[Vision2020] Logos School's all-male board

[Melynda Huskey]

Men and women:  they're day and night, sun and moon, shore and sea, all 
those lovely comparisons.  Claude Levi-Strauss noticed this set of metaphors 
some years ago, and added a few of his own:  nature and culture, cooked and 
raw, savage and civilized.

Guess who's raw, savage, natural, and lunatic?

Some facts from the Institut Pour La Solidarite de Femmes Internationale 
http://www.sigi.org/ :

Every year in India, 5000 brides are murdered or commit suicide because 
their marriage dowries are considered inadequate. (2000)

10 American women are killed by their batterers each day (1998).

In Russia, half of all murder victims are women killed by their male 
partners. (1995)

75 percent of the refugees and internally displaced in the world are women 
who have lost their families and their homes. (2000).

Women produce 80 percent of the food on the planet, but receive less than 10 
percent of agricultural assistance (1995).

Two thirds of the world's 876 million illiterates are women (2000).

Some 600,000 women-- one every minute-- die each year from pregnancy-related 
causes. Most of these deaths are preventable (1997).

There is no country in the world where women's wages are equal to those of 
men (2000) .

70 percent of people in abject poverty (living on less than $1 per day) are 
women (1995).

I have to ask:  what's the good part of  "I'm the sun/you're the moon;  I'm 
the loving leader/you're the grateful follower" for women?


Melynda Huskey




"We utterly deny all outward wars and strife, and fightings with outward 
weapons, for any end, or under any pretense whatsoever: this is our 
testimony to the whole world."
Quaker Declaration of 1660





>From: Douglas <dougwils@moscow.com>
>To: vision2020@moscow.com
>Subject: [Vision2020] Logos School's all-male board
>Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 09:05:02 -0700
>
>Dear visionaries,
>
>Scott has asked me for two contradictory things. He asked me to be "honest 
>and concise," and I might assume from this that any detailed explanation 
>could be taken as evasive -- as me developing my own brand of political 
>correctness. But then he also asks for "all the reasons."
>
>A detailed explanation could easily grow to the size of a book. But modern 
>egalitarianism is incapable of thinking at the level of foundational 
>presuppositions (as has been demonstrated multiple times in this forum), 
>and "all the reasons" would not be likely to find an attentive audience. In 
>our modern egalitarian setting, any restriction placed on men or women is 
>automatically taken as a statement of the superiority of one over the 
>other, end of discussion.
>
>That said,
>
>1. Why now? has already been answered, multiple times. The goal is to 
>protect the school from frivolous harassment in these, our PC times.
>2. Why at all?  is, in my mind, tied in with the first. If we did not live 
>in these times, such a proposal would probably be quite superfluous and 
>unnecessary.
>
>John Danahy just simply assumes that such a practice would entail "second 
>class citizenship for women." But this shows how wildly divergent our 
>foundational assumptions are. I will simply seek to answer this with a poem 
>of Chesterton's called Comparisons.
>
>         If I set the sun beside the moon,
>         And if I set the land beside the sea,
>         And if I set the town beside the country,
>         And if I set the man beside the woman,
>         I suppose some fool would talk about one being better.
>
>Cordially,
>
>Douglas Wilson
>
>_____________________________________________________
>List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the 
>communities of the Palouse since 1994.                 http://www.fsr.net   
>                              mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
>ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ


_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail