This item text has been erased.

17 responses total.

This response has been erased.

I scooped that issue up weeks ago, valerie, and the articles are indeed
intruiging.

I really like the new style and will probably be resubscribing if the next
several issues are as good.  (I quitre reading Ms when the writing style
became painfully dense and academmic.  The topic is important but I didn't
care to work that hard for my information.)

I'll try to purchase this issue.  For the most part I've stopped
reading most "feminist" stuff because of how they absolved women
from being at the root of most feminist "issues".

This response has been erased.

Mary, could you elaborate on that?  I'm not sure what you mean.

Women share a whole lot of the blame for what
feminists like to refer to as women's problems.
You name the problem and women were there either
as co-conspirators or enablers or as passive
partners.  And I believe if women are ever to be
seen as gender equals they will need to ditch
the victim act and take a good hard look at 
their past and present behaviors and accept
responsibility for being part of the problem.

I don't know whether that makes my comment any
clearer, Mark.  The last issue of Ms. I read
left me with the feeling that feminists have
defined the enemy and it wears a penis.  And if
all penis wearers would simply change their
ways there wouldn't be a gender problem.
Women are waiting for men to fix it for them
in much the same way we wait for men to fix
the toilet and mow the lawn.   

How silly.  How cowardly.

Yes, that makes it clearer, Mary, thanks.  I guess I agree that no one should
sit back and wait for someone else to fix all the problems, no matter what
they may be.  I think what makes people act that way is either feeling
helpless or feeling paralyzed by anger or fear.  But it may also come about
when someone wants to help her/himself, but just doesn't know what to do.

The problem of sexual harrassment comes to mind.  It seems to me that the
feminist party line on this one is that we need to educate men, and let them
know that certain behavior is not acceptable, and that's all there is to it.
Well the problem with that, of course, is that it's a whopping generalization.
Behavior that one woman may find unacceptable may be quite welcome to another.

Maybe, Mary, what you're saying is that women need to educate one another, and
come to an agreement on what they want, and then they'll be able to get
something done.  The way a trade union works.  It worked for women when
they were fighting for suffrage, it worked for civil rights workers in the
South.  When there's gross injustice being done, uniting against the foe
and exposing the injustice seems to accomplish things.

I hope that isn't the way it goes in all feminist issues because, frankly,
women *are* very different from one another, and I think that's just
great.  I think trying to apply the union mentality to issues which are
not matters of gross injustice results only in people breaking ranks and
loss of credibility because people think you're overreacting.  (It's
certainly happened to the trade unions lately.)  And you completely
confuse and sometimes alienate the men. 

I think the only solution to problems like sexual harrassment is for
people to educate each other on what they want, on a completely individual
basis, and to listen when other people say what *they* want.  We *all*
bear responsibility for that. 

I agree with everything you said above, Mark.

One example of why I tend to disrespect women a whole lot when it comes to
"feminist" issues is how they want to play victim on demand yet are
unwilling to make the same non-discriminatory behavior changes.  I
frequently watch women make comments to men (phrased as playful teasing
and flirting) that if the same comments had been made by the male to the
female would have been found highly inappropriate.

The men are good sports and simply ignore the double standard.  The 
women find this lopsided freedom great fun and the men simply make the
accurate assumption that there female peers are hypocritical bubbleheads.
I am talking about female professionals here not housekeeping personnel. 

Women get away with murder.  We don't do a very good job of
policing ourselves.  Maybe we are waiting for men to do it 
for us? ;-)

Hmmm...  That reminded me that a few months ago I saw Buzz Aldrin on that
TV panel show "Politically Incorrect".  Now, I suppose one deserves whatever
one gets if one goes on that show, but on the panel with Buzz happened to be
two women who wanted to talk about nothing but sex, and they asked Buzz 
questions like "Did you have sexual fantasies while you were on the moon?"

Now, I've always idolized the people of the space program, and I think they 
achieved the greatest thing the human race has done yet.  So seeing Buzz
treated that way I was, well, horrified and offended.  And now that I think of
it, can you imagine if some man had asked Margaret Thatcher or Golda Meier
(sorry if I spelled her name wrong) about their sexual fantasies during some
historic moment?  Why, it would be an utterly inappropriate and demeaning
thing to do.  Any man that did that would be branded as a pig.

So I guess I think Mary's right, and there is a double standard.

i remember picking this one up at the news stand. it surprised me to
see it there because i assumed 'ms' was a subscriprion only magazine.

i read the article about 'cyber rape', and i have to disagree with
the angle of the magazine. <i remember ranting to my hubby about it 
after i bought it last week.>
in a nutshell.. woman goes into a private chatroom called..um.. rape fantasy
or something like that. the characters there were acting/typing out 
a scenerio. the woman from the magazine was appalled and voiced her
objections. she was told she didnt have to stay. she still objected and was
sent a lot of different messages telling her to get lost, and that
somehow jammed up her computer or something.
she basically spent the rest of the article pissing and moaning about
how horrible and dysfunctional society in general and computer society
in specific was. she talked about how violatedand shocked women are
when they get the 'wanna fuck' type messages.
she said something about how women can join together to fight back
by going into those rape fantasy channels/chatrooms and turning them
into "loving places".
she seems to think that guys are so desperate to talk to real women
that that they would allow the woman to change whatever topic was at
hand to 'how to be gentle and respectful and loving to all women'...
just so they could speak to a real llive woman.
gag

i must admit, it is annoying when i am trying to get something
done and someone keeps talk requesting me...
that is most of the reason that i removed the gender line from my plan.
But usually those guys leave me alone once i tell them to.
In general i take those messages like "wanna fuck?" as the same thing
as guys whistling from cars...ignore them or show them you're not
interested.
It seems ridiculous for a woman to be upset at what she found in 
a rape fantasy room!

This response has been erased.

Pubkich the letter here when they publish it.  I don't read Ms. any more but
would like to read what you wrote.

This response has been erased.

re#11:  Yeah, a few years ago I had a female pseudo for a while.  I don't know
how you put up with it -- it made me realize how obnoxious my gender really
can be.

This response has been erased.

This response has been erased.

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss