GenderGappers 1998: 021 - 030

GenderGappers 1998 - 21

"SUGAR AND SPICE AND EVERYTHING NICE"

Cultural programing can be insidious or downright
obvious. It starts in utero even before we are born.
The most obvious, we can escape, IF we learn to tune in
and cancel it.

The newborn has no such ability. S/he is relentlessly
programed by parents, relatives, friends, teachers and
media through infancy, childhood and, unless s/he be-
comes aware, throughout adulthood.

Even those of us who become aware and turn off the
programming, may contribute to the next generation's,
because this cultural training is built right in to our
social customs.

Next time you meet up with friends/relatives and their
baby, monitor yourself. Do you react and talk differ-
ently to a girl baby than you do to a boy baby? Do you
find yourself saying variations of, "What a big strong
_man_ he is" and "She's such a sweet little _doll_".

From nursery rhymes to Walt Disney, the message is
pounded in. Females are: weak, vain, little, birds,
candy, victims, helpless etc. Males are: strong,
reckless, big, men, achievers, aggressive etc.

And now, when we really need her, one of our media
icons is leaving -- Murphy Brown. Aside from fantasy,
provided by Xena or bondage as provided by Nakita, TV
mostly offers us a "woman as wimp" fare. No media hype
here about "final episode" -- just relief that a strong
woman persona is off the tube.

Predominant message for women is: "It's too hard to
fight this equality battle so I'll settle for being
fashionable and witty and cute and indecisive and
emotional while still working outside the home waiting
for Mr. Right to come along and take me away from all
of this" or "Someday my prince will come".

Despite all this hype, there are girls and women who
ignore it and define themselves. We see it in some
young girls who have escaped the programming through
enlightened parents and sports. They are encouraged to
develop their minds and their bodies to their potential
-- not according to their gender. They do not scream
at insects but may even be totally fascinated with
spiders and other creepy-crawly creatures!

We see it in some young women who flourish in the
atmosphere provided at female-only colleges. And, of
course, we see it often in women of all ages who sud-
denly find out that the Disney story-tale world is a
farce and a sham and discover that "daddy's little girl"
is really "daddy's little dope".

It can be a frightening revelation to go along with a
Barbie doll mind-set since birth, and then become aware
that their gender is less valued in our culture.

The first time such a woman experiences a situation
where a mediocre male is promoted instead of her, or
when her work and ideas are stolen by males and passed
off as theirs, may be very traumatic.

It is also sensitizing. She can now begin to realize
that her worth is mostly only a factor of how she
appeal to males -- especially how her body appeals.
Lacking a killer body, she may note that dumb servility
works almost as well.

She will note how "facts" may change depending on the
circumstances when the media reviews events with its
typical gender bias.

A recent case in point: A few weeks ago, the media
reported that a father had been charged with _kidnap-
ing_ his children. A few days later the wording had
changed significantly although the facts did not.
_Kidnaping_ was replaced by _spirited away_ and the
father was portrayed as _rescuing_ his children from
their mother.

But, science says it's in our nature, isn't it? We
have been taught that men are fierce and women are docile.
To prove this, we are given the "facts". Human behavior
evolved from warlike, male-dominated chimpanzees.

But, the facts that are given us are selective. _We
are just as related to BONOBOS_. Never heard of them?
Not too surprising as they hurt the old male dominance
theories.

Bonobos are apes where the females are clearly in
charge. They are a peaceful society. They in no way
fit the tales we've been told by evolutionists who
described us "as decidedly chimplike -- a violent,
hierarchical society led by powerful, competitive
males."

Although the female bonobos are only 85% as big as
males, "they embody sisterhood, banding together to
take charge."

If this peaks your interest, there's lots more in a new
book: _Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape_ by Frans de Wall.

Whatever theory of evolution you choose to espouse,
clearly we do have choices.

Two cute little rhymes are passed on from generation to
generation to program our children: One tells boys
they are alive and active. The other tells girls they are
inert cookie-dough.

Courage, strength, sensitivity, intelligence and creativity --
that's what little children, _of both genders_, are made of.
#


GenderGappers 1998 - 22
"UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL!"

Every day it seems that we hear about still another
force or plan that is aimed at dividing women to
decrease their political power. These may come from
within or from without. Prominent example of both
are the ancient controls still propagated through
our culture.

In addition there are the political forces engaged in
forcing us back to our past powerlessness. Politicians
have learned to fear the power of women's votes and are
determined to nullify that power by polarizing us.

Choice is a uniting force for women since most of us
feel that each should decide what is suitable for
herself. We may consult with health professionals but
we do not want governmental or religious dominion over
our reproductive choices.

Cracks are already forming as the deep pockets of
political/religious groups are emptied into attempts to
curtail women's reproductive rights. Their final goal
is to deprive women of *all* birth control, but they are
concentrating on abortion methods. Using terrorism and
murder along with the ballot, they have severely re-
stricted the rights of many women already. They have
pushed through punitive and restrictive laws in most
states.

The media support their tactic of dividing women using
lies and emotional blackmail. We seldom if ever hear
acurate descriptions of the reasons and procedures
for late term abortions (Gappers 1998 - 3 _No Zippers,
No Velcro_). Instead, the media constantly barrages us
with pictures, paid ads and "news" stories of "partial
birth infanticide" -- a term designed to play on
voter's emotions and label women as baby killers.

Propaganda messages abound which may usurp our words
and play on them to turn them against us. We must be
vigilant to counteract them. Case in point and thanks
to Governor Childes of Florida who vetoed a bill that
would have allowed a specialty licence plate to be
issued showing two children and the words, "choose
life".

Terrorists activities have largely frightened off doc-
tors since many feel it is too risky for themselves,
their future practice and their patients. This has in
turn caused most medical schools to cut or restrict all
abortion training.

So now it is mostly women who are trained and dedicated
to the service of our sisterhood that stand against
those terrorists who hold a bible in one hand and a bomb in
the other.

Florida is now under concerted attack as Women's clin-
ics are being subjected to noxious chemicals such as
butric acid. In some cases, holes are bored in the
doors and windows and the chemicals pumped in. A bill
to limit abortion availability is said to be certain to
pass the legislature. The hope is that Governor
Childes will veto it.

In upcoming elections, one of the Shrubs (Molly Ivins
word for the Bush boys) is in contention for the office
of governor. It's a sure thing that this Republican
would favor anti choice legislation.

Watch Florida carefully -- your state and your freedom
may be under attack next.

Those are some of the threats from without. The
threats from within may be just as devastating to our
unity of purpose.

We have remarked before that women emerged from pseudo
slavery and began to develop their true potential in
this Century. This in contrast to the thousands of
years that men have had to learn and develop.

Our previous training never prepared us for dealing
with opposing viewpoints. We never had the tradition
of team sports to train us for teamwork. We could only
back down and suffer in silent resentment or compliance
when faced with opposition. Compromises and the cour-
age to make them are just two of the skills that we
must learn and we must learn quickly.

In a nearby town, a woman's organization which has
enjoyed community support for many years has been
nearly ruined by a long feud between two women with
different philosophies who will not compromise. Both
are ardent champions for women, but . . .

One woman's political views are to the left and is
determined that the efforts of the organization be
directed toward poor women and support only left wing
local candidates.

The other woman is a centrist. She insists that the
organization must direct its support to all women and
not affiliate itself with any political party.

The membership has been torn apart and the formerly
great organization flounders and has lost its effectiveness.
The city is considering a proposal to eliminate their
funding and a formerly supportive community is disgusted
with a "cat fight" that did not need to happen.

Being a strong and independent woman does not mean that
we use our strength against other women to promulgate
our own political agendas. It means having the grace
and courage to compromise for the team.

Many women have still not learned that we cannot all
pitch or be on first base. Some of us must be in right
field "watching the dandylions grow". It is not our
position that is important, it is our dedication to
teamwork -- to getting the job done together.
#


GenderGappers 1998 - 23

APOTHEOSIS NOW!

Few would argue that females and males differ from one
another in sexual characteristics and the hormones that
cause and sustain those characteristics. Beyond this,
the various body systems are identical in form and
function serving to denote human beings as one specie
presenting a variety of body types.

There is disagreement, however, on the elusive func-
tions of the mind and brain. How much of the "per-
ceived" differences between women and men are genetic
and how much are culturally induced?

Where cultural differences between populations of
humankind differ, one may note many areas where females
and males exhibit similar aptitudes and attitudes.

These may demonstrate a native gender equity in intel-
ligence just as they demonstrate a near universal,
culturally induced policy: The strongest gender (male)
rules. He enforces his "superior" position by declar-
ing the existence of a male "god", while the less
strong gender (female) serves the stronger and worships
that "god".

Lately, we have observed that there appears to be a
surge among scientist to develop and pursue research to
intensify perceived _differences_ in the genders. The
media reports of their results tend to drive the gen-
ders even further apart; to show woman as decidedly
_not man_ ie not god material.

One needs to be informed as to how these experiments
are constructed, who is involved, how many are involved
and the bias of the researchers. Unfortunately, we
seldom are given this data. So, if we take some re-
ports on face value alone, they may affect us adverse-
ly.

A case in point is a recent announcement claiming proof
that women can stand pain better than men. The infer-
ence is: _ALL WOMEN_.

We know that ALL women were not tested and we know that
scientist construct an experiment using quite small
samples yet when their report comes out -- through the
magic of statistics -- it reveals a statistical signif-
icant difference in the populations chosen by the
scientist. They then apply this to us, the masses with
a caveat compliment -- "brave women".

How is this dangerous? We, you and I, may be in a
population of women that feels pain intensely -- never
mind that _MANY_ women don't -- WE DO! If a physician
gets the mind set that women don't need as much pain
medication as men do, we stand to suffer. Conversely,
a male in pain might be over medicated.

Another study recently revealed that women judge by
their body's feelings while men rely on what their eyes
tell them. This is reinforcement for the oft touted
maxim that women's brains are inadequate (unequal to
men's) or that they do not use them.

As is usual with studies of this kind, they are pre-
sented _AS IF_ women are being complimented and there
lies the danger -- flattery may dilute our rationality.

Subjects were placed in a chair. Their heads were
covered with a virtual reality apparatus. While the
chair was turned one full circle (360 degrees), the
picture the subject saw via VR indicated that s/he was
turned just half a circle (180 degrees).

Without giving any further parameters regarding how
many subjects were tested or what the actual tests
showed on each subject, the report blatantly claimed
that, "Women mostly were not fooled by the VR and
correctly identified one full circle.

"Men, however, mostly used their eyes to determine how
much they had moved and thought they had been turned
only half way around."

Although it was noted that most women were correct and
men were not, the emphasis was placed on how each
evaluated ie woman with her body; man with his brain.

And nowhere was the statement made that many women were
fooled into going with what their eyes told them
(brain) and many men were correct in feeling their body
going around in a full circle.

Until gender-specific and environmental training is
compensated for, there can be no authentic results from
this type of experiment. The danger lies in the insid-
ious ways our culture employs to quiet our fears and
control us.

All that is accomplished with these studies is to
confirm the same old cultural edicts -- Gals do gal
things, necessary but trivial things (care for guy's
comfort and children, spend his money, buy cloths and
makeup). Gals = body orientation. Guys do guy things,
important things (rule the world, think, drink beer and
talk sports). Guys = mind orientation.

We can no longer tolerate shunting women to one side of
the world-room. We know from history what one-gender-
supremacy produces. We know from experience that
gender equality works better. We must continue to
demand that they make room for us at the table.
#


GenderGappers 1998 - 24

SUSAN AND THE SUPREMES

Well no. That's not the title of a new musical group.
It is, in fact, 10 people who recently said "NO" to
America's answer to Attila the Hun.

There are others that have said no in the past and
suffered greatly. There will be those in the future
who will say no and they will suffer greatly.

But we'll bet the Supremes will not suffer at all.
Kenny Starr sent them a load of horse manure thinking
that the nine judges would think it was roses. Fortu-
nately for us, their olfactory apprati was working
properly.

Claiming that the issue was one of GREAT NATIONAL
IMPORT, Kenny implored the Supreme Court to hear his
plea *at once* --bypassing regular legal procedures.
He even couched it in words used years ago in the Nixon
debacle. Kenny had to know right now exactly when,
where and how Monica and Bill had sex.

Not _IF_ they had sex! You see, Kenny has decided that
they did and he is drooling for all the details. He
thinks the President's people in the White House
watched so he has demanded that they tell him what he
wants to hear.

Kenny's a bit of a voyeur, isn't he?

So much of what is going on in this special council
appointment is perplexing and totally weird. OK, so
the law gives the SC a bottomless account chargeable to
us who pay taxes; lavish investigative staffs; limitless
time and, from all reports, the power of life and death
over all those who come to his attention.

But the law also says that the Grand Jury proceeding is
secrete. We wonder if anyone has ever told the media
about that. We wonder if anyone told Kenny Starr about
that. We know that no one has told Kenny's spokesper-
son about that.

That's right. The SC has a frontperson who delivers
Kenny's proclamations to us, the masses. His job is to
explain why Kenny does what Kenny does and to let us
know what a nice fellow he is. He also is in charge of
making statements detrimental to the President in a
manner that suggests they are true. According to him
and Kenny, they are getting the facts in a criminal
investigation so anything goes -- even our Constitu-
tion.

But aren't those proceedings supposed to be secrete?
Guess not if Kenny doesn't want them to be.

On the other hand, the information coming from, "reli-
able sources inside the Clinton White House", are said
by the media to be *SPIN*.

They tell us that it's all about character. Like how
can you trust someone who would lie? Now, who was that
President who lied to Congress about Iran Contra? And
while we are on the subject who knows any political pro
that has not lied? It seems to be a qualification for
public office. Tsk, tsk! So puzzling.

Guess it's not so much what is lied or who is lied to
as it is who is allegedly doing the lying.

We still have three parts to our government, don't we?
Executive, legislative and judicial? Where does the SC
dictator come in and why isn't his character impor-
tant?

Unless, it's OK to attempt to coerce a witness into
wearing a tape recorder into the White House.

Unless, it's OK to hound innocent bystanders for sala-
cious details.

Unless, it's OK to destroy attorney-client privilege
for everyone.

Many legal scholars are revealing how disturbing Ken-
ny's tactics are and what the consequences, the fall
out, will be. If Kenny has his way, it will be safer
to tell your secretes to the town gossip than to your
attorney.

One thing that most everyone agrees on is that the
special prosecutor, backed up by his political party is
hell bent to "get" Hillary and Bill Clinton. It ap-
pears to matter little that Starr has formerly argued
vehemently for attorney-client privileges.

Now he is not satisfied with just harassing the living,
he is going after the dead - Vince Foster. What does
that say about his character? Or, does it really matter
as long as he "gets his man"?

Meanwhile as Republicans accuse Clinton of stalling
Starr's investigation, the congressional majority party
stalls on the tobacco bill, the United Nations bill, the
campaign finance bill -- but, quickly passes a whopping
pork barrel bill. No surprise. There are elections coming up.

All the while, the legislative leaders are voicing the
Starr accusations against the President. They aim this
directly at gendergappers. In their view, women are
ruled entirely by their emotions and will turn against
Democratic candidates. They still think we're dummies
but we know that repeating a lie over and over does not
create a truth.

Sounds to us like a lot of pots calling the kettle black.
If there is substance, lay it out, Kenny, and let's get
on with our Nation's important business.
#


GenderGappers 1998 - 25

"CHRISTINA'S WORLD"

We must admit that we were perplexed by the accusation
that someone has stolen the Women's Movement and we
were flabbergasted to learn that we are among the
accused. How can something be stolen when it is right
here? When it's all around us? When its reason for
being is all around us?

A speaker on C-Span, asserting this theft, caught our
attention and we listened enthralled. The mostly young
male studio audience was told that the Woman's Movement
was abducted and the culprits were nasty women led by
even nastier women's studies professors.

These professors were corrupting the young women in
their classes by telling them lies; encouraging them to
trash males and inciting them to feel victimized when
there was no cause.

This speaker claimed that the statistics used by these
dreadful people were false or had different meanings
that what they attributed to them.

She derided them for male bashing. She declared that
accusing men and a paternalistic society for problems
women encountered was specious. She insisted that
there were no such problems generally and allowed that
the few that might occur should be blamed on those women who
were not being true to their nature.

Insisting that men and women are totally different and
are biologically programed to be that way, she support-
ed this thesis with statistics showing that boys were
injured more then girls (boys active, daring; girls
passive, scardycats).

She attacked a report stating that girls attempt sui-
cide more than boys by gleefully asserting that more
boys were successful at it! (So there!)

While acknowledging that there were batters and rapist,
she brushed this aside by disparaging the statistics
and postulating that these things happened to women who
wanted to be victims.

She found the whole idea that anyone might want to
encourage children to play with gender-neutral toys
hilarious. She related that a group of children were
given a doll house to play with and all the girls
played with the dolls nicely, while the boys threw the
dolls off the top of the doll house.

"This proved that boys will be boys and girls love
babies." This is their true nature and when they
follow it, instead of believing what the rabble rousing
women's studies professors say, they are content. They
do not become victims.

With apologies to Andrew Wyeth, we marvel at the limit-
ed horizons of Hoff-Sommers and her world.

We respectfully invite her to talk to airline steward-
esses. She might even fly along with them and watch
the male public grope and pinch them.

Or tag along with women medical students and doctors as
they are afflicted by boys just being boys in the seri-
ous business of healing the sick.

How about a tour with some women engineers, custodians,
lawyers, stock clerks, chemists, athletes, politicians
etc? Something of this kind might broaden her intel-
lectual capacity as well as her horizons.

As for her proof regarding the children and the doll-
house, we suggest that she check out a few basic scien-
tific procedures. Never once did it occur to her that
children are gender-trained by our society. For any
study to be valid, one has to allow for that training
and discount it's effects.

There are plenty of studies that attempt to do this and
the results are most interesting. And what of the boy
children that are trained in their own home to be kind
and loving individuals? How does one explain their
devotion to dolls and TeddyBears?

Or how about the girls who are trained in their own
homes to be strong and active? Dolls as playthings
have little meaning for them when they are not re-
stricted in their development. They'd much rather be
climbing a tree or building a fort.

And, Christina, watch how these children change when
they face the pressures of gender conformity. Biology
counts for sure, but it is not the sum of the entire
human being -- that is limitless and is true for
girls/women as well as boys/men.

We in the women's movement do not consider women and
men as identical. We see each gender as a continuum of
possibilities. These people you disparage are working
to obtain parity between the genders in matters of
life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

They strive to bring about an enlightened society where
girls AND boys are free to develop without the present
constraints of culturally induced gender discrimina-
tion.

We look forward to the time when a woman can choose an
occupation and can thrive and excel without the con-
stant harassment present in so many workplaces.

When you finished your lecture, Christina, one of the
few women in the room responded to your request for
questions. She asked you, "Since women are biological-
ly attracted to babies, why do some chose to murder
their own baby by abortion?"

Tough question and your answer begged it. You blamed
it on the "cultural training" that the woman's movement
had introduced. A training that confused women into
thinking they would be happier in a job than as a
mother.

That was it. No other questions were asked. You
quickly left the podium and the studio. Whether you
can admit to it or not, you're a hypocrite and your
young audience, who live in the real world, knew it.
#


GenderGappers 1998 - 26

DIS-CONTENT WITH _CONTENT_

Anyone who has found themselves pressured by the un-
wanted attention of the press has been chuckling de-
lightedly the last few days. Their amusement stems
from the fallout from an article in a new magazine
called _Content_.

The magazine's purpose is to turn the tables, as it
were, on the press. To examine media in depth, the way
they do us when they "smell" a story. The first issue
of _Content_ started an angry buzz that still has not
subsided. Turnabout may be fair play, but the 5th
estate is not comfortable with being the object the
truth-spotlight shines upon.

You remember when the Monica Lewinski story was break-
ing and reporters were scrambling for all the latest
sleeze? We all heard about leaks from the Office of
the Special Council. Of course, Kenny came right out
and said, "Oh, no. No leaks from my office. I would-
n't allow that to happen."

His people even suggested to reporters (who passed it
on to us) that the leaks were really coming from the
White House and were meant to incriminate Kenny's
office. The press readily reported this "fact" to one
and all calling it more White House spin.

Then along comes Steve Brill about to publish a new
magazine named _Content_ (as in, `the content of this
magazine will be stuff about the press'). He inter-
viewed Kenneth Starr, SC, and wrote an article.

Under Brill's questioning, Starr admitted to giving
special 'background' briefings to `select' reporters.

Ha! And all this time, the reporters were getting
their briefings from Starr and gaily contributing to
the rumors that the leaks came from the White House.

Now that Kenny outed them, they are screaming bloody
murder claiming that, "everybody does it, background
information is not illegal etc." They point out that
Brill contributed to democrats including President
Clinton, and claim that it shows his bias.

They conveniently forget that only a short time ago
Publisher Brill printed the very positive article about
Paula Jones. The one that insisted that everyone had
been unfair to her and that she might really have a
case against the president and should be listened to.
This does not sound like a biased person to us.

Far, far, far-right columnist, Cal Thomas shrills, "The
latest smear is that Starr has violated the law by
talking to a small number of journalists. But the
White House personnel and other Clinton defenders have
done the same thing."

Say what? The Grand Jury proceedings are secrete. It
is illegal for a SP to discuss or even refer to them.
No such restrictions apply to you or us or anyone
outside of these Grand Jury proceedings. He sounds
like a little child proclaiming that, "Clinton did it
too, so it's OK for Starr to!"

During the time when Bill Ginsburg was Lewinski's
lawyer, journalists fell all over each other buying him
lunches, dinners and drinks. Buying him and his access
to Lewinski. This from a profession that claims to
present unbiased reporting because they "do not pay for
news".

What does all this mean to GenderGappers who look to
the media for information on candidates? We suggest
that it means we must diversify our news sources.

We need to read reports on candidates from different
viewpoints to get some idea of what these people stand
for and what they have stood for in the past.

Once again, we have seen an example of the awesome
power produced by the marriage of the attack add with
million$ of dollars from unidentified contributors.

The tobacco lobby spent billion$ and many in the elec-
torate were encouraged to contact their congressional
representatives and urge them to vote against it.
These very successful ads iterated and reiterated that
the tobacco bill was a huge tax hike.

Some members of the press, to be sure, reported the
facts of the bill, but they also reported the substance
of the attack ads thus promulgating their message.
With supporting calls and letters, the republican
majority leadership felt free to effectively kill the
tobacco bill.

We need to be aware that the press is not, and should
not, be above the law but we know that some reporters
think themselves to be above the truth.

Brill's article found it's mark, to judge by the
screams that still reverberate. We think there's a
clear sense that, `they really do protest to much.'
#


GenderGappers 1998 - 27
UNCHAINED!

What great news. Susan McDougal is finally out of
jail. Of course, there is still Starr's criminal
contempt charge pending against her, so she will be
back to defend herself in court, but at least for
awhile Starr is blocked from further torturing her.

He also lost this week when the Supremes refused to let
him run amok and destroy client-lawyer privilege.
Kenny was trying to get this privilege canceled when
the client died.

Well, we waste no tears on Kenny's frustrations. It
was just so great to see Susan without those chains--
but must confess we have a favorite candidate to inher-
it them.

Now the world news is concentrated on President Clin-
ton's China trip. The majority party politicians in
Congress are loudly proclaiming the sins of this coun-
try and how the President of the USA should not be
associating with people who keep political prisoners.

What was Susan McDougal if she wasn't a political
prisoner? Could there be any connection between free-
ing her and the chance that someone in the media might
just see the similarity and remark on it?

That sure would have been embarrassing. We know she
appeared in court to plea for the right to medical
treatment. It surprised everyone when Judge George
Howard Jr. released her immediately with "time served".
We understand that the judge read letters to the court
from some of her supporters. We hope some of those
letters were from GenderGappers.

While the mainly conservative pols are wallowing in
"the sins of China", the Senate majority leader, Trent
Lott, stood up in his superiority pulpit and condemned
all those who's sexual preference didn't match his.
Calling homosexuality a sin, Lott was soliciting the
votes from the ri-chus far right-wing.

He did this while criticizing China for its absence of
religious freedom. What a hypocrite.

We've all been exposed to religious terrorists who have
tried, and still continue, to deprive women of their
reproductive choices.

And those that insist on school prayer, and THEIR reli-
gious icons in our courtrooms.

And those who would deprive a terminally ill person in
extreme pain the choice of ending her/his life.

Small potatoes, you may think, when placed beside the
sins of China. Could be, but ask the students at Kent
State if their deaths were better or easier or less
important than those of Tiananmen Square.

Or ask the women and men killed by the religious vio-
lence at women's clinics.

Or ask Susan if her freedom is as important to her as
any other dissident. On second thought, there is no
need to. That smile as she emerged from the courthouse
in Arkansas said it all.

Welcome back, Susan.
#


GenderGappers 1998 - 28

`TRIPPED' ON HER OWN PETARD

What a blast! A Maryland prosecutor has called a Grand
Jury to investigate how Linda Tripp, allegedly illegal-
ly, taped conversations with Monica Lewinski.

Linda is yelling, "it's political." Well she's right.
It is political just as Kenny Starr's `scorched earth,
take no prisoners, anything goes as long as I get Clin-
ton' policy continues unabated.

She probably won't be convicted as it is near impossi-
ble to prove that she knew what she was doing was
illegal, but that isn't the point.

The Maryland prosecutor wants to investigate the whole
conspiracy hatched by Luceanne Goldberg, _literary
agent_ and Linda Tripp, _expose writer_. Turning over
the stones around these two is sure to uncover some
noxious odors and more interesting revelations of
others involved.

And Tripp, by her own words, has nothing to fear. As
she has claimed so many times, she is just telling the
truth and everyone knows that the truth is all a Grand
Jury and prosecutor wants from anyone.

Yeah? Try telling that fairy tale to Susan McDougal
and all the others who have been mangled by Kenny.

So it will be hard for the Maryland prosecutor to find
a smoking-gun. Tripp surely is not going to admit to
knowing that by not telling Lewinski that she was
taping their conversations, she was performing an
illegal act.

And, of course, Starr and the FBI will never admit that
they knew it was illegal when they listened in on some
of the last taped conversations they urged Tripp to
make of Lewinski.

Whatever is revealed by this investigation will be well
worth watching by GenderGappers.

As will the suit brought against the State of Vermont
by the Right to Life.

The Vermont legislature passed a tough campaign finance
law last term and one of the provisions was that
amounts and contributions had to be reported.

Since R to L'ers don't give money to just ANY candi-
date, the voter can tell at a glance just who, female
or male, democrat or republican, plans to vote to limit
women's reproductive rights.

R to L is incensed with this law. After all, this was
to be their year of stealth. A year when they support-
ed women candidates that they were sure of, sub rosa.
The year we, unknowingly, would vote for their candi-
dates.

So, be warned if your state does not have such a dis-
closure law. Get after your local TV and Newspaper re-
porters to closely question candidates. Get them "on
the record" pro or con women's reproductive rights and
other issues you support.

... as for the upcoming Maryland Grand Jury investigation
of the Tripper, there's a really glorious giggle, a
pearl in the oyster. One witness has been declared
ready to cooperate fully - Monica Lewinski. How's that
for Karma?
#


GenderGappers 1998 - 29

PRE-ELECTION LOW JINKS

It is hard to escape noticing the sudden flurry of
activity on Capitol Hill in D.C. these days. With
adjournment only a few days away, elections coming up,
and the realization that nothing much has been accom-
plished, the people's representatives are engaging in a
time honored rite of passage - finger pointing.

This collective act of placing the blame is a bit like
"The Running of the Bulls". Just pure mayhem where
facts and truth are as elusive as proof, and all utter-
ances are full of bull.

This mass explanation to the electorate has as its base
line, pure Hans Solo -- "It's not my fault!"Congress
blames the Administration; the Administration blames
Congress.

Forget that many from both parties have been working on
various bills with administrative aids. In fact, two
important bills, campaign finance and the tobacco bill
came up for action. Both were backed by prominent
republicans and supported by democrats. Both were sunk
by the republican leadership.

Now the finger pointing goes into high gear. And,
along with "it's not my fault", is the "mine is bigger,
better, longer and doesn't need the Viagra of hard
earned taxpayer's money".

Referring, of course, to bills whipped up by the major-
ity leadership to be passed in lieu of the administra-
tion's proposals. The greatest of these hoopla raising
proclamations is about health care.

President Clinton threw the congressional majority a
nasty curve when he came up with the "Patients Bill of
Rights" some time ago. It resonated loudly with _Whee
The People_ -- An instant campaign issue.

But for some time, the republicans weren't worried.
They were sure that Kenny Starr would get the goods on
Bill and all they would have to do is impeach him and
poof! There goes Bill and his program.

Bad mistake. The _Comebackid_ is still president and
the congressional majority is scratching around like
crazy to explain months of inactivity.

Already, the campaign ads are pounding at us from the
media. Of special interest to GenderGappers are ads
put out by senators, DiAmato, Faircloth and others.

Hell bent for leather, they are going after the women's
vote fearful of the ever looming gendergap.

But again they have learned nothing from their past
mistakes. They still believe that women vote only with
emotion because, unlike men, they have nothing to think
with.

So with hardly a glance backward (or forward), these
senators have leapt aboard a horse sure to win the
race. A horse that women just have to find so appeal-
ing that they will even vote for the rider. A horse
loaded with emotion.

A horse called, "Curing Breast Cancer". Sit back and
relax, women of America. What science has been unable
to do, these two and other republicans will accomplish
-- if you vote for them.

(We are also seeing ads showing that lesbigays can be
cured! All due to republican initiatives, but that's
another topic.)

Kinda brings us back to the medicine shows and the
magic elixir that will cure everything from poison ivy
to flatulence.

How can they, how dare they continue to consign us to
idiocy? Well, GenderGappers has a special medication
to help these guys.

Not too many years ago, when women never had physical
illness, JUST EMOTIONAL PROBLEMS, this cure-all medica-
tion was about all they got.

It's called, _Lydia Pinkham_.

Swig this throughout the day, fellers. You might come up
with a real issue. Or, just lie back and enjoy the alcoholic haze.
#


GenderGappers 1998 - 30

REPUBLICANS ADVOCATING CHOICE!...?

Well, we heard it ourselves. Saw the ad on TV. No
doubt about it. The Republican Party is running elec-
tion ads supporting choice.

Well, no, not that kind. Ya see, to please their base
made up of irreligious right and unchristian coali-
tioners, ads are being run encouraging lesbians to
choose.

Their pitch goes something like this: Somewhere along
the way, these women made the wrong choice of sexual
preference. They chose to be lesbians. But, with the
help of the Rychus one's god, these lesbians can
_choose_ to become heterosexual. It's all a matter of
_choice_.

Now there should be no need for the Republican election-
committee to get all haired up about lesbians if it was
not for the fact that doing so stirs up animosity among
women.

"Divide and conquer". Turn women against themselves and
get their vote. The media has always promulgated this.
_Time Magazine_ (see URL*) recently pronounced our movement
dead, for example, and columnist, Laura Ingram, loudly
broadcasts that the only F-Word-ist now are lesbians.

Whenever any opinion is sought concerning our movement,
the media's darlings such as Sommers, Wolff or Huffy-
Puffington are interviewed. The many women in the
movement who don't write sexy best sellers are never
asked for their opinion. These are the ones in the
trenches day after day teaching work skills, helping
battered women or keeping women's health centers open -
just to identify a few.

So the election committee is bringing lesbianism to the
forefront to exacerbate any weakness in our movement
that they can find.

It's certainly worked before. Throughout the women's
movement, any woman who stood up for her rights or
refused to be sexually harassed was labeled a lesbian.

Most women responded to this label with various ver-
sions of, "blow it out your ear", but many more were
intimidated. Just as our culture uses race and reli-
gion to divide people, it uses sexual preference.

And it is not a small population they are going after.
Those people are everywhere. In our homes, our offices,
our schools and marketplace etc. They are our
parents, our children, our siblings (poor Newt!), our
friends, our doctors, our lawyers, our mail carriers
and our fellow workers etc.

"Where Do They All Come From", Eleanor Rigby? Well,
'Gappers looked into this and found conclusive proof
that ALL lesbians come from heterosexual coupling.

And so do all heteros. So, this choice thing, it seems
to us, works both ways. If lesbianism is a choice, so
is heteroism.

But the Conservative ads appear to indicate that heter-
oism is the natural and correct choice, thereby promot-
ing healthy, blessed and living happy-ever-afterly
lives.

A lesbian, they assert, converted to the true way,
would then be able to enjoy rewards such as: "submit-
ting gracefully to her husband", having a new baby
every year and adding to the overcrowding of earth.

Even aging lesbians would not be left out with all the
new fertility drugs and a _swell_ helping hand from
Viagra.

After all, why should hetero women have all the fun?

But we wonder if the Conservatives have thought this
through. They may be contributing to the very situa-
tion they wish to eradicate. With all their prayers
and invocations to drive the devil out of lesbians,
they may succeed.

Then, the increase in converted-to-heteros and their
subsequent coupling, will just produce more and more
females that choose their sexual orientation.

And they might not choose hetero. They might choose
homa (female form of homo). And homa may truly be
where their heart is.
#