Next time you're having sex, try to get over the stereotyping ;)
----- Original Message ----- From: "new.morning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 9:00 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: "Defender of the faith" as addiction > llundrub, > > I know you mean well, and are expressing some gentle wit. > > However, as discussed here some time ago, the romantic analogy is one > calling up silly sexual stereotypes. And it applies such stereotyping > when there is no basis for doing so. It presumes, perhaps subtly, that > Judy's posts should conform to some femminine standard and Turqs to a > male one. And that the sourse of conflict between them is sexual and > not intellectual*. That of course is crap. There is no gender > qualities or standards applicable to two posters having intellectual* > debate. > > Falsely putting the debate in gender and sexual terms, adds fuel for > further false stereotyping. If a false man/woman bickering model is > established, its one or two steps closer for some ("great minds") to > fall into traps of making quite irrelevant, inappropriate, having zeo > fit, unproductive comments or views along sexist lines. For example, > > "Judy's not a acting like a woman". Why should any poster have to > conform to some outdated stereotypes that have no relevance to issues > of the mind and intellect*? Such false standards would be > discrimative, placing phantom boundaries on judy's conduct not applied > to Barry. > > Or far more crudely, but unbelieveably, some chucklheads here have > actually said such things: "Judy just needs to get laid". i guess > thats their solution to all problems involving women. A stellar and > sterling vision of what women are (soley) good for, and what their > "problem" is. Other comments referring to Judy's problems as "woman > problems" -- put much more crudely and graphically. Such caveman > absurdities and implied, if not explicit, insults have no place in > civil discussion > > By perpertuating the quite false myth, no matter how wittily and well > intentioned, that gender has ANYTHING to do with a posters views, > style or demanor, only tends to feed those few men in the crowd who > have the intellectual and emotional depth, and shallow insights of a > Beavis and Butthead, and who when "fueled", make crass, rude, crude, > sexist, inappropriate comments such as cited above. > > ---- > *Perhaps "intellectual" is too grand a term for what appears to be > mudfights in the school yard. But I use the term to differentiate it > from sexual tension. > > > > > --- In [email protected], "llundrub" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> >> >> > Barry Wright, Master of Projection >> >> ----such hate=such love. soul mates brought together through the > aethers. >> can't live without each other. such a pure love was never seen on earth >> before. pure ideation without physicality. i'm sort of jealous of > you two. >> i mean no remarks either of you make ever go uncommented. no > lonliness. this >> is ipso facto a sort of vicarious love affair with great passion. >> > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Or go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > and click 'Join This Group!' > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > >
