Re: [UUPoly-L] "Deflowering" (was RE: enough already)

["Catherine Deville" <catdeville@cox.net>]

Gary asks:

<<Just one question: who are you referring to when you use the term  
we?  Some people may not agree with your position (right or wrong) and  
that can be construed as pushing your opinion on others which, whether  
intended or not, results in something not very UU in my personal  
opinion.  >>

For the most part the "we" below is the generic "we", but to clarify
specifically: 

On Oct 1, 2008, at 7:57 AM, "Catherine Deville" <catdeville@cox.net>  
wrote:

> Again, context... I am speaking in the context that this is a  
> *historical*
> cultural precedent.  Of course it is changing.  That's something  
> women have
> been fighting for over the last few centuries. And we've finally  
> started
> making progress.  

The antecedent in this sentence is relatively explicit.  "We" refers back to
"women (when taken within context of the entire post - women who have been
fighting for the right to be seen as something more than brood mares.)" 

...
>
> And if we ignore that... if we ignore the historical context, the  
> reason
> that these cultural "norms" exist, then we have not learned a thing,  
> and
> will not be able to move forward. 
>Indeed, the moment that we forget  
> that
> this is the way that things "are", the more likely it becomes that  
> we will
> move backward.

"We" in the cases above refer to the "generic you/we" (in this case the "we"
implies "those who ignore historical context" within a culture.
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Generic_you  My previous posts where
folks thought I was confused at who was taking what position also used the
generic you (in that case meaning "those who believe the way specified".) 

> Anecdotally I also recognize that there are people who no longer  
> care, who
> don't consider a woman "despoiled" by no longer having an intact  
> hymen.  Yet
> there are still people who *do* care... and that's the worrisome  
> thing.
> Until we all let go of all of the many manifestations of the sexual  
> double
> standard, women (as a group) will never be free of being thought of as
> child-bearers first, and anything else last.  Until we acknowledge  
> and move
> away from all of the traditions connected to that custom, women will  
> never
> truly be free or equal partners.

And in the sentences above, "we" is again the generic "we", and implies
"society in general". 

You know, ya'll... I wouldn't sound nearly so "condescending" if I didn't
have to do things like explain basic English 

NT, 
Cat