Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site orca.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!we13!ihnp4!alberta!ubc-vision!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!jeffw
From: jeffw@orca.UUCP (Jeff Winslow)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: That boring matter of controlled women
Message-ID: <517@orca.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 30-Jan-84 18:19:15 EST
Article-I.D.: orca.517
Posted: Mon Jan 30 18:19:15 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 7-Feb-84 13:13:47 EST
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR.
Lines: 38

I have a great respect for Ms. Quigley's intelligence, but her reply to
my question didn't impress me much. To quote partially:

""""""""""
                                                                 I find it very
tiring to have to explain why "controlling who women copulate with is and has
been very important in most societies".  This fact is very clearly reflected
in many customs and laws of most countries.  Unfortunately, the only book I can
think of dealing specifically with this issue is in french "Ainsi soit elle",
which I read such a long time ago that I do not remember the name of the author.


I think that raising that point in net.women is equivalent to questioning
the premise that "it has been very important for white men not to let people of
colour get access to the same opportunities" in a net.coloured group.  If we
continue debating such basic questions, we will never get anywhere. 

""""""""""""

Undoubtedly President Reagan finds (or would find) it very tiring to have to
explain just how supply-side economics is the answer to our economic problems.
The fact remains that this particular economic theory is controversial. Perhaps
Hitler found it very tiring to have to explain just why he thought Jews were
on the level of animals. So what? If the fact is as basic as you contend, you
should not have such a hard time rounding up evidence. And it is a classic
technique of argument to say "oh, that's a basic premise" when evidence of
one's assertion is scanty.

As a point of detail, I did not ask you to explain *why*. I challenged the
truth of the statement *as written*. That is, while I can easily believe that
the phenomenon you describe is common, I seriously doubt if you have studied
the "customs and laws of most countries", as you imply. It is this almost
compulsive use of "very" and "most" which I find so disturbing.

I think a clear presentation of the evidence in this case would be of 
interest, and certainly not as tiring to read as it appears to be to find.

                                          Jeff Winslow