apologies made to all but the right person
lkista at UNM.EDU
Mon Feb 12 11:12:44 EST 1996
On 12 Feb 1996, ED MCNALLY wrote:
> I was going to let this drop, but I really can't. In articles
> 3511 and 3518, 1kista at UNM.EDU (Linnea Ista or someone using that
> address and name) responded to my post. What I had done was to provide
> information on an alternative to abortion in response to a post
> providing information on how to obtain one. Ms. Ista's response seemed
> to be one of anger in which she stated that it seemed convenient for me
> to "tell the rest of us (women) how to live, knowing that you are
> If you take a moment to read the posts, I did not tell anyone
> how to live. I only provided information on how to obtain information
> on an alternative to abortion. I will assume that Ms. Ista would term
> herself "Pro-choice" (my apologies if I am incorrect). I will also
> point out that providing information on options is consistent with the
> term "Choice", whereas censuring that information is very much the
> antithesis of "Choice". In other words, to say that this information
> should not be provided would be to "tell the rest of us how to live".
> I do not think that this is what Ms. Ista would want. I also will
> assume that she does not feel that every pregnancy should end in
> abortion. (Again, my apologies if I am incorrect)
> I would not have responded to this except for two reasons:
> 1. Ms. Ista made two apologies to the rest of you, but not to me,
> even after having it pointed out to her that she had seriously
> misinterpreted what I had said ( I sent her e-mail to this
> effect, and two others posted general articles).
> 2. My words were discounted simply because I am a man. Reverse
> discrimination against men by some will not help resolve any
> oppression leveled against women. I was told earlier that an
> incident I described in which I was told that I was having
> difficulty with a superior because "I don't think she likes men"
> was an isolated incident. It seems that it is assumed that
> situations like this rarely occur, and should therefore be
> discounted. They are not as rare as many think. Besides, I
> reiterate that such backlashes only serve to heighten tension,
> and are in direct opposition to what should be the real
> objective, which is justice.
> I do not wih to use this forum as a debate for abortion. In fact, I
> originally subscribed to this group so that I could possibly gather
> information of value for my female students. I have to say that I am
> very disappointed that everything seems to be directed toward what has
> been done wrong, rather than providing information for those of us who
> want to do something right for women-in-bio.
I would like to respond to this.
Number one, I responded out of anger, which I should not have done.
Number two, I never received a personal response to my post from Mr.
McNally. I do not doubt that he sent one. My mail server has not been
being really consitant lately.
I thought my apology was general.
Yes I am pro-choice, no I do not belive that every pregnancy should end
MR. MCNALLY I AM HUMBLY, PUBLICALLY AND SHAMEFACEDLY APOLOGIZING!
I saw what I (apparently incorrectly) interpreted as an "antichoice"
post from someone who was male. As I had stated in the one (not two)
apology sent out, I recently had to deal with mostly male protesters
while accompanying a friend to an abortion clinic. It was not a pleasant
experience. When I saw Mr. McNally's post I (evidently incorrectly)
identified him with the people who had so tormented my friend. Once again
(yes, that is my real name)
More information about the Womenbio