On Mon, 3 Oct 1994, Gene Hunn wrote:
To equate meat eating with wife beating and rape is, in my opinion, to
subscribe to the same sort of moral extremism that leads "pro-lifers" to
call first trimester abortions "murder" and to label fertilized eggs
"babies." As I said before, to consider meat eating "murder" and plant
eating morally unambiguous is to assume a semantic distinction, that
between "plant" and "animal," that is "common sense" in English (but
perhaps not in other languages) can be relied upon to define absolutely
the boundary between good and bad, between what one should or should not
do. The world is more complex than that, it seems to me.
Gene.
On Sat, 1 Oct 1994, Brian A. Luke wrote:
>
> > Many said their view of food was a
> > "personal" choice or ethics, that there were no claims to be made on us in
> > general regarding such things, etc.
>
> Yes, I remember this point being made. I was particularly disturbed
> that the idea of meat-eating or no meat-eating was described as a
> personal choice by VEGETARIANS on the list. I mean, I can understand
> why meat-eaters would want to personalize this choice pretty easily.
>
> The women's liberation movement politicized many activities that were
> previously held to be purely personal and therefore outside the scope
> of political analysis or criticism. But apparently there is still,
> for certain patriarchal activities (like the exploitation of animals)
> an inclination by many feminists to preserve the power and protection
> from scrutiny that comes from labelling oppressive behavior "personal
> choice." In my opinion, buying meat is no more a personal choice
> than beating one's wife, raping one's children, or hiring a
> prostitute.
>
> Carol Adams goes into this in detail in her article in Greta Gaard's
> anthology _Ecofeminism_. She states, for example, that "The
> invocation of autonomy ... presumes that no one else's liberty is at
> issue in food choices. This is simply not so. The invisibility of
> animals' oppression permits the debate to be about individual human's
> liberties, rather than making animals' oppression visible" (p. 210).
>
> Brian
>
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Oct 3 10:58:43 MDT 1994
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Oct 3 10:58:43 1994
Received: from sciences.SDSU.Edu (sciences.sdsu.edu [130.191.224.2]) by
csf.Colorado.EDU (8.6.9/8.6.9/CNS-3.5) with SMTP id KAA15952 for
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 3 Oct 1994 10:58:40 -0600
Received: from .sdsu.edu ([130.191.112.25]) by sciences.SDSU.Edu (4.1/SDSU-Complex)
id AA03686 for delivery to [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 3 Oct 94 10:00:41 PDT
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 94 10:00:40 PDT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pat Huckle)
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: harassment
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailer: SDSUMail [Version 1.9 beta]
X-Type: TEXT
PENNY'S POST ON SEXUAL HARASSMENT GENERATED INTERESTING
RESPONSES.
The following email post was circulated to the entire
faculty in the College of Business Administration (80
total). The purpose of forwarding this story
> was to raise consciouness and not to call attention to any
event or individual in the college. I've been fascinated by
the responses. My non-scientific assessment is that the
issue still touches nerves in academia.
POST FORWARDED TO COLLEAGUES: I received the following on my
e-mail. I hesitated to forward it to you
all but felt it was important enough to do so. I hope you
will not be offended by it and that it may provide thought
food for someone.
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 1994 02:07:49 -0400 (EDT)
>From: PNEWS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Not all men harass: men as allies for women...
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[******PNEWS CONFERENCES*******]
Men who say that they care about women have a responsibility
to take action when it comes to sexual harassment. It's NOT
ENOUGH to sympathize with women who are being harassed, or
to make sure one never does it oneself, or agree
philosophically that women should have the fundamental
human right to do their jobs or take a class or walk down
the street unmolested.
It is time for men to deal with their co-workers, buddies,
fathers, sons and brothers. Every harasser is surrounded by
men in his life - men he respects and relies on - men who
know injustice when they see (or hear) it
and can take steps to end it.
If you are male, stopping sexual harassment begins with
actions as simple as not laughing at sexist jokes, not
smiling at comments that put women down, and not letting
harassers interpret your silence as approval for
what they do. Speak up! It may feel awkward or
embarrassing to let a friend or co-worker know you don't
like his comments or behavior toward
women, but you can do it, and do it successfully. (Think
how much more uncomfortable and difficult it is for the
woman who is on the receiving end of those remarks or
actions). It's a disservice to every woman around
when men who know better take the easy way out by remaining
silent in the face of sexism.
In fact, because most harassers are extremely sexist, they
are actually more likely to respect men's opinions than
women's. For that reason, it's important for men who object
to sexual harassment to make it clear that
they themselves do not admire or condone this behavior.
If your friend Joe makes a crack about Shirley's breasts,
your disapproval may carry far more weight with him than the
fact that Shirley is offended by what he said. Joe doesn't
care about Shirley's feelings and rights, but
he does care about being respected by other men. And that
means that YOU have real leverage in changing his obnoxious
behavior. So when you speak up, speak on your own account -
say that YOU think Joe is out of line
(not just that Shirley doesn't like it). Instead of casting
yourself in the traditional and somewhat sexist role of
Shirley's 'protector' by speaking for her, communicate the
message that YOU no longer consider harassment acceptable
behavior.
Here's a good example in which one man did exactly that:
----------------------------------------------------------
THE RAPE JOKE
I'll never forget the first time I heard a man confront
another man. It
was 1985. I was thirty-five years old, one of two senior
women in the
division, and known as the office feminist. I walked into
the front office
of my section one afternoon and heard Doug, one of the
senior analysts and
the office lech, telling a rape joke to a group of the guys
just around
the corner in the office. It was a really stupid and
insulting joke about
an older woman who was so desperate for sex that when she
was raped, she
asked to rapist to come back. Not very funny, to say the
least. I don't
think rape jokes are amusing anyway, but I found that
particular joke
really inexcusable (one of my aunts was raped, in her own
kitchen, when
she was in her sixties, by a man who broke into her house).
None of the
guys saw me come into the office. The women who worked in
the front
office, Sally and Mary Lou, looked embarrassed and very
uncomfortable,
but they were just sitting at their desks, not saying
anything. I decided
I had to confront Doug and put a stop to this.
But then, just as I was about to step around the corner and
break it up, I
heard Sam, one of my co-workers, cut Doug off at the knees.
He said,
"That's not funny. I don't like it, and I don't want to
hear that kind of
crap again". He didn't say that Sally wouldn't like it, or
Mary Lou would
be offended (Doug knew that - he LIKED to make the women
uncomfortable).
Sam spoke up for himself: he said that HE didn't like it.
Doug shut up in
a hurry.
The women almost cheered - talked about it for days. I
realized that it
was the first time in my life that I'd ever seen a man
confront sexism on
the job. Sam and I have been friends ever since.
_____________________________________________
Sam's confrontation was effective: simple, direct, and
strong. It
embarrassed Doug, and made Sam a local hero to the women
that Doug had
been harassing. Because even decent men have been silent
around this
kind of behavior for so long, Sam's response came as a
surprise to everyone
involved - to the women, to the men in the group, and most
of all to Doug
himself. Sam very neatly overturned Doug's sexist
assumptions about his
male listeners. Instead of going along with the
good-ol'-boy camaraderie
Doug expected, Same raised the psychological ego- risks
involved for Doug
in this kind of sexist behavior and made it clear on the
spot that Doug
could not count on his approval for rape jokes. By
challenging the joke
so clearly, Sam not only turned the tables on Doug but
showed the
other guys how it could be done.
When men like Sam speak up, they can make a profound
difference in the
daily level of workplace sexism women face.
*********** End forwarded item ***********
Bill
PENNY'S COMMENTS:>
Approximately 80 people received the forwarded e-mail
message. 20 of these do not know how to use their e-mail
and never read it. 10 of the 60 or so who read it reacted
positively either by sending me a message or talking to me
in the mailroom or at lunch. Of the 10 three were men and
seven were women. The women generally thanked me for
sending the message and in some cases talked a little about
experiences here in the College of Business -- student and
staff etc. One women who teaches in IDS said she intended
to duplicate the memo and share it with her students in
class. The three men said in a sense "right on" One
thanked for a positive action he could take when confronted
with harrassing situations. Another said he thought it was
definitely something we need to more aware of. The third
indicated that his positive response was facilitated by the
fact that he has a daughter who is her first year of college
and he has a much better understanding of these issues
because of encounters she has had. Five men actually
responded in a defensive way, others responded but not
directly. For example, many of my "friends" will now call
to my attention the fact that I am "harrassing" them if I
say something which was heretofore regarded as friendly
jest. I am now asked more frequently if x is harrassment
which it usually is. But the five overtly negative
reactions to the message from male colleagues gave the
following rationale:
1. We cannot use what you suggest on the boat. It wouldn't
be any fun and the women wouldn't like it either. They like
our humor and we drink alot.
2. Another for some reason started to talk about Lorena
Bobbitt. I assume he wanted the shoe to be on the other
foot but not in a particularly positive way.
3. Another said he couldn't do that because the other men
would think less of him as a person. He would not want to
offend his colleagues.
4. Another accused me of sitting in judgment and not having
the right to do that.
5. Another said he didn't think e-mail should be used in
this way because it really does not apply to everyone.
FROM [EMAIL PROTECTED]
