Conference turris::womannotes-v3

    Power is the ability to control.
    
    Yes they do, in some aspects.
    
    again, yes they did have it, and do.
    
    Most certainly they want it.  if they didnt, whats all the fuss?
    
    Yes, I believe they can "get it".  By earning it.
    
    I wouldnt know if it would help or not.  I am a male.
    

    Many women do not have the power that is respected in this society. 
    Money.  Political weight.  A constituency that "counts".  They don't
    hold high enough positions of control in great enough quantity to be 
    seen as powerful in any way, shape, or form.....
    
    I've seen women wield alternative forms of power in lieu of the
    standardly-respected ones.  Some of these powers can be wielded
    negatively or positively.  One is the power to please or be
    tremendously feisty and averse.  Another is the power of sex.  One is
    the power of support - which can be given or withheld.  In other words,
    much of the power women DO have is the power to make life easier or
    more difficult for others.  Not the power to change or the power to
    force people to do anything.  Not the power that counts in this
    society.
    
    And I don't believe that mothers have "power over their children". 
    That's not power.  That's responsibility towards the future.  It's a
    gias - something they must fulfill to the best of their ability if they
    have a conscience or suffer guilt forever.  It's not within their power
    to CHOOSE how they do it, because if they are positive-thinking
    future-oriented people the choice is already made.
    
    Women go from being the daughters of men to being the wives of men to
    being the mothers of men.  Until women can be defined in, of, by, and
    for, themselves.....they will not have identities.  And without an
    identity, you cannot have power that you can call your own.
    
    -Jody

    
    re -1
    
    
    I disagree with your last few statements.  Women do have power in
    today's society.  However, each person's definitions of power are
    different.
    
    Some of the ways I define power are the same as you had defined in
    your note.  
    
    I guess what I am really objecting to is your statement about 
    women being daughters of men, then wives of men, then mothers of men.
    
    I do not necessarily think of men when I think of power.  And I
    certainly would never had made the statement above.  Maybe it
    is because I was raised without a father.  I was raised to be
    a very independent person who was always told that "I did not
    NEED a man to live".
    
    I feel that women have the ultimate power -- the power to give
    birth to another human being.  Sure it isn't considered to
    be "power" in society's terms ie money, prestige, etc.
    
    I have the power to be whoever I want to be.  I have the power
    to achieve the goals I set for myself.  I have the power to
    live an indepenent happy life.  I also have the power to 
    start my own family.  If you start to think of it women in general
    do have power and a hell of a lot of it.  I remember reading somewhere
    I think in the realestate notesfile that women own 60+% of the
    realestate in the United States.  That is power. The obstacle is in         
    achieving and taking full advantage of that power.  
    
    I do think that society's attitudes surrounding women and power are
    changing.  Maybe not changing fast enough for most of us, but they
    certainly are changing.  Just look at the great abortion debate and
    how that is affecting the political situation of our country.  The
    women of this nation are coming together and telling our politicians
    that if they don't wise up on this issue they will not be voted back
    into office.  
    
    Michele
                                                     

    
    i agree with jody
    

    RE: .3
    
    I, too, was raised by a single female parent not to "need" a man 
    to live. I was also raised to be independent and to have a career.
    
    But if we are speaking of power as the society currently looks on
    power - money, prestige, etc.:
    
    It's very clear to me where the power base is. 
    
    And it isn't with women.
    
    
    
    
    Do we change the power base? Do we change our definition of "power"?
    
    Do women begin to realize a different power in ourselves? And do we
    then work to make *that* power the power-of-choice? To make the word
    "overpower" obsolete? 
    
    

    re: .3
> I remember reading somewhere
>    I think in the realestate notesfile that women own 60+% of the
>    realestate in the United States.  
    
    I remember reading it somewhere too, but I'm willing to bet it's not
    what we think (i.e. they generalized a convenient statistic).  I doubt
    women own 60% of all houses in America, although they may co-share the
    deed.  I doubt women own much of the land that is used for businesses
    or leased for businesses since women don't generally run large
    businesses in the U.S.  I'm sure it was quoted from Newsweek or
    something, but without further details on how they got that information
    I doubt it means what it looks like it means, otherwise the politicians
    would be kowtowing to the new powerbase left and right.
    
    -Jody
    

    
    re 2 & 4
    
    Do you folks feel that a woman does not have an identity unless
    she is identified with a man?
    That is the feeling I get from Jody's note.  Also, were you raised
    in a traditional maleasheadofhousehold family?
    
    Michele

    
    re 6
    
    I would tend to agree with you that the stat is misleading or maybe
    even false.  But one can manipulate stats to make them show anything.
    
    After thinking about this all of the women in my family are the
    sole owners of thier property.  Each of them have both a primary
    residence and a vacation home.  It is interesting that only one
    of them is married (my grandmother).  
    
    Just a thought,
    Michele

re: .7

>    Do you folks feel that a woman does not have an identity unless
>    she is identified with a man?
    
    That's how society seems to treat us.  Social standing is often based
    on the father's standing, his earnings, his community stature.  There's
    pressure to find a husband and settle down or you must be "undesirable"
    in some way.  The father gives the bride away, in many cases, to her
    husband.  Who defines her financial standing if she decides to be a
    homemaker/childrearer.  And she supports him in the ways she can,
    emotionally and so forth, and glows wonderfully at his successes,
    because they're indirectly hers.  Or something.  And then there is 
    pressure to have a son.  Somewhere I read that a common response in the
    delivery room when fathers are greeted with the news of a daughter they
    respond with "better luck next time", or merely a crestfallen look.
    
    There's books and books and books on how women are defined in our
    society, by the men they are attached to.  Many feminist books cover
    this in-depth.  
    
    -Jody

    re .1 AMARTIN 
    
    >Yes, I believe they can "get it".  By earning it.
    
    You mean women are supposed to earn what men get just by being born?
    Unfortunately, that's a very common attitude.
    
    I think women have absolute power by virtue of their ability to bear
    children, (the number one goal of life), by virtue of the fact that men 
    are wildly and obsessively attracted to them with an intensity that 
    generally isn't found in the other direction, and by virtue of the fact 
    that, (taking away the culturally created economic dependence), most of 
    them can take care of themselves, (and others!), and run their lives 
    alone much more easily and happily than most men can.
    
    "Because nature has endowed woman with so much power, society,
    thankfully, has accorded her very little".
    
    That was a quote from a book I read years ago.  Sexism to me is man's
    attempt to balance things out and *make* woman need him as much as he
    automatically needs her.  "To find out what your enemy fears, see what
    he uses to scare you."  
    
    Sexism has traditionally been a successful tool to "scare" women with 
    the threat of abandonment, (and the resultant poverty), if they don't 
    comply with men's wishes.  And as the feminist movement takes away their 
    power to "scare" us, men in general are growing increasingly agitated 
    and uneasy. 
    

    
    
    Wait a minute!  Women are a (major)part of society!  Women plan
    their own weddings, including (or not including) the part where
    they are "given away".  Women elect to use their husbands surname,
    and women make the decision to be homemaker.  
    
    The way I see it, women are selecting their 'identity' as it were,
    by their own choices, decisions and actions.
    
    As far as many men being crestfallen at the birth of a girl-bull.
    A recent survey revealed that slightly more couples preferred a
    girl baby.  
    
    

    
    	I think one area where women are gaining power is in divorce
    	court. Most couples seeking a divorce may split the family
    	home, but in reality that doesn't happen. The male is ordered
    	to pay the up keep of the home, plus furnish a home for himself
    	and pay child support to boot. I know that happened in my case.
    	Sure 50-50 on the sale of the house, but until it sells it's up
    	to the man to keep the roof over his childrens (and ex's) head
    	while trying to find/maintain a place for himself as well as
    	being tagged for the child support. My lawyer told me that was
    	common, for the man to pay for the home until it's sold, while the
    	woman and kid(s) continue to live there. The end result was I
    	had to give up any right to the home in order to live (seeing
    	paying the ex's mortage and my rent plus child support was
    	more than I made a month). So yes, she did/does own the home
    	and as a rusult I'm still renting, tell me who had the power
    	there?  I can't see where I had any!!!
    
    	G_B

    Maybe we need a new topic called Man-power too?
    
    -Jody
    

    
    re:.7
    i believe that in american society today, a woman's power is
    usually derived in some way from a man's and is usually, in any
    event, less than a man's. there are, no doubt, many individual
    women for whom that generalization does not apply. also, one should
    not construe that to mean that i think a woman's power ought or
    should derive from a man's; quite the contrary. i read jody's note
    as a factual statement of her observations which happen to agree
    with my own observations and my documentary researches.
    

    
    re.7
    
    From my personal experience, I had an identity until I got married.
    I became somebody's wife (at parties, people would say "so you are
    xxx's wife, instead of Eva). Then, when I had my daughter, I became
    somebody's mother (at the nursery school, teacher would say "so you are
    xxx's mother, instead of Mrs. MacKay). The only time and place that 
    I am still "me" is at work! I think people don't seem to care too much 
    what I, as an individual, have to offer. They are more interested in
    my family - who I am related too. Strange isn't it?
    
    Eva.
    
    

    Oh please Sandy.  I had no parents until I was 13.  I had no "god
    given power, goodies" handed to me due to my extra white appendage.
    
    Why is it that you (not spacifically you Sandy) always resort back to
    the ole "you were born with it" routine?  It isgetting old ya know.
    
    When are you (again) going to start taking resposibility for your life
    and stop blaming it on the "suppressive" white males?
    
    I had nothing handed to me.  I worked for every god darn thing I have.
    Mel, my wife, has earned everything she has also.  She had nothing
    handed to her.  Furthermore, she doesnt blame the white males of this
    world for her difficulties.  
    
    FWIW, upon our engagement, I asker her what she wanted to do about her
    name (identity as you poeple so put it) and she merely stated, I want
    to use your name.  I said fine, as long as she made that decision
    herself, not because it was the "norm".
    
    You see, I could care less what name she used.  I could care less what
    problems you have in society, I have my own.  Among these problems are;
    
    whats it going to be like for my son when he is my age?  Is he going to
    be treated fairly?  or is he going to be treated differently because of
    his white maleness, cept in two fold....  What about Ashleigh?  is life
    going to be easier for her that Allan?  If so, is it because of her
    femaleness?  Is she going to get special treatment becasue she is
    female?  Are the balances in their college accounts equal?  am I
    putting more into Allans?  Ahsleighs?  
    
    You see, My mom was a working woman, and yes, amazingly enough so was
    dad (still are).  I never saw any of this "special treatment because of
    the white maleness" that you people so often speak of.  Mom was a
    manager in Filene's in Boston, Dad a manager here.  aww hell, nuff of
    that....
    
    

    There was at least one major study done, in which large numbers of
    people who held the same job, doing the same work, were tested on
    their work skills.  It was found, for every job that was tested,
    that the women had better skills than the men, and that the
    non-Caucasians had better skills than the Caucasians.
    
    What does this mean?  Does it mean that women are better workers
    than men?  Or does it mean that men are promoted faster than women,
    such that those men with skill equal to that of the women of level X
    are up at level X+N?  (The same questions can be used for the
    Caucasians vis � vis the non-Caucasians.)
    
    By the way -- I've noticed one thing that many women seem to be
    implying without expressing, and which some men (understandably)
    seem to be missing entirely.  This is the understanding that sexism
    (and racism) is not strictly a conscious phenomenon; most of it
    operates from the subconscious level.  Those people who are hiring,
    giving raises to, and promoting Caucasian men preferentially could
    well be very surprised to find that they are doing it.  They really
    believe that those men are doing the best work, because that is
    what they see, and they have no idea that their subconscious minds
    are controlling their perceptions.
    
    							Ann B.

    
    re: .17
    
>    Oh please Sandy.  I had no parents until I was 13.  I had no "god
>    given power, goodies" handed to me due to my extra white appendage.
    
    Well then I guess it's just possible when we refer to oppression by
    men, or unfairness or injustice done to us, it must not have been by
    you, so you can ignore the whole discussion if you wish...

>    I had nothing handed to me.  I worked for every god darn thing I have.
>    Mel, my wife, has earned everything she has also.  She had nothing
>    handed to her.  Furthermore, she doesnt blame the white males of this
>    world for her difficulties.  
 
    Great.  More power to you and her.  But her experience is not
    necessarily our experience.
       
>    You see, My mom was a working woman, and yes, amazingly enough so was
>    dad (still are).  I never saw any of this "special treatment because of
>    the white maleness" that you people so often speak of. 
    
    What's the difference between an ostrich and a human?  
    The ostrich doesn't know the difference...
    
    -Jody
    

<    Women go from being the daughters of men to being the wives of men to
<    being the mothers of men.  Until women can be defined in, of, by, and
<    for, themselves.....they will not have identities.  And without an
<    identity, you cannot have power that you can call your own.
<    
<    -Jody
    
    I didn't see the self identification with men.  I read it differntly,
    I heard the desire to have a unique identity of person, not of group.
    Power is a personal thing, how it's valued is a society thing. 
    Everyone evaluates this differently, me I put my energy in what
    expresses my power for myself not others.  The power society referes
    to is only a tool to keep others from controlling me beyond my wishes.
    Money and control... Money is to aquire things and assure security,
    those things have no power.  Money has power if used to control. 
    Control is power when used but for what?  Is is only power when it
    is used for what society has defined as good or proper.
    
    Just some thoughts as I read the string.
    
    

>    Well then I guess it's just possible when we refer to oppression by
>    men, or unfairness or injustice done to us, it must not have been by
>    you, so you can ignore the whole discussion if you wish...

    Oh come now.  Would you please stop with the discussionary tactics
    usually used on children?  I am not a child.  If your entry was in
    retalliation to my entry, which could have been read in the same manor,
    I apologize.  If not, could you please try to talk to me like you would
    a woman?
    
    and, yes, you can assume that it WASNT by me.  As for ignoring this
    discussion.... what discussion???? this is a B B Q.  it is nothing but
    replies filled with accusatory remarks.  I will not ignore ignorance
    itself, however much I am accused of being......
    
     
>    Great.  More power to you and her.  But her experience is not
>    necessarily our experience.
  
    Very true.  And your experiences with asshole males may not
    neccesarily reflect other males attitudes.... capiche?
    
             
 >   What's the difference between an ostrich and a human?  
 >   The ostrich doesn't know the difference...
  
    
    cute.  Now we stoop to the level of calling names... very adult of you.
    and in case someone missed it, it was a very clever way of calling me
    ignorant.  very clever indeed.
    
      
           

    
    
    re .21 Conure::AMartin
    
    What is the problem here?  I think you turned up the heat a little
    when you suggested that women stop with their "temper tantrums."
    If some women in WOMANnotes wish to continue talking about their
    experience as women, that ought to be ok, don't you think?
    
    Justine

    Unfortunately, some 'job skills' cannot be objectively tested.
    For instance, making your boss 'comfortable' on a subconscious
    level. The way, for instance, a white male employee in a gray
    suit makes the white male manager in the gray suit 'comfortable'.
    

    re .22
    
    I guess Mike put it best.. "why bother"....
    
    I had NO intentions of "turning up the heat" as you so put it.
    I was merely stating what I felt... is that a crime???  I guess so.

        
    re -1:
        
    >I had NO intentions of "turning up the heat" as you so put it.
    >I was merely stating what I felt... 
    
    	If that's all you did, fine -- however, by the use of the
    	phrase "temper tantrums" you passed judgment on people. 
    
    >is that a crime???  I guess so.
    
    	Is it a crime?  No.  Is your judgment going to be challenged?
    	Yes, particularly if others disagree with it.
    
    					andrew

    re: last
    so now, what.. males are forbidden to make *preceivably* judgmental
    comments?  tell me something else thats new.....

    
    I agree mostly with .2, that women lack the sort of power that "counts"
    in our society, namely money and political weight, the power to make
    fundamental social decisions and bring about change.
    
    One might ask,
    
    1. Wny *don't* women have that sort of power?
    
    2. Given the way things are, how can women ever achieve that sort of
       power?
    
    Dorian
          

RE: .17  CONURE::AMARTIN

> I had no "god given power, goodies" handed to me due to my extra white 
> appendage.
  
Maybe not.  But you have plenty of society given power and goodies due
to it!

>    Why is it that you (not spacifically you Sandy) always resort back to
>    the ole "you were born with it" routine?  

Cuz it's true.

>It isgetting old ya know.
 
Imagine how women feel.  You only hear it.  We live it.

> When are you (again) going to start taking resposibility for your life
> and stop blaming it on the "suppressive" white males?
  
When I no longer have a reason to blame anyone but myself.  But loosing
out on many jobs to less qualified men over the years, (and yes, I can
give you specific examples with names - even names of Digital managers),
makes you realize that ability and drive mean far less to a woman's career
than it does to a man's.
  
> I had nothing handed to me.  I worked for every god darn thing I have.

This is such a common misunderstanding.  No one said you had anything
handed to you.  But as hard as you had to work for every thing you have,
and I have no doubt you did work hard, women work harder and get less.  Men 
too often seem to think women are saying, "You had it easy".  Not true.  
The phrase is "You had and continue to have it easiER".   However hard you 
had it, you would have had it a LOT harder if you were the other gender.  
Either that or you think women are making this all up and the movement for
equal power in society is really just a thinly veiled disguise for getting 
MORE than our fair share.  Do men really think women are just plain greedy?
    
    
I suppose if I had a pot of gold and you had none and everyone like you has
always been content to have none, I'd be tempted to just consider you greedy
if you started making noises about your lack.  Otherwise, I'd have to look at 
my pot of gold and feel bad about not only your lack of a pot to pee in, but 
also the lack of all those like you.  I'd rather just think of you as greedy, 
(and keep my pot of gold with a clear conscience), especially if my society 
will back me up, and I know that some people like you are still content with 
no gold of their own.
    
> Mel, my wife, has earned everything she has also.  She had nothing
> handed to her.  Furthermore, she doesnt blame the white males of this
> world for her difficulties.  

I too have earned everything I have.  I too had nothing handed to me.
Nor do I blame the white males of this world for my difficulties.  I'm not 
sure what your point was for stating this.  I do blame the societal structure,
however, for the fact that I have been "pouring coffee" for men far less 
qualilfied than I, and all things being equal, I will, to the end of my 
working life, never get as far as an equally qualified man.  In most cases, 
I won't get as far as less qualified men.  Unless of course I am very lucky.  
But then I could win the lottery too in which case this is all moot.
 
> I could care less what problems you have in society, I have my own.  

I know.  But I'd willingly trade my career "problems" for yours.  Would
you willingly trade yours for mine?  Why or why not?  Think you might be on 
the loosing end of that deal if you did?

>    whats it going to be like for my son when he is my age?  Is he going to
>    be treated fairly?  or is he going to be treated differently because of
>    his white maleness, cept in two fold....  What about Ashleigh?  is life
>    going to be easier for her that Allan?  If so, is it because of her
>    femaleness?  Is she going to get special treatment becasue she is
>    female?  Are the balances in their college accounts equal?  am I
>    putting more into Allans?  Ahsleighs?  

That's nice.  Everyone wants the best for their kids.  Even those who've 
screwed me over big time wanted the best for their own daughters.  I remember 
one of them relating a story to me about what his daughter had faced at work 
and he was indignant.  I, of course, couldn't explain to him that that's 
exactly what he had done to me!

> I never saw any of this "special treatment because of the white maleness" 
> that you people so often speak of.  

I know.  Unless you're the target of it, you naturally don't see it as
much as those who are targets do.  That only stands to reason.  I know
I don't see the discrimination that black people face.  But I know that 
it's just because I'm not the target for it, not because our country has
finally become completely integrated and there's no such thing as racism
anymore.  White males are only beginning to feel discrimination as society
tries different methods to balance the scales.  I don't go for reverse
discrimination either, (like saying you HAVE to hire X number of females
or blacks), I'm just saying it does show white males what it feels like
better than anything the traditional targets could tell them.

> it is nothing but replies filled with accusatory remarks.  

"Nothing but?"  I beg to differ.

>I will not ignore ignorance itself...
    
This sounds like you do understand why women are writing the replies they 
are here - even if they feel like "nothing but ... accusatory remarks" to you.
Sexism is ignorance too!  And we will not ignore it, either.  Not in the philo-
sophical sense and certainly not in the personal sense!  So on that point, 
we all agree that addressing ignorance is ok, yes?  I hope you just don't 
feel that only the responses to sexism, (your alleged "accusatory remarks"), 
constitute ignorance.

> And your experiences with asshole males may not neccesarily reflect other 
> males attitudes.... capiche?
  
Well of course they don't.  But I don't see why the mere existence of "good"
males should cancel out our concern about the rest of them.  It isn't just a
50/50 shot whether a particular male is "good" or not.  If it were, women
would not be clustered at the low end of nearly every single corporate
heirarchy in this country.  You seem to be seeing assholeness as a per-
sonal approach men choose to exercise or not.  Wrong.  It's a cultural norm 
men most often grow into without even realizing it, and the more powerful the
man, the more pressure among his colleagues to keep the power within the
male sphere.  Hense, even the non-sexist man will exhibit sexist behaviors
if not doing so means ostracizing himself from the circle of power he wants
to be in so badly.  If some white CEO is looking for a successor, he's
probably going to like the "good old boy" a little bit better than the
young whippersnapper who's sensitive to women.  Those in power were raised
in a different generation than the men of today.  Women's careers are
not controlled by their enlightened peers - they are controlled by white
men in their 50s and 60s just as your career is.  And most of these men
were rasied to think of women as just one of the "things men get" - the 
better the man, the better the thing he can get.  That translates into
the men in power not even ever thinking that women are people working for 
money and power.  Many of them still think women work to meet husbands, to
buy lipsticks, to kill time, to help their families keep up with the
Joneses.  As a result, many working women are rewarded with lunches,
birthday flowers and verbal attaboys while men get money and power.
    
> I was merely stating what I felt... is that a crime???  I guess so.

Ah, a little insult of your own, I see, insinuating that women are rather 
unreasonable beings.  I guess we were just supposed to accept yours and
also correct ours.  Chuckle.     
    
I doubt anyone's looking for you to justify your right to say what you feel.  
Because even we women know that having a system account at Digital pretty 
much gives you that right and you don't need to justify it any further!

It would be a crime, however, if you picked up your crayons and went home
at this point, only because it seems to be the point where most men do that
in this file - when they are asked why they feel the way they do.  As a 
generalization, the women in the file usually seem pretty willing to lay it 
all out and say what they think and why.  Most of the men seem willing to say 
what they think but then get pissed off if they're asked more questions based 
on what they have said.  I'm willing to listen to you tell me what would
be a good way to ask more question without unearthing this wrath.  Can it
be done?
    
    
re: .25 HEFTY::CHARBONND
    
    >Unfortunately, some 'job skills' cannot be objectively tested.
    
    But plenty can.  And enough can to show a pattern.
          
    

    
    the reason for canned responses, not unlike the reason for canned food,
    is not having to come up with infinite variations on explanations
    that already work. most of us have neither the time nor the inclination
    to cook from scratch just because you're a picky eater.
    

Something in Sandy's reply reminds me of part of a phone conversation with my
parents.

Mom calls, puts Dad on the line. Dad says hello, I ask how he is, and he says
he's getting better. He sounds pretty down; I ask him what's wrong. He says
"Milford [CT] just got a woman as school supervisor". We all laugh at the joke,
and make standard feminist/anti-feminist jabs at each other, to continue the
joke. Then, Mom tells me that most of the principals have never worked for a
woman before. When they were teachers, their principals were male. Several are
rumored to be indicating the set of things they won't let a woman do. Some
women are hoping some men do quit ("to get rid of the dead wood").

Now this is all through my parents' filters. But it's absolutely obvious to me
that electing/appointing a woman to this position was something that had never
been done, and something bound to make more than a few people uncomfortable.
	Mez

RE: Sandy
    
    
>> I had no "god given power, goodies" handed to me due to my extra white 
>> appendage.
  
>Maybe not.  But you have plenty of society given power and goodies due
>to it!

OK.  As much as I would like to think that the above statement is false, I will
have to agree.


>>    Why is it that you (not specifically you Sandy) always resort back to
>>    the ole "you were born with it" routine?  

>Cuz it's true.

All of the time??? some of the time??? by some white males?? by all white 
males??? please clarify.

 
>Imagine how women feel.  You only hear it.  We live it.

That is false.  White Males are not only hearing it these days, they live it
as well.  You don't deny that do you?


>> When are you (again) going to start taking responsibility for your life
>> and stop blaming it on the "suppressive" white males?
  
>When I no longer have a reason to blame anyone but myself.  But loosing
>out on many jobs to less qualified men over the years, (and yes, I can
>give you specific examples with names - even names of Digital managers),
>makes you realize that ability and drive mean far less to a woman's career
>than it does to a man's.
 
That exact argument has been shot down when used by males towards ANY of
the so called minorities.  Why is it OK for a woman to use it???

Are you implying that white males get positions ONLY because they are white
males???

So using that argument, I can honestly say that women only get jobs because
they are labeled a minority.. is that correct??  I thought not.  There are
SOME smart women out there, just as there are SOME smart white males.


 
>> I had nothing handed to me.  I worked for every god darn thing I have.

>This is such a common misunderstanding.  

I misunderstood nothing Sandy.  You are assuming an awful lot about the white
males in this world.  Not everything is so black and white.

>No one said you had anything
>handed to you.  But as hard as you had to work for every thing you have,
>and I have no doubt you did work hard, women work harder and get less.

Which is it?  did I work for all that I have or didn't I?  Please make up my 
mind.  

"Women work harder", EH?  Yeah, right, and cows fly.  I saw just how much harder
women had to work for "equality" in the Military.  Sarcasm meant.

>Men 
>too often seem to think women are saying, "You had it easy".  Not true.  
>The phrase is "You had and continue to have it easiER".   However hard you 
>had it, you would have had it a LOT harder if you were the other gender.

Sorry, I cannot agree.  If you were to say that in specific arenas, I might
have agreed with you.  But, I find it awful hard to believe that in every 
aspect of the white males life, things are easier than a woman will ever have
it.  Sounds like a serious cop out to me.
  
>Either that or you think women are making this all up and the movement for
>equal power in society is really just a thinly veiled disguise for getting 
>MORE than our fair share.  

Hmmm... are we playing pick the extreme here?  I never said such a thing.
I AM NOT denying that women have had it hard in the past, I an also not denying
that SOME women MIGHT have it hard now, I am merely saying that not ALL white
males have the gold and NOT ALL women have the "fools gold".

>Do men really think women are just plain greedy?
 
Some, certainly yes.  but for the most part, I'd like to think that the women
that are "screaming equal rights" are screaming for a reason.  They have 
probably been unjustly treated and want justice.  I can relate to that.  Do you
deny that white males are also treated unjustly?
   
    
>I suppose if I had a pot of gold and you had none and everyone like you has
>always been content to have none, I'd be tempted to just consider you greedy
>if you started making noises about your lack.  Otherwise, I'd have to look at 
>my pot of gold and feel bad about not only your lack of a pot to pee in, but 
>also the lack of all those like you.  I'd rather just think of you as greedy, 
>(and keep my pot of gold with a clear conscience), especially if my society 
>will back me up, and I know that some people like you are still content with 
>no gold of their own.
 
Nice analogy Sandy.  Honest.  Although I can understand it, I do not relate to
it in the least.  There are indeed people out there that are exactly the way
that you stated, but again, I must state that NOT ALL WHITE MALES feel that
way.  That is the body of my argument.  I cannot take responsibility for 
another persons ignorance.  Furthermore, I will not take the BLAME for another
persons ignorance.
   

>I too have earned everything I have.  I too had nothing handed to me.
>Nor do I blame the white males of this world for my difficulties.  I'm not 
>sure what your point was for stating this.  

Just a note explaining that Mel does NOT blame anyone but herself if something
goes haywire.  Now if a male started treating her as a child or speaking to
her as a child, she would blame HIM/HER, NOT ALL OF WHITE MAN.

>I do blame the societal structure,
>however, for the fact that I have been "pouring coffee" for men far less 
>qualified than I, and all things being equal, I will, to the end of my 
>working life, never get as far as an equally qualified man.  In most cases, 
>I won't get as far as less qualified men.  Unless of course I am very lucky.  
>But then I could win the lottery too in which case this is all moot.

I can bet that there are males out there that feel the same way about women 
that supposedly got "the free ride" due to their minority status.  Don't you
agree?
 
Shoot, if you win, can I have some??? :-)


>> I could care less what problems you have in society, I have my own.  

>I know.  But I'd willingly trade my career "problems" for yours.  Would
>you willingly trade yours for mine?  Why or why not?  Think you might be on 
>the loosing end of that deal if you did?

Hmmmm, good question.  Not sure.  it all depends upon what your career is....
I was never a serving sort of guy (per your coffee serving comment) that is
why I am a civilian now.....

let me think on it....


>That's nice.  Everyone wants the best for their kids.  Even those who've 
>screwed me over big time wanted the best for their own daughters.  I remember 
>one of them relating a story to me about what his daughter had faced at work 
>and he was indignant.  I, of course, couldn't explain to him that that's 
>exactly what he had done to me!

Although I can see where you are coming from, I am not sure that you saw mine....
I am worried that the genders will get so furious with each other that there
will be the same old discriminational attitudes, yet three fold..... see?


I know.  Unless you're the target of it, you naturally don't see it as
much as those who are targets do.  That only stands to reason.  I know
I don't see the discrimination that black people face.  

But I am the target.  Of such things as AA etal.  And for what its worth
I may not like it (AA), yet I agree with the premise.  Balancing takes
allot of work, it doesn't come naturally for people who have had the supposed
"heavy side" for centuries.  We all need to work at it.  but by displacing or
redistributing the "lighter side", we do nothing but redefine the scale.
thus, instead of "minorities" being the lighter side, they are now the heavier
side.... and that is wrong also.  don't you agree?


>But I know that 
>it's just because I'm not the target for it, not because our country has
>finally become completely integrated and there's no such thing as racism
>anymore.  

Good point.  But aren't you forgetting that there ARE people out there that DO
see it, EVEN IF THEY ARE NOT THE TARGET?  I see it, and I even say something
when something need saying.  I even get into trouble sometimes.....
so what, I say.. someone has to say something.....


>White males are only beginning to feel discrimination as society
>tries different methods to balance the scales.  

We agree on one thing so far I think.


>I don't go for reverse
>discrimination either, (like saying you HAVE to hire X number of females
>or blacks), 

make that two.....


>I'm just saying it does show white males what it feels like
>better than anything the traditional targets could tell them.

and that makes it OK.?, sorry, I don't think so. the "how's it feel asshole" crap
is for the birds.  should we enslave whites to "show them how it feels"?  Of
course not.  I see it as the same thing......



>> it is nothing but replies filled with accusatory remarks.  

>"Nothing but?"  I beg to differ.

You differ correctly, I was over exaggerating.  Sorry.


>>I will not ignore ignorance itself...
    
>This sounds like you do understand why women are writing the replies they 
>are here - 

I do, in a way.  I may not agree with allot that is said, but I do understand
sometimes.

>Sexism is ignorance too!  And we will not ignore it, either.  

Make that three, we're on a roll......

but, let me add one thing to that statement, OK? 

"we will not ignore it, either".  Nor will we redistribute its negatives 
towards the "other side"....

>  So on that point, 
>we all agree that addressing ignorance is OK, yes?  I hope you just don't 
>feel that only the responses to sexism, (your alleged "accusatory remarks"), 
>constitute ignorance.

Yes, we agree.  whammo! that's four.

No, I don't. I consider it a piece of the very large pie called sexism.


  
>Well of course they don't.  But I don't see why the mere existence of "good"
>males should cancel out our concern about the rest of them.  

True, it shouldn't.  But the "bad" males should also NOT cancel out the "good"
ones.

 > You seem to be seeing assholeness as a per-
>sonal approach men choose to exercise or not.  Wrong.  

No, I see it as an approach that some women see to THINK that men choose to
exercise.

>It's a cultural norm 
>men most often grow into without even realizing it, and the more powerful the
>man, the more pressure among his colleagues to keep the power within the
male sphere.  

sounds allot like the ole "men are out to get women, and keep them barefoot...."
song.  I don't think that the great conspiracy exists.  Sorry.

>  If some white CEO is looking for a successor, he's
>probably going to like the "good old boy" a little bit better than the
>young whippersnapper who's sensitive to women.  

that may very well be true.  Id like to think not, but I cannot prove nor
disprove that theory.

>Those in power were raised
>in a different generation than the men of today.  Women's careers are
>not controlled by their enlightened peers - they are controlled by white
men in their 50s and 60s just as your career is.  

I wholeheartedly agree.


> That translates into
>the men in power not even ever thinking that women are people working for 
>money and power.  Many of them still think women work to meet husbands, to
>buy lipsticks, to kill time, to help their families keep up with the
>Joneses.  As a result, many working women are rewarded with lunches,
>birthday flowers and verbal attaboys while men get money and power.
 

WOW! that's a really awful attitude towards the older generation, don't you
think?  I mean, there cannot possible be that many sexist males in this world.

You make it sound as though all fifty plus males think (oops in power) women 
are good for are baby factories, cheap work forces, and test animals for stupid
chemicals. (see cosmetics)
   

>Ah, a little insult of your own, I see, insinuating that women are rather 
>unreasonable beings.  I guess we were just supposed to accept yours and
>also correct ours.  Chuckle.     

No. Not meant that way at all.  I meant that I FEEL as though I am being condemned
for my extra white appendage.  I insinuated nothing of the sort.  or at least
I didn't mean to.  No, I shall not accept yours, and you don't have to accept
m,ine, sound good?  Chuckle, back.
 
   
>I doubt anyone's looking for you to justify your right to say what you feel.  
>Because even we women know that having a system account at Digital pretty 
>much gives you that right and you don't need to justify it any further!

Oh, having the account is an equal right, fer sure.  Its what you can say and
not say, as a white male, that is not equal.

>It would be a crime, however, if you picked up your crayons and went home
>at this point, only because it seems to be the point where most men do that
>in this file 

OOPS.  Guess you were wrong then.  Here I is.


>- when they are asked why they feel the way they do.  As a 
>generalization, the women in the file usually seem pretty willing to lay it 
>all out and say what they think and why.  

I have no problem doing the same.  As long as it it written on a level that isn't
projected (towards me) as accusatory, downward, or downright rude.  

Your note, spoke, asked, spoke, asked.  It is, in my opinion, a discussion.

I like discussions.  I shall discuss also.  
 

>Most of the men seem willing to say 
>what they think but then get pissed off if they're asked more questions based 
>on what they have said.  

I am neither pissed, nor am I leaving.  Please, continue.

>I'm willing to listen to you tell me what would
>be a good way to ask more question without unearthing this wrath.  

No need, you are executing this phenomenon perfectly.

>Can it be done?
    
Why soitenly!

    
    

    
    Thank you, some of you previous noters, for when treading the line of
    debate and discussion you seem to be trying to do so as courteously as
    possible, and  with concern for others' thoughts, which yields much
    more light and much less heat than I've sometimes seen here.  Please
    continue.
    
    -Jody
    

    Re:34 Al, 342 lines?!?!?!
    
    REK

    	RE: .34  Al
    
    	>> Imagine how women feel.  You only hear it.  We live it.

	> That is false.  White Males are not only hearing it these days, 
    	> they live it as well.  You don't deny that, do you?
    
    	The ironic thing is that the men who scream the loudest about how
    	women make "too much" of things like sexism in the workplace, etc.,
    	are the same guys who *also* scream endlessly about how much men
    	suffer from the relatively small number of opportunities for which
    	qualified women and minorities are specifically sought.
    
    	> Balancing takes allot of work, it doesn't come naturally for people 
    	> who have had the supposed "heavy side" for centuries.  We all need 
    	> to work at it.  but by displacing or redistributing the "lighter 
    	> side", we do nothing but redefine the scale. thus, instead of 
    	> "minorities" being the lighter side, they are now the heavier
	> side.... and that is wrong also.  don't you agree?
    
    	White males still fill an exceptionally disproportionate number of
    	the best-paying jobs in our country, so in what way have the scales
    	tipped far enough to give minorities the "heavier" side??
    
    	Hell, we're nowhere even CLOSE to reaching equality yet, and some
    	men are already screaming that we've gotten too much of it!  Geesh!

    	RE: .34  Al
    
    	>> I'm just saying it does show white males what it feels like
	>> better than anything the traditional targets could tell them.

	> and that makes it OK.?, sorry, I don't think so. the "how's it feel 
    	> asshole" crap is for the birds.  should we enslave whites to "show 
    	> them how it feels"?  Of course not.  I see it as the same thing......
    
    	As far as I'm concerned, this is the single largest misconception
    	that some white males have about rights movements (eg, that an act
    	or a word that could TEACH is actually meant as some sort of mean-
    	spirited punishment.)  It's just not so!
    
    	One of my favorite movies is "Tootsie" (which I hadn't seen in a
    	long time until it played on Cable a few months back.)
    
    	One of the things I really love about the movie is Dustin Hoffman's
    	outrage when he experiences how women are treated.  His brief time
    	as a woman was not enough to mortally wound the character played by
    	Hoffman, but it was long enough for him to learn a few things.
    
    	When people talk about "seeing how it feels," it's not meant as a
    	way to punish anyone.  It's meant as a way for certain individuals
    	to UNDERSTAND what it would be like to be raised in a culture where
    	persons are bombarded for their ENTIRE LIFE with messages about the
    	inherent inferiority of their ethnic/racial/sexual groups.
    
    	Some men scream and cry like there's no tomorrow about what they
    	consider "male-bashing" (yet, they fail to see that the criticism
    	launched at males is barely a fraction of a percent of the endless
    	bashing women and minorities are bombarded with, day after day, week
    	after week, month after month, year after year.)
    
    	When someone comes along to say "Now you have a taste of how it
    	feels," some men scream to the heavens that it must be some sort
    	of hate orgy (when, actually, it is merely someone's attempt to
    	point out that this "taste" has the potential to "teach," if the
    	taster is willing to learn, that is.)

    re: .39 mike z
    
    "Quite meaningless"???  How so????
    
    How would YOU suggest determining fair representation of groups in all
    job sectors (low-paying to high-paying), if you rule out comparisons of
    profiles?
    
    There's a IMPORTANT distinction between numbers "represented and
    gainfully employed" and numbers filling the "best-paying jobs in our
    country."   What method would you use to analyze that distinction?
    
    Pam

    Well, to get back to the TOPIC.....(seems we were getting a bit
    sidetracked maybe?)
    
    I think that women must realize the power they have, and then taste of
    the powers they have not yet experienced - responsibility and control
    to me feel most comfortable when sampled in graduated steps that are
    continually getting larger.
    
    I have a fairly strong fear of failure which keeps me from wielding
    power as effectively as I could, but I realize that if I start small
    and work my way up, my degree of comfort will increase as I progress,
    and the successes I have will build on one another.
    
    I think women wield power differently than men.  In Carol Gilligan's "A
    Different Voice" she discusses women's morality (morality looking at
    the wellbeing of others), and I feel that when women do wield power in
    that mode, it can do a world of good.  I also feel that women who have
    traditionally masculine realms of power (management at higher levels)
    are often forced to wield power as men do (often more self-focused, as
    Carol Gilligan quoted after studies were done in the 1960's....).
    
    -Jody
    

    RE: 35
    I may not speak for others, but in my humble being, I think that if a
    note is written in a spacific way (See Sandy's), that note can (and
    will )yield oodles of thought provoking discussions.....
    
    
    RE: 36 REK
    
    
    Shoot! really???? :-) Must  'ave been a gremlin....
      
    
    The note that I was replying to was worth the effort.
    

re .41
 
>  I think that women must realize the power they have, and then taste of
>    the powers they have not yet experienced - responsibility and control
>    to me feel most comfortable when sampled in graduated steps that are
>    continually getting larger.
 
I'm all for getting larger increments of responsibility and control.  A while
back I took a look at how I was progressing, 5 years at the same job level
and getting exactly the same performance ratings, not bad but not stellar
either.  I wondered why I wasn't getting any larger increments.  I was
a strong, steady worker, but more responsibility and promotions didn't seem 
to be coming my way.  I had always done well in school and had come to 
expect an accelerated rate of advancement.

Then as the project leader for my current project moved on, the supervisor
took me aside to talk to me.  They were looking for a new project leader and
this was sort of an interview (but it wasn't advertised as such).  I had 
often asked to be a project leader so that I could demonstrate my ability. My 
supervisor asked how I ranked against the others on the project.  I thought
I was the best, but I didn't want to appear immodest, so I said I was at
least as good as anyone else.  The job went to the next best person on the
project.  He had 4 years less experience, but no problem with self promotion.

Now I have learned that I have to promote myself.  It won't be
awarded to me if I sit quietly in my cube and work hard.  I make sure my
supervisor knows when I have accomplished something.  I forward on the thank
you notes I get from people I've helped out.  I am no longer shy about 
crowing my accomplishments.  Now I hear my management echoing praise back 
(different management now).  I even got a promotion!   I feel a thousand
times better about myself and I don't feel as if I am climbing on anyone's
back.  I've definitely earned the additional p'raise (payraise) and 
responsibility.

Being brought up to be good for goodness sake and being taught not to brag
hindered me in the workplace (at least at DEC).  Several of the traits that
have been bought into by women may be causing their lack of advancement.  
Some of the barriers (certainly not all) in the workplace may be self-imposed.  But
until the barriers are pointed out, they may be invisible.  Maybe there are
other barriers we can work to identify and remove.  

			Bb   

Re: .43

It is not bragging to show your accomplishments to your next-up.
A course I took at Wang called "It's your career, Manage it!" has been
an invaluable bit of information.

You sit around assuming that your exemplary performance will naturally
be noticed, then the best you'll get is a pat on the back and it's 
forgotten.  You did the right thing in forwarding your thank-yous
so that your next-up has a record to read when review time comes.

And if you do something for someone and they thank you for it, it is not 
inappropriate to ask, "can you send me a little note to that effect?"

Performance should be rewarded, but you (we) must all take it upon ourselves 
to ensure that performance is noticed.

MM

>And if you do something for someone and they thank you for it, it is not 
>inappropriate to ask, "can you send me a little note to that effect?"

And, if someone does something for you [generic], it is not inappropriate to
send that note to their manager, CCing them.
	Mez

Re: .45   Yes!  Thanks for pointing it out.

As a funny addition: The course instructor (if I thought I minute, I bet
I could remember her name - Carmean, I think) moved onto bigger and better
things at another company!  I thought it was interesting that a company
(Wang) was sponsoring a course that told one to take charge of their career,
even when it meant the possibility of finding better employment.
This was *before* the massive Wang exodus.

Mark

    AMARTIN, (Al Martin?), you are a patient and very interesting debator!
    If I didn't think we were in danger of boring everyone else, I'd
    continue.  But I think we've made our points.  I apologize for even
    suggesting you might pick up your crayons and go home.  I like a person
    who stands their ground, speaks their piece and backs it up.  Good
    show!
    
    Barbara Bazemore hit on a big point - self promotion.  I think a lot
    more women would be further too if they hadn't been taught the "virtue"
    of being self-effacing.  Read "Games Mother Never Taught You", (I
    forget the author).  She thinks that's one of women's biggest stumbling
    blocks - modesty.

    Do please continue if you wish; I very much doubt that boredom is an
    issue:  nice discussion!

    a few thoughts on power.  My own power seems to be creating my own
    image and controling my destiny.  I support a family, I own my home,
    I am developing my career as a secretary and what I can find in
    that.  The most difficult part is to see what I am doing and to
    convince myself that I am in control and I have some power as a
    homeowner, supporting my family and taking control at work.  I am
    trying to force some issues and make things happen and learning
    how to do that.  I feel that I have the ability to do anything I
    set out to do because I am not dependent on anyone to do it for
    me.  so I think this is power to me.  i need to use more to my
    advantage. this is definately something I am working on.
    
    denise