Conference quark::mennotes

    He cannot apply for student loans sponsered by the goverment. Where
    women can. He my face problems, legally, someplace farther along in his
    carrier. Maybe even jail!
    
    Yes, I will agree. How come women don't have to register now they can
    be up front where the action is?

    Sexual discrimination, obviously.

    re .0
    
    You tell him that this is what "equality" means in America.
    
    fred();

    When the Selective Service legislation was passed in 1978, feminists
    were concentrating on the ERA, which, if passed, would have fixed this
    problem.  Don't blame us that the ERA didn't pass.
    
    DougO

    RE .4
    
    Using that logic:  
    
    Get the women out of combat then!
    
    The ERA didn't pass so they can't go into combat.....
    
    
    Touche...?
    Steve

    rep .3
    
    As I recall, the draft was one of the main reasons ERA _didn't_ pass.
    When many who generally supported ERA discovered that there were
    some things about it that didn't _benefit_ them.
    
    fred();

    Steve, you tell your 18 year old son that feminists fighting for the
    ERA were trying to make sure that women got the same opportunities and
    duties in this country as men do.  That's the answer to your basenote.
    
    Since we didn't get the ERA, (and Fred, your selective memory is
    hilarious), then we have to establish those equal opportunities and
    duties separately.  One at a time.  Combat jets and warships, women now
    serve on/in.  Combat frontline troops positions, well, the Army isn't
    so fiar yet.  We're working on it.  And when the volunteers all have
    equal opportunities to serve, we'll start working on those who aren't
    volunteers- those who have to register.  Deal?
    
    DougO

    
    re .8

>    And when the volunteers all have
>    equal opportunities to serve, we'll start working on those who aren't
>    volunteers- those who have to register.  Deal?

    I think this is exactly what I've pointed out before--as soon as
    everyone helps you get everything you want __then__ you might consider 
    working on what someone else wants.  Yeh--right!  

    FWIW, I was one of those who were working _hard_ for the ERA, but
    not for the same reasons "feminists" were.  Because I believed, and
    still do, in _equality_.
    
    fred();

    RE .7
    
    When women HAVE to sign up for Selective Service THEN and ONLY then
    will I support women in combat positions no matter whether front line
    or jet
    
    One step at a time...
    
    Deal??

>    When women HAVE to sign up for Selective Service THEN and ONLY then
>    will I support women in combat positions no matter whether front line
>    or jet

Selective Service seems pretty useless in the post-cold-war era.
Would you support women in combat if SS were eliminated altogether?

    In some reguards, SS is a moot point. But, in the event that it becomes
    a necessary evil. It is worth while to settle the delema as you have
    the time vs having to have the issue forced down your throat when your
    in the trongs of it all. 
    
    Never know when Uncle Sam will send us off to some dank julge, or to
    fight some mid-east confrontation. Never know if one of these little
    spats turns out to be long and involved.. 
    
    Hey, just the same. The vast majority of women that seem to discuss
    this issue is that they want to have the opp to do so. But, dont want
    to go fight. Kinda like the same old same old of conviences
    justification of the cause. Right Doug0!:)
    

    
    Can't remember the exact details, but back during the Gulf War there
    was a ship in the Persian Gulf had several female crew members.
    When he war broke out, the ship had a sudden epidemic of pregnancy
    break out and all the pregnant females had to be shipped home.

    fred();

   Defense Chief Backs Women on Warships 
    
    Washington 
    
    The assignment of women to U.S. warships, followed by the recent
    removal of pregnant sailors from an aircraft carrier, has not hurt Navy
    morale or readiness, Defense Secretary William Perry said yesterday. 
    
    ``I do not see it as a problem based on the information available to me
    at this time. But we have to continue to watch it,'' Perry told
    military veterans in response to a question following a speech to a
    meeting of the American Legion, a military veterans organization. 
    
    Published 2/28/95 in San Francisco Chronicle

    Thanks Doug0 for backing up my statement.

    Remember that it was an Iraqi Exocete that blew the b-jesus out of the
    U.S. frigate?  Now I suppose none of those women got pregnant just
    so they wouldn't have to face the possibility of dodging flaming 
    jet fuel.  Naw--surely not.

    fred();

    >Would you support women in combat if SS were eliminated altogether?
     
    Of course. BUT THAT IS _NOT_ THE CURRENT LAW!
    
    Any 18 yr old US male who fails to register for SS can be _DENIED_ benifits from the
    givmint because of _SEX_
    
    Is that sexist and discriminitory...? Only a fool would try to tell
    that 18 year old anything else (IMHO)...
    
    Steve

    YEP, SS registration for males only ain't fair.  Best thing to do about
    it is register, then register to vote, write your congress critters
    and take part in the process of making life more fair for all -- I
    don't care if that means eliminating SS or putting women in foxholes.
    
    ed

    Yes, it is unfair -- there are two possible solutions:
    
    	1. Have every eighteen year-old register.
    
    	2. Eliminate the SSS.
    
    					andrew

    
    3. Canada ;^).
    
    fred()

    There was a doctor, who was in reserves during the Desert Storm
    program. Who recieved her educational money from our beloved tax
    payers...refused to go to the mideast.... 
    
    A doctor becomes a critical need during times like that. She was not a
    flight hand on an aircraft carrier, nor a mess cook.....

    anecdotes, George.  I prefer to take SecDef Perry's word for it that it
    isn't a problem, and that they're watching to make sure it doesn't.
    
    DougO

    Nope! Not an anecdote Doug0.. A real life person. But, thats life..
    Sides what do you do as the US goberment?? Marter the woman? Nope.
    Praise her for not going because all war is unjust and unfair? Nope..
    How about let folks like yourself know that their short memory cycle
    needs a refresh....:)

    
    re .21

    And I prefer to take SecDef Perry's report as just another typical
    finding of "evidence" to "prove" a pre-supposed end.  Remember how
    adamantly against gay-in-the-military many in the military were?
    However no officer dared come forth to oppose the views of his 
    superiors.  You don't get far in the military, or politics, by finding 
    evidence that opposes your superiors position.

    fred();

    George, an anecdote is a personal story.  That's what you told, an
    anecdote.  Anecdotes may be useful to illuminate certain facets of
    certain situations, the human side of an issue.  But they generally
    fail to provide conclusive evidence for policy determinations because
    they are a single story where policy has to handle millions of cases,
    and anecdotes cannot be presumed to be representative of millions.
    
    I repeat, an anecdote about one woman does not persuade me that when
    Secretary of Defense Perry says this behavior is not a problem, and
    that they're watching for it, that he is wrong.
    
    DougO

    hummmm.... You mean that people make up stories to show a single side
    of the issue?? Like DougO might do?? Naaaaa!! Not me!!:)
    
    Sides this was on Tee-Vee.... Yha know... That boxie thingie that you
    have told us you dont like to watch less its PBS... or wrestling.:)
    And I saw that article on there too.. So, I guess perhaps, again, 
    I failed to raise this to your personal justificational levels. Or 
    you wanna just ignore it cause it doesnt fit in the slot of what 
    DougO wants to be told.

    I didn't say you made the story up, George.  The point is that a single
    example doesn't override the evaluation of the whole situation offered
    by the person whose job it is to notice such problems.
    
    DougO

    
    Well, going by what my own reaction would be to the situation (That
    is, right before going into combat a good size chunk of my crewmates
    suddenly got pregnant and had to be sent home and be replaced by crew
    that wasn't as familiar with the ship)  I think I'd have a real 
    problem with that.

    As I said before, would a woman get pregnant just to avoid actually
    going into combat?   Well, back during Nam I saw a lot of men get
    married and become fathers to avoid going to Nam.

    fred();

    
    re .29
    
>    I didn't say you made the story up, George.  The point is that a single
>    example doesn't override the evaluation of the whole situation offered
>    by the person whose job it is to notice such problems.
    
    Perry's job is to support HilBill's policies.  If he can't then he
    is to resign or be fired.
    
    fred();

    Most consider him the best SecDef in decades, Fred, and it isn't for
    political reasons.  He's knowledgable and competent to run the DoD, and
    a heckuva better choice than Aspin who he replaced.  He has the respect
    of the forces.
    
    DougO

    There were men who were able to aviod Nam by marriage, or anouncing
    they had come out of the closet, or you were a felon. And then it all
    became a moot point because no one was getting out of anything. It was
    either or jail. And that was the bottom line.
    
    And I am just bringing up a news story to light that hopefully over
    rides the din of the NOW hype. But... I'de rather watch wrestling than
    the PBS...:)

    "NOW hype"?  The story in .14 was a news article printed in the local
    paper about remarks made by the SecDef.  "NOW hype"?
    
    DougO

    Excuuuseeee me! For a moment I thought I said NOW hype.... Musta been
    DougO hype.:)

    
    re .29

>    Most consider him the best SecDef in decades, Fred, and it isn't for
>    political reasons.  He's knowledgable and competent to run the DoD, and
>    a heckuva better choice than Aspin who he replaced.  He has the respect
>    of the forces.

    That still may not be saying a whole lot.  He's still a politician,
    and I still doubt that he would sacrifice his political career by
    "interpretding" "evidence" in a manner in opposition to his boss's
    policies, or that any crew member of the ship would come out and
    say (in this day of "equal rights") what he really thinks of the
    situation (good way to end a career real fast).   But HilBill promised 
    he'd have the most ethical administration ever, so he must be ethical, huh.

    fred();

    > He's still a politician, and I still doubt that he would sacrifice his
    > political career
    
    He's not a politician.  He's a technocrat.  He had a long and
    successful career long before he was asked to be a Deputy SecDef in
    1993, and when he's done at DoD I'm sure he'll go right back into
    business.  Here's a bio from last year when he was selected after
    Admiral Inman took himself out of the running to replace Aspin.
    
    DougO
         <<< ALPHAZ::SYS$SYSDEVICE:[NOTES$LIBRARY]OLD_SOAPBOX.NOTE;1 >>>
                         -< SOAPBOX: The Golden Days >-
================================================================================
Note 1097.59                     Inman Out, Man!                        59 of 59
WWDST1::MGILBERT "Education Reform starts at home.." 27 lines  25-JAN-1994 10:58
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William J. Perry, age 67.

BS in Math '49 Stanford
MS '50 Stanford
PhD '57 Penn State

Technical consultant DoD '67-77
Undersecretary DoD R&E '77-81
Managing Director - investment banking firm '81-85
Chairman - Technical Strategies and 
	   Alliances, Inc.  '85-93

Codirector - Stanford Center for International
	     Security and Arms Control - '89-93

Deputy Secretary of Defense - '93

The Boston Globe articles this morning said nothing
about his military service. Age 67 coupled with 
his graduation from Stanford in '49 and '50 make
it unlikely that he saw service in WWII. However it
doesn't take 7 years to get PhD and their wasn't
any fill in info between '50 and '57 so it's possible
that he served during Korea.

    
        .34

    Given the fact that he is a member of Honest-Bill's administration
    doesn't say much for him, though, and it still gives no indication
    as to whether he'd present any reports in opposition of Hilbills
    policies.  Or perhaps his own policies are slanted that way.  I
    do know that, given how I'd feel about the situation and how I know
    military types feel about such things,  I find this awfully hard
    to swallow.

    I do recall that a directive was issued that said that pregnancy _may_
    not be reason to be relieved of duty.  Which means that, yes indeed 
    this is a problem.  It was one of those reports that they flash by once 
    in order to be able to say that they are presenting "balanced" news.  
    Be interesting to see what NOW has to say when they start sending
    pregnant women into combat.

    fred();

    The way I heard it, the Navy can no longer remove a woman from a combat
    ship just because she was pregnant.  It seems the Navy was sending
    pregnant woman to the rear, whether they wanted to go or not.
    
    					andrew