Conference quark::mennotes-v1

re: .0
    
>    What do y'all think about the poll in womannotes?
>    
>    I get the distinct impression that we are not wanted there.
    
Sorry, i don't read that conference?  What's the issue being discussed?

								paul c.

    Re: .0
    
    I think the poll is an attempt to get another feel for the "pulse"
    of WOMANNOTES readers.  Those who don't read WOMANNOTES shouldn't
    care.
    
    No, I don't think it implies that men aren't wanted in the conference,
    and am quite surprised that you should think so.
    
    I agree completely that women are spending too much energy justifying
    their feelings to men in that conference, and I myself have been
    guilty of provoking that effect at times.  Lately I've tried to
    read more, write less.  It's not that important that I say something
    to every issue.  (And what happens?  I get asked if I've withdrawn
    from the file.  You can't win! :-))
    
    But anyway, I don't see any big changes coming.  I sometimes wonder
    why people choose WOMANNOTES to bring up certain topics that are
    equally or even more relevant to men (AIDS, for example), but that's
    their decision.
    
    I'm pleased to have many women friends who participate in WOMANNOTES,
    and pleased to continue my own participation.  Women DO get the
    short end of the stick a lot in our society, and it should come
    as no surprise to anyone that they get upset about it.  Men should
    not react defensively to such emotions, but should instead try
    to see the other's viewpoint, and understand.  Men should also
    not try to tell women what to think - something I see a lot in that
    conference.
    				Steve

    re .0
    
    Bob, please answer the e-mail you have been sent on this
    subject privately before the note was posted.
    
    Steve, thankyou for your response.
    
    Bonnie J
    moderator womannotes
    
    please feel free to read the note 335.0 and answer it either
    by e-mail to me or in womannotes
    
    I have been getting a lot of mail that indicated that what was
    supposed to be a 'safe place for women' with men invited, had
    become a place where women feel attacked....
    
    
    and I request that any man or woman reading this who have problems
    with the way womannotes is currently organized to please write to
    me and tell me why they are having a problem...
    
    Bonnie J

    Re .0 I got that feeling from ONE respose to the poll, but the
    author gave valid reasons for her conclusion. I will be slower
    to argue minor points there from now on. But I reserve my right
    to point out blatant errors in reasoning, or assumptions that
    are obviously untrue.   Dana

    
    It'd be interesting to see what would happen if all male writing
    in womannotes disappeared for a while, say, the month of July, to
    see if the nature of the conference changed.
    
    I'm not advocating a boycott or anything -- who am I to dictate
    to anybody.  I just think it'd be interesting to watch.
    
    DFW

I made my reply.  I'm beginning to feel *slightly* unwanted in a file that 
I thought was supposed to help bridge the 'gender gap'.

As I stated in that note [for those who don't read WOMANNOTES], what would 
the reaction be to a closed "WHITEMALENOTES" conference?  It would solve 
nothing and cause a lot of problems.

I never looked at women as 'inferior' or anything like that, probably 
because I was brought up _exclusively_ by women.  I'm finding out, however, 
that a lot of women have been burned by a lot of sexist males and it's hard 
to separate the wheat from the chaff.

    Personally, I haven't been into WOMANNOTES in over a month because
    it grows too fast and I don't have time to keep up with it.  I
    regualarly read 4 other conferences.
    
    If this is the same poll that has been going on for several months,
    it appeared that there were a couple of women who would like to
    see men banned from 'their' conference.  However, *most* women were
    in favor of having men participate.  Hence, I did not leave it because
    I didn't feel welcome (although I did at times), I simply left because
    it was taking too much time to read.
    
    Spence

re .6 & .7

Good point.  I re-read what I had written and it's easy to see where the 
wrong idea could come from.  Like I said...  Well, I'll post what I wrote 
in Womannotes: [edited slightly]

-----------------------

Note 335.15                        Womannotes                           15 of 35
HULK::DJPL "Do you believe in magic?"                39 lines  16-JUN-1987 10:18
                      -< Maybe .10 was a little strong. >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...

I was just expressing a feeling of _slight_ unwelcomeness.  Like I said, 
it's slight.

For the most part, it's been a positive experience.  I've learned a few 
things I would not have ordinarily found out [like hassles being given to 
women who put up children for adoption].

My comment about a theoretical "WHITEMALENOTES" was just that, theoretical. 
That's the barometer I use to see how productive WOMANNOTES has been.  I 
just look at what the flip side *could* be like.

To give a positive note about WOMANNOTES, I'd like to relate a personal 
viewpoint.

I never gave much thought to sexism.  I was raised _exclusively_ by women 
[4-5 different people at various points in my life].  I never thought women 
were 'inferior'.  The idea was completely foreign to me.  I used to wonder 
about what women were screaming about on the 6 o'clock news.

When I started working, I thought it was 'curious' that there weren't more 
women in the field I was in.  After all, women were just as smart as men.

I didn't really get an understanding until I started reading these notes.  
In fact, I was finding myself harboring some distasteful thoughts about 
certain aspects of 'feminism' because I didn't completely understand where 
women were coming from [not to say that I completely understand it now].

When I hear some of the stories related herein, I shudder.  To think that 
people could be so blind to half the human race!  My problem was because 
I never saw and never considered it, sexism was nearly impossible to 
visualise.  I thought sexist people were really on the lunatic fringe.  I 
had no idea it was so pervasive in mainstream culture.

WOMANNOTES serves a good purpose.  Don't change a thing.  I know I've 
profited [personally and emotionally] from it.

And thanks to both of you for pointing out where I was somewhat deficient.

Sometimes I feel like ol' Ronnie himself needing advisors to 'clarify'
my statements.  Usually, I catch myself.  But it's nice to know there
are others out there who can catch a lost parity bit.

Thanx,
dj

    
    I agree with .0
    
    I generally feel as if they'd just as soon I never entered anything
    unless what I had to say was in somewhat total agreement. When I
    ask sincere questions they are ignored. 
    
    I have learned quite a bit but I think my increasing confusion
    derived from reading the notes cancels that. 
    
    Finally, as I mentioned once in that file, I find it interesting
    that they complain about discrimination (which I don't deny exists)
    and the patriarchal control of society and then sign things
    "in sisterhood". I end up wondering what their real motives are.
    
    Regardless of my thoughts, I feel the communication of thoughts
    and feelings is important; I hope it continues.

    Well, I 'got out' of Womannotes some time ago. I was so po'd that
    I couldn't see straight. I felt very abused, put upon etc etc.
    I was trying to take a moderate stand in an discussion, but got
    shouted down in the argument. Intentions and warning notes
    misinterpreted. I made a final reply giving my feelings and haven't
    been back since. I felt men were welcomed only as long as they were
    willing to 'go along with the crowd'.
    
    Bob Mc
    
    

    Re: .15
    
    I agree readily that some WOMANNOTES noters make it difficult on
    men (and women) who disagree with them, but that's what life's
    about, isn't it?  If you believe in yourself enough, and you believe
    in the need for increased communication and understanding between
    women and men, then you ought to stick with it.  Otherwise you're
    basically turning your back on the whole matter.
    
    The women have something to learn from all this too, and many of
    them are doing just that.
    					Steve

    Re: .17
    
    All this talk about a "safe place" bothers me.  If by "safe", one
    means insulation from those with possibly contrasting viewpoints,
    then I think that's absolutely wrong.  If instead it means that
    one can write a note in reasonable confidence that one will not
    receive abusive responses, then I'm all for it.  The latter, which
    I'd claim is the case today in MENNOTES and HUMAN_RELATIONS, requires
    (in my view) active, consistent and firm moderation, something that
    WOMANNOTES has historically been lacking.
    
    					Steve

    
    I personally stopped going into WOMANNOTES about a month ago as
    I found the Conference rather "sexist" and I thought that some of
    the opinions were stated in an extremely biased way and I felt that
    I was not going to reply to many of the Notes as I did not want
    to attacked by a bunch of "heated" feminists.
    
    In some ways, I was sorry to leave as some of the more gentle Notes
    are a great insight into understanding other people that I have
    to share the world with but I thought it was spoiled by what I would
    consider an over-reaction to opinions stated (particularly when
    those opinions were from the Male contributors).
    
    For me, WOMANNOTES is just not light hearted enough.
         
    Just to clarify, I'm no expert on these great Male v. Female issues,
    I hold no strong opinion, nor do I believe I am a particularly biased
    or sexist person - I just wanted to understand a little better.
    
    Steve
    

    Although the previous replies don't specifically reference my
    previous reply, I don't want to be painted with the same brush.
   
    At no time did I ever intentionally disrupt any note with rude
    or crass comments. I was one of the first men to introduce myself
    in the conference. I have always believed in equality of treatment
    for women, equal pay for equal work etc. Their are differences and
    limitations. One of the real problems in the work place is the fact
    that men are always assumed to meet certain standards while women
    have to prove that they do. Not all men are physically strong, not
    all men are sports fanatics, not all men know how to repair autos,
    not all men can fix bad plumbing. But, it seems to be a surprise
    to find out that a guy can't do those things and a surprise to find
    out that a gal can. Expectations and mind sets. 
    
    Yes, there were and probably are a number of differing views between
    the female participants in womannotes. But it appeared to me that
    women who held similar views to mine on certain subjects were shouted
    down as I was. They didn't seem to respond much either. I guess
    my problem was my faith in human nature that people would be able
    to understand a reasonable opinion. However, certain people made
    vicious attacks because they didn't like the opinions and repeatedly
    misinterpreted the words to fit their own negative view of the world.
    Sort of like the black gal in my reserve outfit who came on like
    I was being racist for saying "Say what!" in response to something.
    The little guy that made that phrase popular was black, but I can
    only think that someone that would think use of that phrase indicated
    that the person was racist, was paranoid about racism.
    
    Bob Mc
     

    Suzanne's first note comes close to saying what I feel about the
    two conferences.  I've read this conference since it was started,
    but write very little.  Why?  I don't want mennotes to turn into
    the heated debates that are in womannotes.  Men deserve to have
    topics like "I'm a girlwatcher" without me pumping in about "treating
    women like objects".  I'll state my views on that in womannotes.
    It's *their* space.  However, *a few vocal* men in womannotes have
    not allowed *us* that same courtesy, which I believe is why mennotes
    is a relatively peaceful conference while womannotes is full of a
    lot of garbage notes.
    
    	-Ellen

    Re: .22
    
    All that proves is that individual women can be just as big jerks
    as individual men!  I have found the majority of the female noters
    in WOMANNOTES to be reasonable and caring people.  Many of the
    male noters have similar qualities.  But you always notice the
    squeaky wheel.
    
    When I was troubled by what I thought was generic rejection of the
    male viewpoint in the conference, I took a closer look (prompted
    by concerned inquiries from some of the women noters), and indeed
    found that it was only a handful of women (with a man or two sprinkled
    in) that tended to attack in this fashion.  Unfortunately, the
    calmer majority was drowned out.
    
    In the past few months, there's been a LOT less man-bashing in
    the conference, though it hasn't disappeared entirely.  Nor would
    I expect it to.  Unfortunately, what's taken its place is an increased
    level of woman-bashing by a handful of men (and a sprinkling of
    women).  I don't consider this an improvement.  But it appears
    that the more vocal woman-bashers have taken to leaving the conference,
    so it's getting better nowadays.
    
    I like WOMANNOTES - many of its active contributors are friends
    of mine and I enjoy learning, participating and growing.  I don't
    expect to like everything I read, nor do I expect everyone to like
    what I write.  But I do expect respect for others' opinions, and
    that's starting to emerge.  With some gentle guidance from the
    noters and moderators, WOMANNOTES will do even better.
    
    					Steve

    Re: .23
    
    Ellen, I believe that the reason you don't see the same kind of
    attacks in MENNOTES is that the moderators won't allow it.  I'll
    leave the implications of that up to you.
    
    					Steve

    Hm.  This discussion and the one in womannotes lead me to a conclusion
    that I hadn't noticed before:  The reason for all the varied opinions
    about womannotes is that there are so many diverse opinions represented
    there. 
    
    There are men bashers and women bashers, people (like me) who
    occassionally get too loud in their opinions and forget to watch out
    for other people's feelings, people who are too sensitive, people who
    are deliberately offensive, people who are open-minded and people whose
    minds are permanently nailed shut, feminists from rabid to timid, and
    so on and so on and on.  It's wonderful. 
    
    The openness of the womannotes discussions is unparalleled in the notes
    files I read.  I can say things there that I would not even consider
    posting in human_relations or mennotes because I know they wouldn't be
    accepted.  This can lead to hurt --  Any open and honest argument over
    sincere differences of opinion is in danger of becoming hurtful or, for
    want of a better word, too rough. But closing the playground or
    checking admission at the door is not a solution. 
    
    I think we're all learning to communicate better, to argue in
    constructive rather than hurtful ways, to see the true points instead
    of being distracted by the form of the expression, to listen to
    someone's explanation and accept their apologies.  I can see the change
    and the growth in just the few short months I've been participating in
    these conferences.  We have a long way to go -- when it comes to
    understanding other people, you never reach perfection -- but we are on
    the way.
    
    --bonnie 
    
    

    re 25:
    
    Steve, I believe that's only part of the problem.  I think that
    from time to time, some men (actually, only a handful that I can
    think of) get in there for the very reason of "bashing feminists".
    Small minds, huh?  Whereas, there is not the kind of politicism
    with a conference called "mennotes".  A conference called "womannotes"
    is a bit more politically named.
    
    	-Ellen

I have become mostly a reader of Womenotes, and much less frequently
at that.  Yet this is not because I feel unwelcomed as a male or
personally unwanted. 

There are two (related) main reasons for my change in attitude
toward Womenotes: 

1.	I could usually predict who would answer (multiple times)
and what they would say.  In other words, it started to feel like
the most active writers were more interested in talking and reacting
than in really listening or considering a point of view.  This is
not to say that their point of view is wrong. 

2.	These same people often dominated, even entering multiple
replies, and other people too often did not put in their point of
view, thus true discussion was sometimes inhibited. 


	~Mike

    Re: .28
    
    I don't consider the refutations based on logic to be bashing.
    But there WAS bashing on both sides, and I think it's unreasonable
    to deny it.
    
    I in no way blame the current situation on the moderators.  I have
    utmost respect for the moderators, and one of them is a good friend
    of mine.  But it is not sufficient to just sit back and respond
    only to "fires", one must take charge and point the way.  I consider
    Bonnie Reinke's initiation of this poll to be an extremely positive
    step in that direction.
    					Steve

    I'd suggest hanging loose for a while.  I have a feeling that the
    problem will begin to straighten itself out.  To really succeed
    requires understanding and acceptance from all of us.
    
    As an exercise, I'd suggest that one try waiting 24 hours before
    replying to a note in WOMANNOTES.  It will tend to avoid the
    ping-pong effect, and you may decide it's not even really worth
    a reply.  I've done this myself and find that I really didn't
    have anything significant to add to the conversation.  I do
    reply when I feel it is warranted.
    					Steve

    A prerequisite to resolving a problem is to correctly identify it.
    
    I think the poll has identified a problem. That done it may largely
    resolve itself, at least amongst the more thoughtful contributors.
    
    /. Ian .\

RE: .22
>>    Sort of like the black gal in my reserve outfit who came on like
>>    I was being racist for saying "Say what!" in response to something.
>>    The little guy that made that phrase popular was black, but I can
>>    only think that someone that would think use of that phrase indicated
>>    that the person was racist, was paranoid about racism.
       
       
Not knowing the "black gal" you mention I can only speak for myself.  If
in your use of the saying "Say what" you emphasized it with extreme dialect
inflections, then I know why she would take exception to your use of this 
phrase.  Exaggerating black dialect has been a method used to ridicule the way 
some blacks speak and its only purpose is to be derogatory.  You also have
made a mistake common to many people dealing with racism, that is to apply 
"your" definition of what is racist without trying to understand "why" the 
person is telling you it is racist.  I would suggest if you are "really" 
interested why the person feels it is racist, just ask.  After being told
why something is racist then apply their reasons against your "true" feelings
and if the reasons have merit, in the future change your use of the term
or phrase.  This is what people do all their lives to learn and adapt to the 
environment around them but when it comes to racist behavior it is forgotten
or trivialized.          
               
Also the term "black gal" when referring to an adult black female can be
racist.  The person using it may not mean anything derogatory, but that 
and other similar terms have been used to show that blacks(no matter their
age) are forever children and are never to be taken seriously, therefore
whatever they say or do is to be ridiculed or ignored.  The same terms 
that are used in everyday socially acceptable conversation to address other 
adults applies to blacks as well.
           
       
JEF
    

    
    re: -.1
    
    While I agree with most of what you said.  I have to say that the
    use of the term 'gal' to denote an adult female is common in many
    places and doesn't necessarily carry derogatory overtones.
    
    Just my $.02,
    
    Rich

    
    	RE:-1
    
    	As a matter of fact, the term "gal" seems to be the *safest*
    term when you don't don't want to get into the: Lady,girl,Miss.Ms.
    thing....True?
    
    Todd

    
    	Can't please em all, lill doogy.
    
    	Todd|^(

    just to echo suzanne, I find "gal" a really stupid term too, but
    that's just me.  If you're a nice person, you can even get away
    with calling me girl without having me vomit on you :)
    
    Lee

    �set mode British wit�
    
    From my days of spending time in British army officers' messes...
    
    Definition:
    
    Gal (1) Female member of "the County Set" old enough to have fond memories
    of Finishing School.

        (2) Placid mare of sufficiently robust build to carry the above
    on a days hunting.
    
    ========
    
    /. Ian .\

    re .37
    
    Yeah, I guess you're right. Imitating the guy that made that phrase
    popular is obviously racist. Just like imitating a certain member
    of the A-Team when you call someone FOOL, is obviously racist. And
    so is imitating the Duke when you say 'now hold on there pilgrim'.
    
    Bob Mc

    We seem to have gotten off the topic somewhat, but I do believe
    that our digression illustrates a point.  I read both conferences
    religiously (MENNOTES and WOMENNOTES) but I rarely comment for two
    reasons.  First, with the variety of opinions expressed, normally
    someone else has already expressed my viewpoint and there is very
    little reason for me to clutter up the discussion by restating it.
    Personally, I wish more people would apply this standard.  Second,
    I have noticed that quite often people are attacked more for the
    way an idea is expressed than comments are made on the substance
    of the idea.  I have seen so many people get flamed that I am a
    little wary of entering the fray.  It would seem to me that the
    obligation of a reader would be to understand what is being said
    if possible and to give a certain amount of credit for good intentions
    if some ambiguity exist in what is written.  I would also like to
    say that repeatedly defending yourself if someone choses to
    deliberately misunderstand your point of view is pointless.
    If you feel you are being unjustly attacked, one defence is usually
    enough.  Rest assured that the audience will normally be coming from
    a neutral corner, and will shrug off senseless attacks.  
    
    DRC