Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!aero-c!nadel
From: oneil@zeus.unomaha.edu (Sharon L. O'Neil)
Subject: Re: Sexism vs. Men's Oppression
Message-ID: <15264.283c2534@zeus.unomaha.edu>
Originator: nadel@aerospace.aero.org
Lines: 80
Sender: news@aero.org
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
References: <1991May13.194337.3494@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <282f3194.17a3@petunia.CalPoly.EDU> <14905.2833d44d@zeus.unomaha.edu> <1991May21.221824.5781@MDI.COM>
Date: 23 May 91 20:25:24 CST
Approved: nadel@aerospace.aero.org
Lines: 84



In article <1991May21.221824.5781@MDI.COM>, gannon@MDI.COM (Alden Gannon) writes:

>> In article <14905.2833d44d@zeus.unomaha.edu> oneil@zeus.unomaha.edu (Sharon L. O'Neil) writes:
>> [Context: I argue that it is not fair to justify discrimination against women
>> on the basis that they cannot be drafted or because they cannot serve in
>> combat because 1) No one has been drafted since the mid-seventies, male or
>> female 2) the decision to force men to register with selective service was
>> made by congress, a body composed mostly of men and 3) despite the fact that
>> women do not serve combat, this could change very soon, and is pretty much
>> a moot point, since many women did serve in the Gulf War in combat areas in
>> jobs that were not combat and 4) many women did perform duties which were
>> pretty damn close to combat.

Alden Gannon then replies:
> I've followed this thread for some time, and I still can't see why
> this is a gender issue.  Whether women or men cause discrimination
> based on sex doesn't matter.  The fact that only men must register
> with the selective service is a *law*, not a gender issue.

	I thought I made that clear.  I merely take offense with those who
	would argue that women are justifiably denied their equal rights on
	the basis of 1) not being drafted and 2) not serving in combat.  
	Women are not drafted and they do not serve in combat because a 
	bunch of congressmen in Washington D.C. are afraid that it will 
	cost them their political careers.  None of them want to be 
	characterized by their political opponents as "the guy who sent
	your daughter to be raped by Iraqi soldiers."  In essence, we women
	are being told that we should accept our lot because we do nothing
	to protect our way of life, but then, we /are/ being denied the
	ability to fight in combat or being drafted.  To me, it doesn't
	make sense.  There are plenty of women (and gays and lesbians for
	that matter) who are willing to serve, but cannot.

> Who cares
> whether the legislature that drafted this law was composed of men,
> women, or 3 toed sloths?  In South Africa, ANC supporters in Soweto
> are being murdered by radical Black Zulus.  Is this violence somehow
> justifiable because it's Black on Black, and would only be condemned
> if the Afrikaaners were doing the killing?  The draft is a
> discriminatory policy, and should be changed.  Seaching for a group to
> "blame" for the policy seems like wasted effort.

	I'm not arguing whether the draft is good or bad.  I'm not
	making a judgement about the draft one way or another.  I'm
	merely saying that the justifications used by many to oppress
	women are not institutionalized by women.  Women did not choose
	to not be drafted or not serve in combat.  Someone else chose
	that for us.  Whether or not the draft is right or wrong has
	nothing to do with this debate. 

	As set up, the draft is a discriminatory policy, but too many
	people are blaming women for the inherent sexism (against men)
	in the draft -- but that blame is misdirected.  Why punish women
	(and gays and lesbians) for not serving in combat and for 
	not being drafted -- that is what I'm concerned about here.

> So, how many women died in the Gulf War?  How many out of the seventy-
> something total U.S. deaths?

	A small number died.  I can't remember the exact number -- I have
	a list of all who died in the Gulf War.  The number /was/ less than
	five, but /of course/ we have to remember that women did not serve
	in combat positions.  Or, at least, most women did not serve in
	combat positions.  One of the pilots who died, I believe, was serving
	on a mission that was not classified as a combat mission, but 
	essentially /was/ a combat mission.  Do you see what I am saying now?
	We're talking numbers here, but those numbers are skewed because woman
	are denied the ability to serve in combat.  If you argue that less
	than five women died in the Gulf War and if you argue that that is
	justification for denying women equal rights, then can't you see that
	the cards are stacked against women in the first place.  (You can't
	get a job if you don't have any experience, but how do you get 
	experience if you can't get a job is a poor analogy.  But do you
	see where I am coming from?)
 
-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Sharon L. O'Neil | Internet: oneil@zeus.unomaha.edu | Bitnet: oneil@unoma1

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


