.
GA>
GA>Personally, I would much rather be raped than drafted.

Your choice.  I'd much rather be drafted.

GA>And as with rape, the problem with the draft is not that joining
GA>the army is evil, but that being forced to do it is.

Your opinion.  I feel that a draft is not evil.  If you want
to yell at me further that I'm "an old person who likes to
see young people be killed" or that "my life is mostly over"
go ahead, but let's stop discussing it as a woman's issue when
it's really a draft issue.  But if you just want to let hatred
wash onto me because I support the possibility of a draft, then
send it to /dev/null.  (I certainly didn't call *you* names about
your beliefs on the draft nor will I start now.)

GA>I find it hard to believe that very many feminists agree with you.  If
GA>they do, you can count me out.

JK>I'll say it again.  When you give women special privledges, such as
JK>not being called up for a draft, you put them on a pedestal.  People
JK>will think of women as being "different".  You may see it as protecting
JK>women from evils men have to bear.  Others will see women as being
JK>weaker or not as capable and something that needs protecting.  And once
JK>women are excluded from a draft or combat positions, it will be much easier
JK>to exclude them from other things, such as high risk (but high paying) jobs
JK>on the grounds that it's too dangerous.
>
GA>I'm pretty sure you are in the minority (among feminists) on this
GA>issue.  But if I'm wrong and this is a big issue with most feminists,
GA>I'd like to know so that I can disassociate myself from the
GA>Women's Rights [hah!] Movement".

This just once more shows how varied and how impossible it is to
label anything or anyone as "feminist."  So many people call themselves
that (I do not) and carry such widely varied beliefs that it is
useless to judge a person on the label "feminist."  When I've
posted about women's rights, I get jumped on by some people screaming
about the horrible things "all feminists" believe.  When I say
I don't, I'm called a liar and the assumption women's rights ==
"feminism" == all one belief structure, is made.  But I also get jumped
on by people telling me my "feminism" is wrong or flawed.  I feel
like if I'm to be included in the "feminist bunch" and be counted
as a true "feminist" (whatever that is) I have to follow a strict
party line (as shown on the net) or be cast out.

I feel it's very ironic.

Julie
DISCLAIMER:  All opinions here belong to my cat and no one else