Conference turris::womannotes-v2

    I agree with you, and I think this note is a good idea.
    
    Helen.

I want it to work; gosh I want it to work. But the truth of the matter is that
if male-type persons feel free to make nasty remarks in this notesfile about me
or other women, then I'm going to have to be pretty strong to let it all hang
out. 

It's like catcalls. It's fine with me if a guy 'wants my body/thinks women are
doing the wrong thing'. But I don't want 'catcalls/advice from above in this
notesfile'. And I don't see how to do anything about it. All the same issues on
'what to do about catcalls' apply to 'what to do about obnoxiousness in
womannotes'. Ignore it? Retort?

How do you stay strong in womannotes? How do you carve out your space?

	Mez

< Note 174.2 by ULTRA::ZURKO "UI:Where the rubber meets the road" >


>And I don't see how to do anything about it. All the same issues on
>'what to do about catcalls' apply to 'what to do about obnoxiousness in
>womannotes'. Ignore it? Retort?

>How do you stay strong in womannotes? How do you carve out your space?

Mez,

I totally agree with you on this problem.

Some of my replys to seemingly innocuous notes is of the "final staw"
type of response.  I have noticed that there have been a lot of males
discussing topics "of interest to women" in this file lately and I would
like to change the balance a little but I do not know how to when every
note is responded to by x number of males that bombast the women with
their (the males) idea of what is right is right and anything else is 
not even in the realm of "to be considered" options.

I have in the past tried to ignore the noters who are nit pickers and 
on a few occasions I have retorted (this number is no where near as high
as the number I have wanted to reply to).

As for staying strong in =wn= I have found that I need outside support
to be able to come into this notes conference and stand my ground - it
ain't easy being a standard bearer.  I think that the women of =wn= need
to keep supporting one another and taking the torch when it is pasted.
If we share the effort it will be easier for us to have the strength to
continue repeating one more time ....

_peggy

		(-)
		 |
			The Goddess is in us and in the Earth
			and the Earth has been around for a long
			time and she is still willing to fight
			back.

    
    Peggy,
    
    I admire your strength!  It strikes me as sadly ironic, though, that you
    feel you have to get outside support in order to be strong in
    womannotes.  This place ought to feel supportive and reasonably
    safe.  Instead here I often feel as I do when I walk home on a dark
    street - wondering if I'll make it home safely.
    
    The way I'm feeling about it is this:
    
    Sometimes it feels like the right time to fight, to stand up and
    say, "Mr. x, I feel like this about what you've just said..."  But
    I mainly feel like I should not *have to* do that in Womannotes.  I think
    I should be free to choose not to fight.  In Catherine's wonderful
    hot button note, I heard her saying that it really makes her angry
    when people misread and/or twist her words.  That's a lot of what
    I'm feeling right now.  I have never said that men's opinions have
    no value.  What I said in .0 was that sometimes the way in which
    some men express their opinions hurts.  And I would like to feel
    like there's a place where I can avoid that pain.  I also feel like
    that is a completely honorable and reasonable request.
                                             
    Now.. perhaps someone will actually use this note to ask for some
    kind of support or advice...
                                                          
    There is so much peace and power we can find when we let ourselves
    find community.
    
    Justine             
    
    

>    Now.. perhaps someone will actually use this note to ask for some
>    kind of support or advice...

I just did! Thanx Peggy and Justine. I feel much better. And I'll be back when
I don't!
	Mez

    You are all right - we shouldn't have to explain the same things
    over and over and over again.  And it shouldn't be that 95% of the
    notes that get me _this_ mad are written by _men_!
    
    I come here to be able to talk about all my frustrations I face
    at work and home.  In those settings, I do _not_ feel free to talk
    about them; I need to save my anger and my arguments for the vitally
    important things that happen in the hostile environments.  If I
    were to squander it all every time...
    
    But you know, I want to be able to be angry here without ANYONE
    accusing me of "hating", "stereotyping", "misinterpreting" [uh-oh,
    there's that old knee jerking] "ALL" men - cause then I'm required
    to go on the womannotes-world-wide love-in where I say, "oooh, no,
    no I think you're swell and I could _never_ be angry at _you_" when
    I'd rather say "read my [expletive deleted] words, fool!  I say
    'I get angry with those who do [x]', and you tell me I shouldn't
    be mad at all men; are you implying that I am stereotyping all men
    because _YOU_ think all man _do_ [x] behavior? After all, _I_ never
    said all men do that, and for that matter, what the heck is happening
    that when I come to womannotes I spend my time telling you that
    not all men are nasty creatures..."
    
    
    It is good to know that others [especially some of my most highly
    respected sisters] get mad.  I just wish that I could spend less
    of my emotional energy here focussed on getting involved with what
    men say and more in heated discussion with _women_.
    
    Ag.  I'm going to go pollute my lungs now...
    Lee

    If I feel my remarks will help anyone clarify their own point of
    view, or give them new fodder to ruminate (mentally speaking), or
    simply clarify where I stand - then I enter them
    
    If I feel I have nothing to add that has not already been said,
    or I will be adding more fuel to the fire, or generating more heat
    than light - I shut up
    
    I regret that sometimes things get icky and difficult and some people
    have to explain, and explain their explanations, and explain the
    explanations of their explanations - and still nobody says anything
    new (just rehashing and restating, you can tell they're not even
    trying to look at other viewpoints - although I'd never demand they
    accept new viewpoints, just try them out).......
    
    but nothing's perfect...so I just hop off to joyoflex or something
    else that doesn't get my hackles up as some conversations here do.
    
    -Jody

    As much as I'd prefer NOT to admit it, I've been hitting a lot of
    NEXT UNSEEN in recent months.  When I discoverd =WN= earlier this
    year, I was so excited I could hardly wait to read it.  Now, I find
    myself occasionally flinching because instead of supporting each
    other and respecting each other's views, opinions, and realities,
    I too often see people getting torched for their particular beliefs,
    or enmeshed in "trying to explain" or vindicate the reasoning
    behind their comments.  In turn, the explanations totally get off
    track of the original note and we've got layer upon layer of BS
    that is totally unnecessary and irrelevant to the issues being
    discussed.  I, for one, am here to read, understand, and support
    the women who turn here for help and TLC.  I would also like to
    support the men who turn here for help, but sometimes it's hard.
    
    I appreciate having someone enter a note on this topic because it's
    bothered me for awhile.  I wish I'd thought of it, and I'm glad
    to find out that I'm not the only one who feels this way.  Perhaps
    the next step is to ask "what can we do about it?"
                                                       
    In Support-
    Barb

    ditto.
    
    I am trying new tactics so I don't get so angry that I can't think
    or see straight.  At the first sign that a man response is going
    into the realm of blaming the victim or invalidating women's feelings
    and experiences, I stop reading that reply and continue to the next.
    
    It is hard not to be VERY suspicious of men's motives in this file
    when it is a man that instigates a question about why women do or
    don't like going to male gynecologists...I mean is this some kind
    of veiled voyeurism/pornography or something?  
    
    When I find I'm getting totally twisted into a pretzel with rage,
    I usually go offline to one of my =wn= pals to find a forum where
    I can let the flames die down.
    
    Given the fact that women have such a strong role in my life, I
    just don't really care a whole lot to hear about men's opinions.
    And this has nothing to do with a value judgement of whether they're
    right or wrong, they just don't interest me that much.  So I get
    perturbed with myself when I find, that out of anger, I'm giving
    away alot of my energy.
    
    Glad that this topic is here.
    
    Laura
    

    
    
    Barb,
    
    I, too, find myself hitting "next unseen" much more often than I
    would like to, but I am sick of all this bantering between the men
    and women that participate in this file.
    
    
    ****
    
    Lee,
    
    Please understand that what I have to say is not directed at you,
    but at several women in this conference.  Your reply just seemed
    to sum up best what I believe these women are saying:

   >But you know, I want to be able to be angry here without ANYONE
   >accusing me of "hating", "stereotyping", "misinterpreting" [uh-oh,
   >there's that old knee jerking] "ALL" men 
    
   >what the heck is happening when I come to womannotes I spend my 
   >time telling you that not all men are nasty creatures..."
    
    
    In my opinion, some of you [and you know who you are] appear to
    convey a self-righteous attitude in your notes/replies.  You lash
    out at a man for common courtesies, i.e., holding a door open.
    It's getting a little sickening.
    
    I enjoyed this conference, but it's becoming a chore to read.  I
    don't think it's difficult for anyone to understand the need some 
    women have for a shoulder to lean on or to seek advice from another 
    woman.  On the other hand, if a man has valuable advice, he should 
    be able to enter it without any head-bashing from any of you.  
    Granted, some men who participate here [and they know who they are 
    as well] do get carried away.  Need we take it out on the entire
    male populace of this conference?
    
    Again, I offer you the contents of my note #146.0:
    
          		JUSTIFICATION ???

		When the other fellow acts that way,
			he's ugly;
		When you do it, it's nerves,
		When he's set in his ways, he's obstinate;
		When you are, it's just firmness.
		When he doesn't like your friends,
			he's prejudiced;
		When you don't like his, you are simply
			showing good judgment of human nature.
		When he tries to be accommodating, he's
			polishing the apple;
		When you do it, you're using tact.
		When he takes time to do things, he
			is dead slow;
		When you take ages, you are deliberate.
		When he picks flaws, he's cranky;
		When you do, you're discriminating.


    Think about it!  Now, can we get back to being a productive, 
    supportive noting community and end this _WAR_ some of you seem to 
    have declared?
    
    Beckie
    

    I agree with the previous notes except .10.  There are times when
    I have seen women enter a note about something only women can
    experience.  oh lets say......pregnancy.  there are a couple of
    men who have to comment!  I don't feel that a man who knows this
    woman who has this same situation blah blah... should be answering.
    to me it is still his interpretation of how she feels. he isn't
    experiencing it.  Those kinds of entries I kp3. This file has given
    me so much strength and insight into being a woman and I truely
    treasure it!  But the frustration!  I really don't want to hear
    a mans opinion on every entry. A woman entering anything in this
    "womensnotes" file should not have to defend how they feel.  this
    is supposed to be a safe place.  we should be allowed to feel our
    pain, learn from our sisters and then go on. If we are feeling anger
    towards "some" men, we shouldn't have to qualify that it is not ALL
    men being referred too every time.
    we are intellegent women and *we* know when we discuss some mans
    action that the women talking don't mean that ALL men are being
    referred to.  only the men question that. 
    this is supposed to be a womans place, with men as visitors.
    
    vivian

       RE: .10 - you are not ALONE. I too see the problem as being both
       sides. If a man enters a reply I don't like I can ignore it
       unless it's something I decide it's worth arguing about. If I do
       then I argue. Just like I would in person only maybe a bit more
       freely. So let a man make a statement you don't like, ignore it
       and there won't be a long diatribe from both sides. Many times
       folks make statements they know will cause a flurry beacause that
       gains them attention. You defeat their purpose when you ignore
       it.

       I'm not one for all women groups except on an occasional basis. I
       prefer the free for all of everyone being included, gay,
       straight, male, female. I am not a separatist and don't care to
       become one. liesl

    RE: .10 - Men opening doors, etc.
    
    You know, no one ever slammed a man for opening a door. Not once.
    Not ever.
    
    What they *did* remark on was the *attitude* of said man, and
    the manner of opening said door. *And* that how the deed was done
    NOT who done the deed, determined *their* attitude toward the doer.
    
    I am constantly amazed at how views of attitude metamorphose into
    views of men in the second telling.
    
    This entire reply dosen't belong in this note; I abjectly apologize,
    but I couldn't help it.
    
    Dawn
    

    
   Dawn,
    
    That is not entirely true. I do recall one note where the author
    implied she would ignore or be rude or even let the door shut
    in the person's face. I don't recall right now where the note was
    but I believe I read it.
    
    Bonnie

    
    I don't remember that note, but I believe that it's there.
    Interesting that one woman saying that she would react rudely to
    a man's polite offer to open a door gets turned into - You feminists
    won't even accept a man's kind offer to hold open a door! -
    
    Argh!
    
    Justine

 This is a version of a note that was written in another conference.  I 
 have posted it here, because I think it addresses the behavior
 that has been brought up here.

{some background:  the note was written as a result of a noter lamenting 
the "schism" he felt was developing in the file between the "politically 
correct" types and certain others.}

It is an observable cultural phenomenon that many people hear statements
from others and somehow jump to the conclusion that any statement of a
given position automatically implies that all other points of view are
wrong and that anyone who doesn't think the same thing is being demanded
to change.  This kind of assumption creates a "schism" when in fact
there is only a difference. The "womyn" episode cited in a previous
note is a good example.  {more background:  a female noter used the term
"wimmin" in a note about the upcoming election, and was rebuked by a man
for this "misspelling".  The exchange set off a very heated debate.} 
This is what happened (from my perspective): 

	A: What do you wimmin think?
 	B: "Wimmin" is not a proper word.
	A: That's ok, I like to use it.
 	B: I'm going to correct you when you use it.
 	A: I'd like you to let me say what I want without correcting me.
 	B: Why are you demanding that I call you "wimmin"? 

Does anyone see how an artificial dichotomy has been created here?  A 
simple statement of personal feelings has been distorted into something
absurd, which has then been attacked.  The creation was so successful,
that I'm sure there are people in this file who remember it as being an
argument about how all of the females in this file are want to be called
"womyn" or "wimmin" and are mortally offended by anyone using the word "
"woman".

The agitation that some members have expressed about how they are being 
"corrected" for making sexist, racist, or other "politically incorrect"
statements is also, in my mind, about a similarly non-existent argument.
Here's the standard exchange (as I see it):

	A: <something insensitive*>
	B: What you said hurt me.
	A: Why are people demanding that I act in a PC manner?

[*"insensitive" is used here to mean "unaware of feeling", specifically 
the feelings of someone else.  This does not mean maliciousness, just a 
lack of awareness.  I'm sure there are many things that people have 
feelings about that I am unaware of.]

Does anyone see that in this example, someone is making a strictly 
personal statement that expresses a sense of asserting themselves and 
their feelings, and it is interpreted as an attack on others?  It seems 
to be some kind of assumption that if one asserts the validity of 
oneself one is automatically attacking others, as if the two things 
cannot possibly co-exist.  Lesbians are particularly familiar with
the phenomenon, since we often get the following kind of 
exchange:

	A: I love women.
	B: Why do you hate men?

I'd like to suggest that when someone feels that someone else is making 
a crazy and demanding statement, they take the time to look at what is 
actually being said, and why it seems to be so irrational.  Often that 
is because there are many layers of unseen interpretation filtering out 
the simple reality of it, and a lot of good flame goes into attacking a 
non-existent bug-eyed monster.

I do not think human beings are fundamentally arbitrary.  If anything
does not make sense, it's a good time to stop and think that there must
be a frame of reference from which the statement DOES make sense, rather
than dismissing it as something not worth understanding or as a thing
that must be "corrected" to align with how you think things really are.
It is at these points of greatest bafflement that we have the
opportunity to obtain the greatest understanding of someone different
from ourselves. 

    in re .15
    
    um, Justine, the reference in this particular string didn't refer
    to feminists per se....what was said was 'lash out at men for common
    courtesies i.e. holding a door open'....and there were an awful
    lot of very negative comments about such things as men's possible
    motives for door opening, that *some* people could so interpret,
    whether it was meant that way by the author or not.
    
    Bonnie

    re: .16
    
    Catherine,
    
    Thank you for your sensibility and insights into the way we get
    side-tracked by debating words rather than the real issues.
    
    Laura
    

    RE: 17 and another...
    
    Bonnie,
    
    I'd like to see that one note that attacked men for opening doors.
    My impression of that enitre discussion was that women (not ALL
    women) were trying to make a point about an *attitude* which 
    is put forth by men (not ALL men) regarding the opening of doors
    for women.
    
    RE: last few
    
    Yes. That's the point I was trying to make here. There seems to
    be some view of feminists as women who will use their karate training
    to deck any man who *dares* to open a door for her. Where this came
    from, I don't know. Women say "We don't *need* men to open doors
    for us." And somehow it is magically transformed into "Look, you
    (%^(^*^ oppressive SOB, just *try* to open that door, and I'll
    drop kick your face." 
    
    Not even *close* to the same thing.
    
    --DE
    

    Dawn,
    
    and the point raised by the woman who mentioned door opening
    earlier was that she perceived that men were being (mocked,
    put down, what ever) by women in re the doors issue. My point
    is just that...the notes could well be taken in that light,
    and a person male or female who read that into the notes should
    not be flamed, criticised...what ever..
    
    Bonnie

    
    Justine,
    
    If you would reread my note, you will find that I made mention of
    *some women* not *feminists*.
    
    
    Dawn,
    
    The point is this: it IS a "perceived" attitude.  Maybe those of
    you that I had in mind when I wrote my original note are not aware 
    of just how negatively perceived some of these writings are.  Try
    to remember these are readers, not listeners.  The tone of someone's
    voice is not heard but perceived.
    

    Alan,
    
    Thanks.
    
    - Beckie    

re:
	.20 - .24.  A gentle reminder that this is the FWO string.

    Having just realized that this is the FWO string, I have deleted
    174.21.
    
    My apologies.
    
    Dawn
    

    Bonnie, Beckie:
    
    I am obviously not able to properly explain my meaning here.
    I leave the field to those more able than I.
    
    Dawn
    

    
    re: .25
    
    To my knowledge, the names Beckie and Bonnie have always been that
    of females.

    One more able than I was Ann (as usual!).
    
    No, you cannot tell what's behind words if the person is not
    present. Being in the *presence* of the individual makes
    all the difference. 
    
    Thanks, Ann.
    
    --DE
    

    
    Dawn,
    
    Isn't that what I said in .23?
    
    - Beckie

    Well, uhm, .23 was written by Bonnie. So I'm still confused.
    

    
    Well, my humble apologies.  My last response should have referred
    to  .24.
    
    May I never make a typographical error again!
    

    RE: .34
    
    Surely you didn't think I was going to search through this
    whole note trying to find the REPLY I thought *might possibly*
    have been the one to which you referred?
    
    I shall dutifully go read .24 now.
    
    Thank you for making it clear which reply you meant.
    
    

    RE: .24,.34 and some others
    
    OK - you percieved the writings differently than I did.
    
    You read notes which slammed men for opening doors for women.
    
    I read notes which had no problem with anyone opening a door
    for anyone else, so long as it is done with a courteous *attitude*.
    
    Ain't people interesting.
    
    --DE
    

I had ambivalent feelings about Womannotes for a while, and this note 
has made me want to make a statement of my feelings, also to clarify them 
for myself:

- Womannotes is not a safe space for women, but I don't care because I
  don't believe there is any safe space in the world outside of my own
  home; 

- Womannotes is not a safe space for men either, and that's fine with me 
  because it's not their space anyway, though some of them may be trying to 
  make it so;

- Ignoring notes that anger me is not a solution for me, though I admire
  the people who have the strength to do so. If somebody's answer angers
  me, I will say so. I cannot let stand something which I find patently
  unfair or untrue, even if that is playing in the hands of the person who
  entered the note that is offensive to me; 

- For the first time in my life I, the loner, feel I belong to a community:
  I read the other women's notes and think I am one of them and recognize
  myself in what they say. I also feel this in some men's notes, but less
  frequently. I know that, not being a man, I cannot presume to understand
  or have intuitive feelings about everything they write.

- I have dropped out of Womannotes several times because I got tired of the 
  discussions, and of the feeling that some men where trying to take over      
    this file and rule it. I won't do so anymore (well I am going away for
    3 months, but that's temporary): damnit, this is MY SPACE, or it
    wouldn't be called Womannotes. 

- Every single thing I do in my life is geared to my being a woman, both 
  because the society I live in has defined me as such, and expects
  from me certain behaviours, and because of my biological nature, which
  has embodied my brain into a female body. The sort of communication we have
  here is VITAL to my understanding of who I am, and to my better perception
  of everybody else - humankind if you want, not just men and women.

Joana
                     

    Thanks, Joana - you really said a lot in a short note. I can
    identify and empathize with all you said.
    
    --DE
    

    re .36
    
    Dawn,
    
    I read both kinds of notes. My point was that it wasn't unreasonable
    for some one to have felt that some of those notes put men down,
    tho I entirely agree that the main thrust of the notes was the
    (perceived) intent of the door opener.
    
    Bonnie

    
    While we seem to be clarifying things, may I say that I spoke to
    Dawn off-line this morning to "clear the air" as it may be.
    
    My point was, to paraphrase what Bonnie just stated, it wasn't 
    unreasonable for someone to *perceive* those notes negatively, as
    I did.
    
    We all seem to have very strong personalities.  In talking with
    Dawn this morning, we agreed that almost anything could be said
    to almost anyone *if* it was said correctly.  I think, maybe, our
    strong personality traits get in our way of this sometime. I know
    mine do.

    So, if I offended anyone with my viewpoint, I apologize.  And, I
    hope I've said this correctly.
    
    Beckie
    

< Note 174.37 by SHIRE::BIZE >
                             -< My Women Note... >-


>- For the first time in my life I, the loner, feel I belong to a community:
>  I read the other women's notes and think I am one of them and recognize
>  myself in what they say. I also feel this in some men's notes, but less
>  frequently. I know that, not being a man, I cannot presume to understand
>  or have intuitive feelings about everything they write.

>- I have dropped out of Womannotes several times because I got tired of the 
>  discussions, and of the feeling that some men where trying to take over      
>    this file and rule it. I won't do so anymore (well I am going away for
>    3 months, but that's temporary): damnit, this is MY SPACE, or it
>    wouldn't be called Womannotes. 


Joana,

	I want to send you a hug across the wire ( | ) this is the best
	I can do.

	Your statements about being a loner but feeling you belong here
	is probably the main reason I can't seem to leave =wn= for very
	long - I get loney.  After all how many women are there outside
	of DEC who would laugh at a VMS/ULTRIX joke much less understand
	it.

	After reading what you said out this being "MY SPACE" my first
	thought was that this is a territorial/protective response.  I
	think that I may be right - 'cause I am not about to give this
	conference up - its not much but it is home in many ways.

	When the day comes that I no longer have to skip over replys to
	keep from getting knee-jerked into responding may be the day I
	stop sounding soooooo hostile (I know it may never come).

	Good luck in the Network training and come back to =wn= in January
	we should be in yet another phase of "process" discussion by then
	(it seems to be like the seasons and happens every three months or
	so).

	_peggy
		 o
		(-)
		 |
			Maybe the LABRIS is just a big hug - heeheehee

	                     

I'd like to talk about validation. Validating validation, if you will. I tried
to reply to the statement that went something like:

'if I can invalidate a feeling, it wasn't valid'

and got all balled up. I tried replying because I respected the note and
phrasing of the author, and felt he deserved some conversation. But I didn't
feel like getting all balled up in a place with all its own problems. So here I
am.

Where I seemed to lead myself was: 

1. Validation is important because as a woman I've been raised to value
relationships. And I think that's fine. And getting validation means building
bonds, understanding some piece of the life experience, and so on.

2. In theory, no one _should_ be able to invalidate a feeling. I believe in the
primacy of my experience. However, I also believe in the primacy of _your_
experience. So, if our experiences are at odds, that's ok, as long as we
recognise our experiences as separate. They don't invalidate each other. But
they don't validate each other.

Can anybody help this women? Offer scholarly feminist tomes on the subject?
	Mez

    Mez,
    
    What follows is my truth about validation.  It tries to encapsulate
    my current reality.  As I am still evolving, I'm sure it's not finished
    yet.
    
    	Ultimately all validation comes from myself.  No one but myself
    can invalidate my feelings.
    
    	If another [or others] find my conclusions invalid it is the other's
    reality, not mine.  If I allow myself to be worn down and swayed by
    this other reality, then _I_ have invalidated my own conclusions.
    
    	This is not to say that I never seek reassurance of or challenge
    to my worldview.  Nor does it imply an immovable rigour in my outlook.
    I frequently seek constructive input, and I frequently receive
    un-solicited input.  Both can be either bane or balm to my convictions.
    
    	All feelings are valid [which does not imply that all feelings
    are rational].  Hence the statement 'if I can invalidate a feeling,
    it wasn't valid' is, to me, roughly equivalent to 'if we are having
    a drought now, we have never had rain.'  Feelings, and the weather,
    do change.
    
    	To view today's convictions as my ultimate reality would be
    to stop evolving.
    
    [ahem] As to where this all came from, well, I'm very catholic [note
    small'c'] in my sources.  I read voraciously everything from kleenex
    boxes to encyclopedias and experience that 'aha!' when it comes.
    Most of where it has all come from would be countless hours with
    friends...late nights, long afternoons, hurried lunches...talking
    and arguing and learning.  That and some quiet times of my own for
    reflection.
    
      Ann
    
    
    
    
    

    	Ann, 
    	
    	I like that.  I think you've summed up pretty much how I feel about
    it.  Ultimately I am responsible for what I feel/believe., but it's
    nice to know, "I'm not alone."
    
    	I've been much of a loner in my life and validation has not
    been historically of great importance to me.  One of the things that 
    my pregnancy has done for me is to show to me the value of validation.
    ("When you were three months along did your stomach start itching?"
    "How much weight did you gain in the first trimester?" etc.)
    Ultimately I have the reponsibility for deciding whether or not I think
    something is wrong/unusual, but it sure does help, when I hear things
    that say "Your right on track.  I felt that too."  Validation of
    feelings works in a the same way for me.  
    
    tlh
    

Ann, you've summed it up beautifully!

Liz

    Ann - that was great.  One point that you touched on is that
    ultimately we're responsible for our own feelings.  If we allow
    someone else's words or actions to invalidate those feelings 
    then we are abdicating our personal power and responsibility
    for our feelings.  For me, the result is always a feeling of
    powerlessness and choicelessness (is this a word?).
    
    Nanci

I haven't said much for a while, but that doesn't mean I wasn't thinking...

I started several times writing notes, and then got hopelessly entangled in 
sentences which, because they were trying so hard not to give the slightest
possible offence to anybody, lost all meaning and most of their grammar.

Most of what I could have said in The Processing Topic and the KKK note has
been said very eloquently by others, and I am glad the discussion there allows
so many articulate people to voice their opinions. It's extremely enlightening
to get this kaleidoscopic view of a topic.

Yes, there's lots of aggressivity, both below and above the surface, but it
doesn't really matter. What matters, at the end of the day, is that =WN= has
added to our awareness of the world around us and how sexism - latent and
blatant - affects all our lives.

I feel a bond with many persons in this file, most of them women, whether I 
agree with them or not. I understand better who I am, because, through the 
thoughts of others, I clarify my own feelings about certain subjects. For 
example, the discussions around abortion, cat-calls, raising non-sexist chil-
dren, equal employment opportunities, adoption, rape, gun control, mommy-track,
have obliged me to admit to myself, and sometimes to others, my true feelings 
about these subjects.

It's good to have =WN=. 

Joana