Conference turris::womannotes-v1

EVERY issue is a woman's issue.

I think that just about covers it.

Don.

    re .0:
    
    > However, some of us view the results of the present administration's 
    > taxation goals as explicitly negative for non-traditional households
    > and hence a women's issue since more and more women are finding 
    > themselves, either by choice or by circumstance, in non-traditional 
    > households.
      
    The two income family is what is being targeted by present tax policy.
    Funny how you say that in such a household it is the _woman_ who
    finds herself in a non-traditional household. 
    
    No one ever said that the discussion of taxation did not belong in
    WOMANNOTES. I said:
    
    230.1> I don't know why you [CADSYS::RICHARDSON] say that it is the 
    230.1> woman taking the pay cut, both parties are being taxed at a 
    230.1> higher rate because their total income is greater.
                                           
    Steve Lionel said:
    
    230.3> I don't see this as a women's issue particularly - the rules
    230.3> simply discourage marriage of equal-earning people.
           
    I don't understand your complaint. Are either of these statements
    patronizing? Are they requests to take the topic elsewhere? Are
    they deserving of "Set Flame/well_done"?
                           
    230.0 "points the finger" at women, that it (the tax law) is their 
    problem because they're the ones who are the second income. If they
    had just stayed home, there'd be no problem. THAT is the patronizing
    attitude, and why both Steve and I responded with "that's not a
    woman's problem", it is everyone's problem.
           
    
                                                   
                  /
                 (  ___
                  ) ///
                 /                     
                                       

    It's interesting to hear men say what they think is appropriate
    for women to discuss in a notesfile about "topics of interest to
    women".
    
    Do I really mean interesting, or would familiar drone be a better
    description?
    
    Lorna
    

    My response in .3 was triggered by .2, not by .1.
    
    I agree with Don (and he's even a *man*).
    
    Lorna
    

Perhaps the the example was poorly chosen.  It was not intended to roast
anyone in particular, more directed at an attitude which I think all of us
(men and women, Ms.  Schafley for one) carry around to greater or lesser
degrees.  I do this too, and it really pisses Lisa off.  Guess I may be
over sensitive because of it.  It seems that we sometimes attempt to remove
women from positions of authority on a given issue by saying they don't
have a unique perspective.  I am *NOT* saying this is what any one
individual has done in any specific note or reply.  But that is one of the
connotations that echo's around in the back of my head. 

Help!  Mez, Lorna, Maggie, (and other folks whose name don't come to mind,
but whose opinions I've learned to respect, if not always agree with) Am I
being paranoid? Is this a non issue?
-Byron

    um, no Byron I don't think this is a non-issue.  It looks real from
    here, certainly.
    
    Many people work very hard to shunt topics to what they consider
    to be the most appropriate notefile, and if that happens in here
    it's quite easy to construe such requests as sexist in motivation.
    And of course, as we all know, it's *very* hard to decode motivation
    correctly.  So, part of the question is:  when someone objects
    to a topic on the grounds that it's not appropriate here, is he
    simply viewing the domain too narrowly or is he really, consciously
    or not, making a political statement?  
    
    The rest of the question, and to my mind the larger part, is what you
    have identified as the tendency to "remove women from positions of
    authority on a given issue by saying [we] don't have a unique
    perspective".  That is very real and dishearteningly pervasive. As many
    have pointed out from time to time in this file, it isn't enough that
    women bring an equivalent amount to the table in some situation...if
    we're not better, if we don't somehow bring more, if it's not strictly
    a "woman's issue" then we're presumed not to be qualified for
    whatever's going on and told, sometimes explictly, that we ought to
    back off and let men continue doing/discussing/deciding it. 
    
    That same problem is the cornerstone of racism and of inequity in
    general.  How do we solve it?
    
    						=maggie
    

Byron, I was *very* glad you started this topic, and *twice* as glad
that Don told the truth as I see it. I have no problem with someone
saying something we discuss here is a "people" issue as well as a woman's
issue, as long as the subtext is not: "so, I don't expect women to come
up with anything new and different to say about it", or (heaven forbid):
"don't talk about it".

This notesfile allows me to "try on" the more way-rad pro-female side
of me, and use the pieces that fit in everyday life. Thank you all for
being here.

In day to day life, I often find myself discussing the validity of my
point of view. No my opinions per se, but ideas like being a whole human
at work, and still being a professional; and that just because "your"
argument may be more "logical" than mine, that doesn't mean "you"'re
right, because logic isn't everything. I would like to pat myself on
the back, and flatter myself into thinking I have helped some people
to see that there are other ways to live life, and every person in a
position of authority does not have to buy into the traditional business,
patriarchal, ethic. But its hard to tell. I happen to luck out, and
be able to argue "emotions" and "humanness" pretty well. Any other hot
tips? (in case you can't tell, I'm trying to answer Maggie's question.
I happen to be on indocin and valium for my back right now :-}).
	Mez

    It does seem that an awful lot of the discussion regarding the
    appropriateness of certain topics as womens issues is being done
    by the men who participate here. Outside of the precedent set in
    the *real* world, I don't see much sense in allowing men to decide
    what is a women's issue.  It's also getting a little difficult to
    not flame over discussions on whether or not a topic belongs in
    this conference.
    
    The last time I checked, women were people too. And as such, they
    had the same concerns, albeit a different perspective sometimes,
    as the rest of the world. I'm begining to resent being told that:
    
    	A topic is not relative to me as a woman.
    
    	A topic is not important to me as a woman.
    
    	A topic I'd like to discuss is not a valid topic for women.
    
    What are we supposed to discuss?  Only housekeeping and rearing
    children? Women's voices have been stifled for too long. We have
    been told for too long *not to worry our pretty little heads about
    it* and personally I'm getting a little tired of it.
    
    I value the opinions of men voiced in Womannotes, but I'd really
    appreciate it it you'd let the women of the conference make up
    their own minds what they'd like to discuss.  You guys have your
    own conference.  The last time I checked we weren't telling 
    Mennotes what was a Man's topic.  Maybe we should start?
    
    

The point is not what is or is not of interest to women.  Women write
computer programs in FORTRAN, too.  Should we discuss that here, or in
the FORTRAN notes file?  A simple rule to go by is to put a discussion into 
the NOTES file that is most specialized for a subject.  That way you get 
the most wide-ranging inputs on the topic.

Now, if there was something special about the way *women* used FORTRAN, 
*that* would be appropriate here.

- Paul, speaking allegorically

    re .8:
    
    I believe that there is some honest confusion about the term "woman's
    issue", at least, I'm honestly confused. I think there is a definite
    distinction between "women's issues" and "topics appropriate for
    this notesfile". The latter is basically open ended, whatever the
    participants want to talk about. But is the former a phrase with
    no meaning, i.e. every issue is a woman's issue?
    
    I do not recall any examples of men even implying that a particular
    topic is something that "women shouldn't bother their pretty little
    heads with". There have been pointers to other conferences, sure,
    but that is completely different. Is any topic applicable here just
    because a woman enters it? And if a woman wants to talk about
    child-rearing, might it not be better (as in more informative to
    that person) to be steered toward the PARENTING Conference?
    
    I agree that WOMANNOTES is not necessarily ONLY for "women's issues".
    But aren't some things more of a "woman's issue" than others?    
                  
                                                   
                  /
                 (  ___
                  ) ///
                 /
    

    re: .9
    Byron did some good quoting of what this notes file is set up to
    do. It's obvious to me *and every other woman that has replied to
    this topic so far* that if some women want to discuss FORTRAN, or
    Men (mennotes) or growing roses (gardennotes) or anger (soapbox?)
    in *this* notesfile, it's OK by the female contributers here. So
    there :-}.
    	Mez
    

    re: .10
    It's nice of you to produce pointers to other notes files when topics
    come up. If the discussion continues here, it's obvious that a
    different class of people (ie - us here) find it interesting, and
    the discussion can be continued from the point of view indigenous
    to this file.
    
    Indicating other conference is good. Telling me/us/someone to go
    over there, and not here, to discuss a topic, is unwaranted.
    
    Is that an understandable difference? (question to various persons
    who seem to disagree, not just Steve)
    	Mez

Is anyone actually letting the men *decide* what is being discussed
in this conference?

Martin_who_doesn't_care_what_is_being_discussed_as_long_as_it's_interesting

    re .13
    No but they are free to talk if they want to...:-)

    Re: .12, others
    
    I guess I have a different philosophy on running a topical
    conference than some other people.  That's fine - the moderators
    of WOMANNOTES can run it any darn way they please.  I simply
    offered my views based on how I run the conferences I moderate.
    
    An analogy was brought up in MENNOTES to a men's magazine such
    as Esquire.  Doesn't Esquire discuss all sorts of topics that are
    of interest to men?  My response was that conferences, at least
    MENNOTES, were NOT magazines intended for specific audiences, but
    rather an exchange of information and ideas about particular
    topics.  To me there is a lot of difference between the two concepts.
    But I can also understand that others don't start from the same
    basic assumptions I do.
    
    One point I'd like to make, though.  Nearly all of the complaints
    about moderator "pushiness" I have seen in various conferences are
    from those who have never taken on moderator responsibility themselves.
    
    I openly admit that I have been pushier than I should be in
    directing people away from conferences - I promise not to do it
    anymore in conferences I don't moderate.  I'll just cross my fingers 
    and hope that noters show SOME reasonable discretion when choosing 
    a conference in which to enter a note.  Of course, in conferences
    I DO moderate, I will continue to guide noters according to the
    concensus of the conference moderators.
    
    				Steve

For what it's worth, I think that any topic is alright for this conference.
My view of this notesfile is that it's for the discussion of anything
relating to women's issues; that's not a well-defined term, and that's ok,
because it keeps the field open.

If everyone starts talking about lawn care, the discussion will either move
to the appropriate notesfile (to include other interested parties), or
people will use the NEXT-UNSEEN key (which is fine, because no one is
interested in everything), or the notesfile will close down (because it's
gotten too general and no one's interested anymore).  I suspect that it'll
be a long time before the latter happens.

This conference is different from others; it has a different perspective. It
isn't (or shouldn't be) limited to one topic, or set of topics. It's here
for women (and interested men) to discuss anything of interest to them,
anything that affects them, and to do it in a safe place. I believe that
being "in a room of one's own" was one of the original goals of this
conference, and than means that *any* topic is relevant.

					-- hs

I like to think of the appropriateness of a topic this way:

If the view of a woman on the topic MAY be unique because of gender,
it's appropriate. 

Thus, if a woman might see some aspect of FORTRAN differently
because of her being a woman, then that issue belongs here for
discussion. 

And if in doubt, I'd vote to put it in and see what happends.

Too many of us don't discuss things for the wrong reasons, like fear
of being chastised just for bringing it up. 

One (mans) opinion.


	~Mike

    re: .18
    What if the view of a topic (Fortran) is "familiar" (read: men have
    it too), but the tone of the discussion is different? What if this
    is the only notes file a woman feels discussing her views in, even
    if they happen to be the same views espoused by men, because 
    other notesfiles are less supportive of women getting a chance to
    air and discuss their views?
    
    I think Martin said it best. This is an interesting discussion,
    but thank goodness its not having any impact on the way this conference
    is moderated (which is quite well).
    	Mez

    To add a second to .19
    
    It is entirely possible that a hypothetical woman might bring
    up a technical subject here because because she felt more assured
    of getting a friendly non condescending response.

    Hal, you said it pretty well in .17.  I had been trying to put
    together a reply to this topic, but now I don't have to.  Thanks.
    
    	-Ellen

    re .19, .20:
    
    (I'm going to get clobbered for this but...) Seems to me that
    notesfiles are the perfect way to avoid prejudice (racist, sexist,
    ageist, etc.) In NOTES you are judged by what you write and only
    what you write. Scared of being patronized? Use initials.
    
    To continue the FORTRAN metaphor, I really don't understand why
    a woman wanting to discuss FORTRAN would find the FORTRAN conference
    to be "less supportive of women getting a chance to air and discuss
    their views".
    
    But that to me is not the question. Whatever gets discussed here
    is up to the participants. If women would rather discuss programming
    with other women rather than other programmers, fine.
    
    What I would like to learn is "what are women's issues?" Rape, incest,
    discrimination, etc spring immediately to mind. Is FORTRAN a woman's
    issue?
    
    To reiterate, I am NOT saying that WOMANNOTES should just discuss
    "women's issues" (if there is indeed such a thing).
    
                                                   
                  /
                 (  ___
                  ) ///
                 /
                  

    re .22
   
    I don't think I expressed myself clearly enough in .20. I don't
    think this is the apropriate place to discuss Fortran or Automobiles,
    or Windsurfing or Science Fiction or any other topic that has it's
    own notes file (and even many that don't). What I meant was that 
    someone might ask here and be directed to the appropriate place.
    My appologies for my lack of care in choosing my words.
    
    It would be foolish if the contributors to this conference felt
    that "since I am a woman and this interests me it can be discussed
    here" I think that attitude is just as sexist as the older attitude
    that there were only certain topics that were approriate for
    women to talk about.
    

    Your point is a good one and I don't think it deserves the type
    of answers that would require flame suit protection.
    

    Bonnie

    AS we go back and forth on this issue it seems to me that once again
    we have the women saying it's OK to say what you wish and some men
    trying to erect walls around what is alright to discuss. I agree
    with Steve and others that using a technical notesfile for technical
    problems is more likely to reach the right audience, but...technical
    work related issues have never been brought up. It's the broad social
    issues that have generated the battle. I see this file as a wide
    ranging discussion, by it's very nature it may hit on a variety
    of unrelated topics.
    
    If the memebers of a conference don't think a topic is appropriate they
    don't read it or reply to it. That will stop a discussion faster than
    a write lock on the topic. A pointer to a notesfile that might better
    address an issue should always be welcome. It is necessary in work
    related files. I don't want to read PDP11 notes in the VMS conference.
    This is different, this is a mental/emotional sharing conference
    and is not bounded by the same limits. Liesl 
    
    This started out to be 0.2 and ended up a dime.