[441] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
RE: women@mit
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dalie Jimenez)
Tue May 1 20:07:19 2001
From: "Dalie Jimenez" <dalie@MIT.EDU>
To: "MIT Talk" <mit-talk@MIT.EDU>
Cc: "Susan M Buchman" <susan1@MIT.EDU>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 20:06:06 -0400
Message-ID: <NEBBLPFBCLNPMLDCNGNAKEGACGAA.dalie@mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <200105012020.QAA19974@m2-032-12.mit.edu>
On the vein of the ATO incident, the Extropians discussion and now the
women@mit issue of the Tech ... perhaps we should remember that famous quote
usually attributed to Voltaire:
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
say it."
Reading these emails I've been getting the sense that a lot of people are
uncomfortable hearing things they don't like/disagree with and think that
the rest of us shouldn't have a right to form our own opinions. Thankfully
there are those who disagree.
>i think the tech did a fine job in general, but i was a little
>perplexed about who they asked to speak about *women's* issues. most
>disturbing was having mit pro-life attend their round table. i guess i
>fail to see how a group whose goal is to control women's lives and
>whose officer list is **87%** male - that's right, baby, 87% - is
>qualified to speak about women's issues just because they can dredge
>up a woman to represent them.
So their officer list is 16 people and 87% are male. Their email list
contains 132 members and the pro-choice list has about 50 more. Big deal.
I didn't bother to do a breakdown of gender because I don't really think it
matters all that much.
The point is that they are a group with an opinion and they should be heard,
whatever your personal opinion is.
Perhaps they don't represent the majority of women but they do present a
sizable chunk that is hushed all the time. The fact that being pro-choice
is not deemed "politically correct" nowadays has somewhat of a stifling
effect on the men and women who consider themselves to be pro-life. My
acquaintances for instance usually assume I'm pro-choice and talk about
"those pro-life people" in much the same way you have. That has been the
most blatant form of uncomfortableness I've ever felt at MIT, coming mostly
from women who find out I'm pro-life. I can't call it discrimination, but
it feels a great deal like when someone judges you based on something as
silly as your skin color.
The fact that people assume that just because you're "progressive" or
"liberal" or a "democrat" (and all those silly little words we use to
categorize ourselves and make our life easier) means that you must therefore
be pro-choice is all the more reason for a minority group (right now,
because it wasn't always this way, and there's no reason to think it will
be) to be allowed to be heard.
So I for one am glad that the pro-life group got a word or two in the Tech,
maybe it'll remind "the other side" that we are people too.
>might as well invite the extropians while you're at it... (and it all
>comes full circle.)
Indeed, perhaps they should've been included as well. Their opinion would
bring a great deal to the debate.
