Crackpots! - misc.survivalism - Salon article
Bill
Janelle says...
"And people like Bill -- the crackpots, extremists, paranoiacs and
alarmists of three months ago -- are the gurus of right now."
Full Story...
From crackpots to gurus
By Janelle Brown...
http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2001/11/12/survivalists/index.html
AFell99197
doubt she's a world-class expert on curling irons and mascara. But who knows?
Maybe she'll start a trend: Gucci bugout bags.
WhiteWolf
who is 'bill' ??????
WW
WhiteWolf
WhiteWolf
so, howz it feel to be our fearless leader?
WW
On Thu, 15 Nov 2001 02:22:02 GMT, WhiteWolf <whit...@rubyridge.com>
wrote:
>silly article.
Bill
> oh, nevermind - that's you - duh!!
>
> so, howz it feel to be our fearless leader?
>
I'm still laughing at that article, so I guess humored? Anyway it was about
what I expected. For example...
I said: "I have not done much in the past so far as preparation except the
basic red cross stuff."
She said: "Bill -- no last name, just "Bill," as he anonymously posts on
misc.survivalism newsgroup -- says he's kept this protective arsenal around
for years "just in case."
Did I say that?
Also the CDC recently issued the same advice about protective equipment for
anthrax protection which I was saying people should use. But they went even
further than I did with their recommendations. Now is the CDC a bunch of
crackpots too? CDC link...
http://www.bt.cdc.gov/DocumentsApp/Anthrax/10312001/han51.asp
Geoffrey L. Hardin
A touchie-feelie, big-hug a la the Teletubbies article that those who
advocate preparedness aren't a bunch of kooks and crackpots?
Please.
Geoffrey L. Hardin,
geo...@abcs.com
Although. . .it's nice to know that there is a smidgen of optimism out
there.
Brown Thumb
<lgli...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 18:01:56 -0800, "Bill" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote:
>
>so? What's wrong with this article, outside of the fact that it is
>NOT objective, but rather derisive, in an editorial way.
>
>Are there any lies, misrepresentations, half-truths in there? No. We
>saw this same crap show up around y2k. Better get used to it, or get
>over it.
Actually, I think it's excellent guerilla tactics to post the
survivalist information in a form that allows liberals to
read it without realizing they're being severely
patronized. (I think the tone of the article
borders on "We'll humor you (the
liberal reader) with your stereotypes,
so go ahead and read this, it's safe...")
She's covered the topic before,
so have other writers at that site, I think they want to
sneak in some preparedness consciousness while keeping
their ultra-liberal bosses happy.
Just like I thought _Clan_ _of_ _the_ _Cave_ _Bear_,
while poor fiction, was excellent guerilla feminism.
I'd been reading similar ideas for years but couldn't get
any men to listen to any of it. Add sex, make it a movie
with a beautiful blonde, and guys got fed the ideas through
the back door.
Works for me.
------------------------------------------------
Liberal in favor of the Second Amendment
Bob G
<Brown...@RemOvEtHisGrrAttitude.com> wrote:
>Actually, I think it's excellent guerilla tactics to post the
>survivalist information in a form that allows liberals to
>read it without realizing they're being severely
>patronized. (I think the tone of the article
>borders on "We'll humor you (the
>liberal reader) with your stereotypes,
>so go ahead and read this, it's safe...")
>
>She's covered the topic before,
>so have other writers at that site, I think they want to
>sneak in some preparedness consciousness while keeping
>their ultra-liberal bosses happy.
>
>Just like I thought _Clan_ _of_ _the_ _Cave_ _Bear_,
>while poor fiction, was excellent guerilla feminism.
>I'd been reading similar ideas for years but couldn't get
>any men to listen to any of it. Add sex, make it a movie
>with a beautiful blonde, and guys got fed the ideas through
>the back door.
>
>Works for me.
Clan of the Cave Bear? Why do you think it was poor fiction? I
rather enjoyed the whole series of books. Haven't seen the movie tho.
I rarely watch a movie if I've read the book. Too often the movie
disappoints, IMHO.
And I never got the impression it was guerilla feminism.
Bob
I love my country ! It's the politicians I don't
like or trust.
Condor Chef
> I'm trying to post this while laughing, but here goes...
>
> Janelle says...
>
> "And people like Bill -- the crackpots, extremists, paranoiacs and
> alarmists of three months ago -- are the gurus of right now."
OK, Bill, you crackpot extremist paranoid alarmist guru, you... ;)
Hehehe...sounds like she's ready to invest in TVP futures.
CC
Gunner
Not the most fair article Ive seen in "major media", but not the worst
either.
Id give it a 5
Gunner
This Message is guaranteed environmentally friendly
Manufactured with 10% post consumer ASCII
Meets all EPA regulations for clean air
Using only naturally occuring fibers
Use the Message with confidance.
(Some settling may occure in transit.)
(Best if Used before May 13, 2009)
Jim Davidson
Eh......
I guess that is my equivalent of Gunner's 5 rating.
I'm seeing a lot of stuff in the press like " the world has changed
since 911 ". Did it ? Not mine.
Perhaps if you were living in a fantasy world, it shook you and let a
little light in. That is a good thing. A few less anti gun , anti self
defense , anti common sense people out there. Maybe only a few woke
up. But that is a few more that won't buy the media lines quite as
easily from now on. Things like, if we just dis-arm, trust the gov,
hold hands and sing kumbiya, the world will be nice and treat us with
respect. Hello ???
It is true that some of my associates seem a tiny bit more interested
in things that would help them survive if something really happened.
One called about rifles, one wrote and asked about bleach. So I'm less
of a nut in their eyes than before. I guess that is good. Add a buck
or two and it might buy a coffee at Boarders.
Richard Lewis
>On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 19:31:10 -0800, "Bill" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote:
>>"WhiteWolf" wrote in message
>>> oh, nevermind - that's you - duh!!
>>>
>>> so, howz it feel to be our fearless leader?
>>>
>>I'm still laughing at that article, so I guess humored? Anyway it was about
>>what I expected. For example...
>In some ways I thought the article was flattering. As much as we'll
>ever get out of an ultra liberal source. They poke fun at us, but
>then clearly say a large part of the general population is a least
>interested in learning what it's all about. And after all isn't it
>just being grown up "prepared" Boy Scouts?
I too, thought it was semi-flattering, Winston. It didn't compare us
to neo-nazis or racial supremists or cults other than to say that most
of us were mislabeled by the few bad apples.
I couldn't argue with the post anymore than to call her on her
apparent misquoting of her source, so I'm as satasfied rihgt now as
any left wing media type could ever make me. When those same biased,
stereotypical reporters are themselves buying firearms and ammo and
stocking twice the food and water they normally keep on hand, I feel a
sense of vindication.
And yes, before anyone points it out, I too am stereotypical and as
biased as they come....but I'm not making my living in a field whereby
my assumed impartiality is a scale to measure my truth and
respectibility against.
All the best, sir!
ral
Offbreed
> with a beautiful blonde, and guys got fed the ideas through
> the back door.
(snicker) Through *which* door?
Yeah, I might have caught what you refer to as "guerilla feminism".
Thought is was kind of dumb for the men in that one tribe to be so
submissive (too long ago, can't remember exactly). Didn't that woman
bring the men into her hooch for sex, then kill them? Why didn't they
kill her when they had the chance?
Yeah, everything was all hunky dory and a utopia back in those days.
Sure.
Never saw the movie. Did get a laugh out of racoon being in western
asia at that time.
Cheese Monkey
Winston Smith wrote:
>
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 19:31:10 -0800, "Bill" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote:
>
> >"WhiteWolf" wrote in message
> >> oh, nevermind - that's you - duh!!
> >>
> >> so, howz it feel to be our fearless leader?
> >>
> >I'm still laughing at that article, so I guess humored? Anyway it was about
> >what I expected. For example...
>
> In some ways I thought the article was flattering. As much as we'll
> ever get out of an ultra liberal source. They poke fun at us, but
> then clearly say a large part of the general population is a least
> interested in learning what it's all about. And after all isn't it
> just being grown up "prepared" Boy Scouts?
>
> >I said: "I have not done much in the past so far as preparation except the
> >basic red cross stuff."
> >
> >She said: "Bill -- no last name, just "Bill," as he anonymously posts on
> >misc.survivalism newsgroup -- says he's kept this protective arsenal around
> >for years "just in case."
>
> That is a cheap shot from them. Almost everyone uses a net name -
> here and on all groups.
They do??? Awe Shit ok folks forget Cheese Monkey... um net name net name...
Oh yea George Bush... Ok folks my secret name here is George Bush... Yea that's
it Now they will never find me.... BWAHAHAHAHAAA!
> The people here have been consistent with
> their name for a long time and you often see a lot of personal info
> expressed, so we aren't all that secret.
Shhh No one was suppose to know that Damn it!. Ok Folks Nobody tell
Winston our new secret decoder ring codes he'll blab it to everybody!
>
> An arsenal is more than one gun by liberal standards. I'll be real
> disappointed with you if you only have one. <grin>
Um, er, Ya mean I should only have one??? EEEEK! BRB gotta redo my quotas.
Not really Cheese Monkey My net name is George Bush.
Cheese Monkey
Lawrence Glickman wrote:
>
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2001 05:55:41 GMT, Brown Thumb
> <Brown...@RemOvEtHisGrrAttitude.com> wrote:
>
> >Actually, I think it's excellent guerilla tactics to post the
> >survivalist information in a form that allows liberals to
> >read it without realizing they're being severely
> >patronized. (I think the tone of the article
> >borders on "We'll humor you (the
> >liberal reader) with your stereotypes,
> >so go ahead and read this, it's safe...")
> >
> >She's covered the topic before,
> >so have other writers at that site, I think they want to
> >sneak in some preparedness consciousness while keeping
> >their ultra-liberal bosses happy.
> >
> >Just like I thought _Clan_ _of_ _the_ _Cave_ _Bear_,
> >while poor fiction, was excellent guerilla feminism.
> >I'd been reading similar ideas for years but couldn't get
> >any men to listen to any of it. Add sex, make it a movie
> >with a beautiful blonde, and guys got fed the ideas through
> >the back door.
> >
> >Works for me.
>
> So, in other words, you think that these ultra-libs are really
> *closet-survivalists,* and wouldn't admit so in public, but under
> their sheets with a flashlight at night, they read all our posts.....
>
> I suspect you are on to something.
>
> Lg
My Name is Cheese Monkey... I'm a Liberal Survivalist....
H. McDaniel
> Just like I thought _Clan_ _of_ _the_ _Cave_ _Bear_,
> while poor fiction, was excellent guerilla feminism.
> I'd been reading similar ideas for years but couldn't get
> any men to listen to any of it. Add sex, make it a movie
> with a beautiful blonde, and guys got fed the ideas through
> the back door.
I know guys who beat up their girlfriends. I seriously doubt if them being
"fed" would change their behavior one bit. So what is the value of "guerrilla
feminism" ?
-McDaniel
Bill Seward
from USENET, wrote:
>silly article.
>who is 'bill' ??????
Well, it ain't me, since I don't post anonymously. Although if the
spam doesn't slow down, I may just start.
I read the article, and I guess it coulda been worse. I found parts
of it bordering on insulting, but given Salon's normal leanings, I
figure that's par for the course. Some of it was
interesting--especially the "paranoid neighbor" part. My wife used to
accuse me of the same thing. One threat of bodily harm, two
hurricanes, n number of power outages, 9-11 and anthrax later, I don't
look so paranoid after all.
I do have to eat a serving of crow, though. If you go back and find
her orginal post to the group, you'll see I questioned her identity.
Turns out she's who she said she was.
Hm-m-m, maybe I am a *little* paranoid...
Bill Seward
http://www.geocities.com/bill_seward
WhiteWolf
<grin>
WW
Brown Thumb
<lgli...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 15 Nov 2001 05:55:41 GMT, Brown Thumb
><Brown...@RemOvEtHisGrrAttitude.com> wrote:
>
>>Actually, I think it's excellent guerilla tactics to post the
>>survivalist information in a form that allows liberals to
>>read it without realizing they're being severely
>>patronized. (I think the tone of the article
>>borders on "We'll humor you (the
>>liberal reader) with your stereotypes,
>>so go ahead and read this, it's safe...")
>>
>>She's covered the topic before,
>>so have other writers at that site, I think they want to
>>sneak in some preparedness consciousness while keeping
>>their ultra-liberal bosses happy.
>So, in other words, you think that these ultra-libs are really
>*closet-survivalists,* and wouldn't admit so in public, but under
>their sheets with a flashlight at night, they read all our posts.....
>
>I suspect you are on to something.
No, I think the journalist is a closet survivalist (even
she may not know it) and also a closet moderate
working for an ultra-liberal site. So she's feeding
the stuff to liberals without them realizing she
is actually half-way to agreeing with us. Some of
her tone was so mocking of us it assumes the reader
is really all the way on the stupid end of liberalism, which
makes me think she doesn't respect either the left end
of her reader spectrum (but wants to reach the others)
or doesn't respect her management, but wants to reach
her readers.
Brown Thumb
>Clan of the Cave Bear? Why do you think it was poor fiction? I
>rather enjoyed the whole series of books.
I slightly enjoyed them, but wouldn't put her in with
Heinlein, McCafree, Bujold, Lackey, Clancy, Bradley.
> Haven't seen the movie tho.
>I rarely watch a movie if I've read the book. Too often the movie
>disappoints, IMHO.
I waited a decade after reading the books, so they were dim in my
mind when I saw the movie (on TV). I've been permanently
traumatized by seeing Disney's Swiss Family Robinson after
having the book read to us in my 2nd grade class -- nothing was
as I'd pictured it! I've gotten a LITTLE more tolerant, I liked the
6-8-hour version of Dune, but I generally agree with you on that.
>And I never got the impression it was guerilla feminism.
If you'd read the same 20 or so feminist history books I read
before Clan came out, you'd know what I mean. Books about
how most people surveyed really BELIEVED, erroneously,
that cave MAN started agriculture, and discovered all the things she
discovers in all those books. There are also excellent language
essays on why the spoken form of English stubbornly puts
agreement in gender ahead of agreement in number despite the
best efforts of 400 years of acadamia to enforce the opposite rule.
I was a fairly famous poster on soc.*men from 1989-1994, and
theology, feminism, and feminist theology were as much obsessions
of mine at the time as native plant gardening, survivalism, herbalism,
and appropriate technology are now.
>
>Bob
>
>
>I love my country ! It's the politicians I don't
>like or trust.
------------------------------------------------
Brown Thumb
>Brown Thumb <Brown...@RemOvEtHisGrrAttitude.com> wrote in message news:<sel6vtotqfgehri9s...@4ax.com>...
> Didn't that woman
>bring the men into her hooch for sex, then kill them? Why didn't they
>kill her when they had the chance?
I don't remember that part, which is not a guarantee of
anything.
>Yeah, everything was all hunky dory and a utopia back in those days.
>Sure.
The *part* of feminism which those books were about was not
utopia, it was that there are reasons to believe that women
developed primitive agriculture, and other similar historical
ideas.
>Never saw the movie. Did get a laugh out of racoon being in western
>asia at that time.
You mean the movie or the books? I thought it was funny that some
Indians I know (from western India) were telling me they'd always
had racoons. I said WHAT? Thought those were American critters.
This guy kept saying " well, we have something that looks just like
it, but much smaller" -- seems to me they do, but it's not a racoon,
it's something else.
Brown Thumb
<ro...@neveryoumind.foo> wrote:
>Brown Thumb wrote:
>I know guys who beat up their girlfriends. I seriously doubt if them being
>"fed" would change their behavior one bit. So what is the value of "guerrilla
>feminism" ?
Are all ideas useless unless EVERYONE buys them right away?
In that case, as long as Rosie O'Donnell isn't going to be changed by
the pro-gun attitudes in this group, we should all just stop being
pro-gun, right?
H. McDaniel
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2001 02:39:22 GMT, "H. McDaniel"
> <ro...@neveryoumind.foo> wrote:
>
> >Brown Thumb wrote:
>
> >I know guys who beat up their girlfriends. I seriously doubt if them being
> >"fed" would change their behavior one bit. So what is the value of "guerrilla
> >feminism" ?
>
> Are all ideas useless unless EVERYONE buys them right away?
>
> In that case, as long as Rosie O'Donnell isn't going to be changed by
> the pro-gun attitudes in this group, we should all just stop being
> pro-gun, right?
You can be whatever you want to be. The question is what is the value of
"guerrilla feminism" in changing the minds of guys who have no problem watching
scantly clad women flicks but beat up their girlfriends. BTW, while I don't think
it's healthy, some of the women who are drawn to these guys in some way seem to
enjoy the abuse. They are always with abusive guys. This is not some grand thesis
on my part about women in general. Just a statement about some specific ones in
abusive relationships that I know of.
-McDaniel
Offbreed
> On 15 Nov 2001 12:56:14 -0800, Offb...@my-deja.com (Offbreed) wrote:
>
> >Brown Thumb <Brown...@RemOvEtHisGrrAttitude.com> wrote in message news:<sel6vtotqfgehri9s...@4ax.com>...
> > Didn't that woman
> >bring the men into her hooch for sex, then kill them? Why didn't they
> >kill her when they had the chance?
>
> I don't remember that part, which is not a guarantee of
> anything.
Third book, I think, while they were travelling. The female tyrant was
the ex-wife of a half neandrethal who beat her for not acting like a
neandrethal woman. Ayla comes in riding one of the ponies after
freeing what'sesname with a spear cast from an atal-atal. The men had
been kept in a stockade while the women wen hunting.
> >Yeah, everything was all hunky dory and a utopia back in those days.
> >Sure.
>
> The *part* of feminism which those books were about was not
> utopia, it was that there are reasons to believe that women
> developed primitive agriculture, and other similar historical
> ideas.
Not so sure about the "feminism" now, it has been a long time.
Sure, I never did buy into the idea that *men* started agriculture,
just got the credit so the women could benifit by the puffed up male
ego. Ahhh, I'll not go further <G>.
>
> >Never saw the movie. Did get a laugh out of racoon being in western
> >asia at that time.
>
> You mean the movie or the books? I thought it was funny that some
> Indians I know (from western India) were telling me they'd always
> had racoons. I said WHAT? Thought those were American critters.
> This guy kept saying " well, we have something that looks just like
> it, but much smaller" -- seems to me they do, but it's not a racoon,
> it's something else.
No fooling? Never heard of such a creature. I'll have to poke around
and see if I can find the critter. India is a bit isolated,
biologically, but 'coon do live out in the US desert, so... Gotta
check on this one. I wonder if it might be one of the lemurs.
Cheese Monkey
Lawrence Glickman wrote:
>
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2001 23:50:24 GMT, Cheese Monkey
> <cheesem...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> So, in other words, you think that these ultra-libs are really
> >> *closet-survivalists,* and wouldn't admit so in public, but under
> >> their sheets with a flashlight at night, they read all our posts.....
> >>
> >> I suspect you are on to something.
> >>
> >> Lg
> >
> >
> >My Name is Cheese Monkey... I'm a Liberal Survivalist....
>
> Does that mean you support the 2nd Amendment?
Wanna break in to my apartment and find out? >8^D
The big Cheddar...
H. McDaniel
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2001 11:55:20 GMT, sa...@pclink.com (Bob G) wrote:
>
> >Clan of the Cave Bear? Why do you think it was poor fiction? I
> >rather enjoyed the whole series of books.
>
> I slightly enjoyed them, but wouldn't put her in with
> Heinlein, McCafree, Bujold, Lackey, Clancy, Bradley.
Is it "John Norman" GOR class material? That's the standard for judging
scantly clad women in fiction. One Usenet wag declared GOR, safe for perverts.
-McDaniel
Offbreed
> BTW, while I don't think
> it's healthy, some of the women who are
> drawn to these guys in some way seem to
> enjoy the abuse. They are always with
> abusive guys. This is not some grand thesis
> on my part about women in general. Just a
> statement about some specific ones in
> abusive relationships that I know of.
>
> -McDaniel
Yes, they are drawn to the abusers. It's a complex situation, though.
The closest I can describe to another man is to compare it with a
badly abused child. The kid remains totally devoted to the caregivers,
no matter how bad the treatment.
Being beaten until you are broken (which I was many times when I was
young) does strange things to the mind. Maybe part chemical, maybe the
endorphins (they have a morphine like effect) are involved, maybe
physical changes in the mind. Something set off my brother, it took
six men and a cargo net to constrain him. The people responsible for
the abuse kept it withen a context safe for them, so we were unable to
fight back.
Anyway, people low on adult male hormones can be patterned or
conditioned to seek such treatment. Men are trickier, from what I've
read, but there are techniques, mainly involving humiliation and
imposing a sense of helplessness, that reduces the hormones that make
men more resistant.
Just remember, the obvious is not what is real. There is a lot to the
situation that does not meet the eye.
Dan Goodman
says...
Such works as _Slave Girl of Gor_ aren't just about nekked and near-
nekked women. They're about women who love being slaves to men who love
being slave-owners.
--
Dan Goodman
dsg...@visi.com
H. McDaniel
Actually my point (not very clear) was that GOR does little for pervs, so declared
one perv on the net at least ;)
-McDaniel
Bob G
<Brown...@RemOvEtHisGrrAttitude.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 15 Nov 2001 11:55:20 GMT, sa...@pclink.com (Bob G) wrote:
>
>
>>Clan of the Cave Bear? Why do you think it was poor fiction? I
>>rather enjoyed the whole series of books.
>
>I slightly enjoyed them, but wouldn't put her in with
>Heinlein, McCafree, Bujold, Lackey, Clancy, Bradley.
Depends upon one's tastes and what precisely of is expecting to get
from the book which makes it enjoyable.
i.e. I am an Heinlein fan, but enjoy his books for entirely different
reasons as versus Jean Auel's books. The same goes for McCafree,
Bujold, and Clancy. Haven't read anything by the other two. That I
remember.
>>And I never got the impression it was guerilla feminism.
>
>If you'd read the same 20 or so feminist history books I read
>before Clan came out, you'd know what I mean. Books about
>how most people surveyed really BELIEVED, erroneously,
> that cave MAN started agriculture, and discovered all the things she
>discovers in all those books. There are also excellent language
>essays on why the spoken form of English stubbornly puts
>agreement in gender ahead of agreement in number despite the
>best efforts of 400 years of acadamia to enforce the opposite rule.
>
>I was a fairly famous poster on soc.*men from 1989-1994, and
>theology, feminism, and feminist theology were as much obsessions
>of mine at the time as native plant gardening, survivalism, herbalism,
>and appropriate technology are now.
Chuckle, okay, I'll take your word for it. As I've never read a book
on feminist history.
Understand that my mind works in such a way that when I've read or
heard references to 'man' having done this or that, or discovered or
invented this or that ... my mind does not form the picture of a
literal human male having done it, necessarily.
i.e. In your example, the term "cave MAN" being used, does not make me
think in a gender specific way. If I read, "Cave man started
agriculture" ... the image formed in my mind is that some ancient
-people- started agriculture. It'd not have ever occurred to me that
it was solely a male discovery/invention.
Mostly, I assume the term 'man' is not gender specific in many of it's
usages, unless specified by the topic of discussion. I tend to think
of it often as a shortened substitute for 'HUman'.
Feminists have their own theology? Hmmm, I guess I do indeed learn
something new every day.
In my particular beliefs, BTW, what you might call 'God' is not
necessarily male. Or female. A male image would simply be one aspect
(face) of God, a female ... yet another. Essentially, I view all life
and energy as simply different aspects of God, and part of the same
thing. To me, referring to God as -He- or -She- is equally valid.
In any event, I enjoyed Jean Auel's books for the entertainment, and
as she includes element's of history and realism. Not with utter
accuracy. But she includes many elements of behavior, custom, belief,
day to day living, etc which are based on some historical,
archaeological, and anthropological basis. I like reading stories
about ancient times, but only if there is at least some realism
injected into it.
Dan Goodman
says...
I gather that's a Your Mileage May Vary thing.
By the way -- John Norman started an interesting letter thread at
http://www.locusmag.com -- complaining that the World SF Convention
censored him and his ideas by not putting him on the program. Oh -- and
he says he's a Libertarian.
--
Dan Goodman
dsg...@visi.com
Walter Daniels
>On Fri, 16 Nov 2001 07:15:09 GMT, Brown Thumb
><Brown...@RemOvEtHisGrrAttitude.com> wrote:
>>On Thu, 15 Nov 2001 11:55:20 GMT, sa...@pclink.com (Bob G) wrote:
>>>Clan of the Cave Bear? Why do you think it was poor fiction? I
>>>rather enjoyed the whole series of books.
>>
>>I slightly enjoyed them, but wouldn't put her in with
>>Heinlein, McCafree, Bujold, Lackey, Clancy, Bradley.
>
>Depends upon one's tastes and what precisely of is expecting to get
>from the book which makes it enjoyable.
>
>i.e. I am an Heinlein fan, but enjoy his books for entirely different
>reasons as versus Jean Auel's books. The same goes for McCafree,
>Bujold, and Clancy. Haven't read anything by the other two. That I
>remember.
You might like the "Darkover" series by Bradley. It can be a little
hard to "get into," but good cultural clash writing. Sadly, she died a
few years back, and there will be no more.
>>If you'd read the same 20 or so feminist history books I read
>>before Clan came out, you'd know what I mean. Books about
>>how most people surveyed really BELIEVED, erroneously,
>> that cave MAN started agriculture, and discovered all the things she
>>discovers in all those books. There are also excellent language
>>essays on why the spoken form of English stubbornly puts
>>agreement in gender ahead of agreement in number despite the
>>best efforts of 400 years of acadamia to enforce the opposite rule.
>Chuckle, okay, I'll take your word for it. As I've never read a book
>on feminist history.
>Understand that my mind works in such a way that when I've read or
>heard references to 'man' having done this or that, or discovered or
>invented this or that ... my mind does not form the picture of a
>literal human male having done it, necessarily.
>In any event, I enjoyed Jean Auel's books for the entertainment, and
>as she includes element's of history and realism. Not with utter
>accuracy. But she includes many elements of behavior, custom, belief,
>day to day living, etc which are based on some historical,
>archaeological, and anthropological basis. I like reading stories
>about ancient times, but only if there is at least some realism
>injected into it.
Where I had a "problem," was with how she approached "s-x." I mean,
men _can_ be stupid, but *that stupid?* Come on.
>Bob
>
>
>I love my country ! It's the politicians I don't
>like or trust.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
FBN Graphics prints specialties in small quantities at reasonable
prices. Express your interests with a Custom printed T-shirt, mug,
mousepad, or carry bag. We cheerfully print in quantities as small as
one. http://www.digiserve.com/fbngraphics/
Answer the design survey, and win a free prize.
Charles Scripter
Gosh Gunner, I missed this...
> I read ONE Gor book, and never bothered to read another. IMHO they
> suck. Not found of the SM?BD theme either..but if your a over
I know some who _love_ Gor books... You store them in plastic bags,
next to your camp shitter... (what a crappy attitude, eh?)
--
Charles Scripter * cesc...@progworks.net www.progworks.net/~cescript
When encryption is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir rapelcgvba.