From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Sat May 25 2002 - 11:44:32 MDT
A number of people are now quoting and re-quoting to the
effect that I consider men to be more valuable than women.
This is untrue. How did it get started?
Harvey originally wrote
> Proposing that we judge people by race, value people by gender, kill or
> abuse children, assassinate Luddites, reprogram people for their own
> good, initiate force because we're right, govern people against their
> will, and other "final solutions", without addressing the principles
> first is bound to fail. Most people will look at your new proposals
> and point out that they will break everything else we believe in.
and I responded,
> *My* new proposals? This is slanderous. I NEVER said anything
> about assassinating anyone, valuing people by gender, going for
> "final solutions", initiating the use of force, or several other
> things on your list.
Well, it's true that I did say how Roman soldiers might
value women more than men. So how did all this get twisted
to mean that I thought men to be more valuable than women?
(In the above, I should have written that I never approved
of those things I mentioned, whereas you clearly say that
those are *my* proposals. For that alone you must make a
retraction!)
On the other subject,
> All you added was that ancient Romans sometimes valued woman
> more than men if they were breeders for more male soldiers.
Yes, I *did* add that.
> I must have missed the part where you describe men and women
> being valued equally.
Well, I didn't say anything at all about what I valued!
Logically, no one can infer what I believe from the above.
It so happens that I do *not* value women less than men.
(And yes, the remark about Roman soldiers was in the
lifeboat discussion. I was in error about never
having participated at all, sorry.)
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:21 MST