Women and evangelism

I've been getting the same post, on 'women saving the world' from a
number of sources. I find it quite offensive. Why? Because it's naive,
reductionist, filled with false data, illogical ungrounded
conclusions - and - racist.

False assumptions - that women are innately good, nurturing and etc,
when hard data shows that women are just as capable as men of hatred,
ignorance, jealously, malice and violence. False assumptions - that IF
women were in charge, THEN, all would be good and peaceful. False
assumption - that women are 'good and peaceful' due to some genetic
characteristic lacking in men. Sounds racist to me - the attribution
of a behavioural characteristic grounded in genetic causality. So -
men are genetically unable to generate peace? Prove it. And prove the
opposite- that women are genetically bonded to peace. False data -
that women do 2/3 of the work. False assumptions - of 'mind over
matter' - assuming that all it takes is 'goodwill' to deal with the
ecological, economic and educational disparities of the world. False
assumptions - that men have no desire to do so. These type of post are
evangelistic, advocacy rants. Not open to proof, to debate, to
dialogue.

Why do people of education send them out?

Edwina Taborsky
39 Jarvis St. #318
Toronto, Ontario M5E 1Z5
(416) 361.0898
Received on Wed Aug 28 05:06:27 2002