_________________________________________________________
Robert Weverka wrote:
>
> Linda Purrington wrote:
> >
> > That's interesting. I suspect that ww will never get equity until men
> > begin taking on child care, nursing, etc. "pink-collar" type jobs on, so
> > that the fundamental inequity of women's unpaid second job at home is
> > wiped out as the basis ofr the larger wage economy.
>
> Absolutely. In promoting equity, I would promote getting more men in both the
> "pink-collar" type jobs and in the at-home jobs. An equal number of men in
> nursing is an integral part of equity by sex.
>
> > It would probably
> > be a prerequisite to solving the male dominance of such crimes as sexual
> > assault against children, women, and other men.
>
> I think the relationship between education and crime is an important one (an
> attempt to keep this on subject for the list).
>
> > Maybe another thousand
> > years, if we are lucky and we all call 1-888-NOT-2LATE so that the world
> > does not collapse from overpopulation in the meantime?
>
> I get the hint.
> It is apparent that by promoting this part of equity in education, the part
> that would encourage men to get as many degrees as women by increasing the
> numbers of men in fields where they have been traditionally excluded, I am
> writing to the list about portions of Educational Equity which you would have
> us put aside for now. Perhaps you are right. Perhaps today's political
> climate only admits efforts promoting Equity for Women and not promoting
> Equity for Men too. I find that unfortunate, but nevertheless I remain a
> supporter of Equity for Both Sexes.
>
> Robert Weverka <weverka@optivision.com>