Hey, this is Joe Dees. Could some of you log on to the listserv on the bottom and
help me convince these people of the error of their porcine ways (or at least not
advertize them as genius!)? They're tag-teaming me.
At Sun, 21 Feb 1999 22:41:37 +1000, you wrote:
>
>Joe Dees wrote:
>
>>DQ:
>>>The fact that women have been oppressed *without interruption* for thousands
>>>of years suggests to me that it has never been a genuine power struggle in
>>>the first place, and that women have played a major hand in their own
>>>"oppression". In other words, women seem to have a psychological need to
>>>be dominated and oppressed. If they didn't have this need, then they would
>>>have usurped their oppressors on a regular basis and partaken in the normal
>>>cyclic process of the power struggle.
>>
>>Why is a man assertive but a woman a bitch, why is a man committed but
>>a woman strident, why is a man angered but a woman hysterical? It's
>>because the language has played as great a part in the brutalization
>>process as the fists. You're the same kind of moron who'd blame a woman's
>>rape on her wearing a dress, and insist she was asking for it.
>
>You really are a feminist stooge, aren't you. If nothing else, you
>certainly know how to recite the scripts.
>
>If being a moron involves expecting women to be responsible for their
>actions, then I guess that makes me a moron. I don't know how any woman
>who claims to be scared of being raped could possibly wear clothing and
>adornments that are specifically designed to arouse the sexual lusts of
>every man she encounters. It would be like being scared of getting mauled
>by lions while walking through a jungle and deliberately rubbing bloody meat
>all over one's skin. I may be an ignorant bigot, but even I can see this
>is insane behaviour! Yet funnily enough, it is regarded as perfectly
>acceptable behaviour for a woman.
>
>I certainly don't condone rape or sexual harassment. To my mind, men
>forcing themselves upon women is very ugly behaviour and the kind of man who
>behaves in this animal-like way is very repulsive to me. At the same time,
>I have little sympathy for a woman who, in the course of getting her kicks
>out of teasing and arousing male desire, suddenly finds the whole thing
>back-firing her. Such behaviour on her part is clearly very foolish.
Just the type of language I'd expect from such a blatantly porcine individual. Blame
the victim. You should'nt have worn the short dress; by the way, bechador yourself.
These cognitively superior men of yours can't self-consciously control their own
testicles when they scent breeding stock, and the less-aware woman must take the
greater situational caution? Self-Servicus Self-Contradictorus Bullus Shittus.
>>>On a final note, I love the words you use to describe men's behaviour
>>>towards women - "brutalization, discrimination and slavery". You make it
>>>sound as though every man has a whip in his hand and violently oppresses
>>>women at every opportunity. I don't know about anyone else, but this
>>>doesn't tally with my experience at all. A handful of men may very well
>>>behave in this way, but I don't think it accurately describes the majority
>>>of men.
>>
>>Check out the Taliban. Remember the Rule of Thumb. Check out when
>>women got the vote and the right to own property and go to college, and
>>the many places where they still can't. Look at Islamic honor killings
>>according to Purda and Sharia (Islamic Law). Read the Biblicaly approved
>>chattel status of women. Check out the widespread history of footbinding
>>in Oriental societies, the prevalence of vaginal infibulation and
>>clitorectomy in African and Middle Eastern ones, the persistent ubiquity
>>of the chattel system of dowries and arranged marriages, and Wake the
>>Fuck Up!
>
>I second Dan's endorsement to read the "Myth of Male Power" by Warren
>Farrell. It presents the other side of the coin to the feminist slant on
>these issues. As Farrell explains so eloquently, both men and women have
>been as equally oppressed as one another. Throughout the course of history,
>each sex had its specific role in the community, and each of these roles had
>its own restrictions and benefits. Hardly any man in the entire course of
>history had the kind of freedom and endless perks that feminists insist is
>the normal lot of men.
Is this the same person who was just asking why women were the dominated gender for
millennia if they weren't mentally inferior (a question I laid to rest, BTW)? When
one position doesn't justify your prepackaged end, you'll assume the opposite premises
and attempt to argue to the same wrong conclusion from them. Very logical, rational,
coherent, consistent, cohesive and cogent uv U!
>On a personal note, I was told a couple of years ago by a Pakistani that I
>wouldn't last an hour in Pakistan before having my throat slit.
>Apparently, the kind of thoughts I have and the way I express them would
>have me persecuted by an Islamic society in no time. I therefore think
>that men are as oppressed and tyrannized in these kinds of cultures as much
>as women are.
Visit http://www.rawa.org and see how the Taliban women live.
>>>In short, it seems to me that you have a very unrealistic picture of men and
>>>women, one that is greatly distorted by feminist ideology.
>>
>>In short, It seems to me that you have a very patriarchially templated
>picture >of the way it's supposed to be; one that is greatly distorted by
>your >ignorance, your insufferable ego and your own sick desires.
>
>My sick desire is that everyone on earth become fully-enlightened and enjoy
>their days participating in the nature of God. This is my fundamental
>motivation in all matters. Part of this involves depicting things as they
>really are, and not how our emotional feminine selves would like them to be.
Or that our bombastically self-inflationary masculinity would desire that they be?
>If you were more perceptive and less spell-bound by womankind, you'd
>probably realize by now that I have no interest in preserving patriarchy. I
>see no value in preserving a society in which ignorant men forcibly dominate
>women. I personally despise the way most men conduct their lives. But at
>the same time, I reject the solutions presented by feminism. I reject
>feminism because it is based on unrealistic assumptions about the world and
>is rooted in a superficial understanding of human psychology. I reject it
>because the prescriptions it offers would create even more barriers for
>those genuine souls seeking enlightenment and Ultimate Truth.
>
Your UT is more like an Unthinking Travesty.
>
>David Quinn
>
>--
>
>PS: Subscription info for genius-l:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> subscribe genius-l
>
>--
>
>
>
>
Joe E. Dees
Poet, Pagan, Philosopher
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Access your e-mail anywhere, at any time.
Get your FREE BellSouth Web Mail account today!
http://webmail.bellsouth.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
