Women Under Islam

alie...@gmail.com

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 12:14:05 PM9/27/12

to

From Al-Jazeera

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/09/201292745427434390.html

Mark L. Fergerson

miso

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 12:19:24 PM9/27/12

to

All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.

John Larkin

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 12:38:09 PM9/27/12

to

You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web
browsers, and fruit trees. But I don't recall many instances of
Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

George Herold

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 12:48:06 PM9/27/12

to

On Sep 27, 12:38 pm, John Larkin
<jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:19:24 -0700, miso <m...@sushi.com> wrote:

> >On 9/27/2012 9:14 AM, n...@bid.nes wrote:
> >> From Al-Jazeera
>
> >>http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/09/201292745427434390.html
>
> >> Mark L. Fergerson
>
> >All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.
>
> You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web
> browsers, and fruit trees. But I don't recall many instances of
> Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.

giggle..:^)
I thought it was more a story about abusive cops.
That seems to be pretty universal.

George H.

>
> --
>
> John Larkin Highland Technology Incwww.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

hamilton

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 12:50:29 PM9/27/12

to

Is this where Todd Akin got his marching orders ?

Tim Wescott

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 12:53:07 PM9/27/12

to

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:38:09 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:19:24 -0700, miso <mi...@sushi.com> wrote:
>
>>On 9/27/2012 9:14 AM, nu...@bid.nes wrote:
>>> From Al-Jazeera
>>>
>>> http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/09/201292745427434390.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark L. Fergerson
>>>
>>>
>>All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.
>
> You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web
> browsers, and fruit trees. But I don't recall many instances of
> Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.

Google "Westboro Baptist Church". Not Methodist, but it gives a modern
example.

--
My liberal friends think I'm a conservative kook.
My conservative friends think I'm a liberal kook.
Why am I not happy that they have found common ground?

Tim Wescott, Communications, Control, Circuits & Software
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Vladimir Vassilevsky

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 1:08:19 PM9/27/12

to

"John Larkin" wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:19:24 -0700, miso <mi...@sushi.com> wrote:
>>All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.

> You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web
> browsers, and fruit trees.

It is relatively easy to avoid supermarkets and web browsers.
It is not so simple with governments and religions.

> But I don't recall many instances of
> Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.

Salem witch trials ?

Vladimir Vassilevsky
DSP and Mixed Signal Consultant
www.abvolt.com

John Larkin

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 1:17:35 PM9/27/12

to

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 11:53:07 -0500, Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com>

wrote:

>On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:38:09 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:19:24 -0700, miso <mi...@sushi.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On 9/27/2012 9:14 AM, nu...@bid.nes wrote:
>>>> From Al-Jazeera
>>>>
>>>> http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/09/201292745427434390.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Mark L. Fergerson
>>>>
>>>>
>>>All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.
>>
>> You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web
>> browsers, and fruit trees. But I don't recall many instances of
>> Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.
>
>Google "Westboro Baptist Church". Not Methodist, but it gives a modern
>example.

How many people have they beheaded for blasphemy? How many women have
they stoned for letting their hair show? How's their suicide bombing
program coming along? Do they club people for holding hands in public?

They do seem to object to people having sex in a public park, which is
not a radically unreasonable position.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators

Custom laser drivers and controllers

Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links

VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation

John Larkin

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 1:28:10 PM9/27/12

to

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 12:08:19 -0500, "Vladimir Vassilevsky"
<nos...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>
>"John Larkin" wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:19:24 -0700, miso <mi...@sushi.com> wrote:
>>>All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.
>
>> You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web
>> browsers, and fruit trees.
>
>It is relatively easy to avoid supermarkets and web browsers.
>It is not so simple with governments and religions.

It's easy to avoid religion in countries that don't have a state
religion. Just ignore it.

>
>> But I don't recall many instances of
>> Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.
>
>Salem witch trials ?

Was that Methodists? Was it about enforcing a dress code?

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators

Custom laser drivers and controllers

Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links

Michael A. Terrell

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 1:52:58 PM9/27/12

to

Tim Wescott wrote:
>
> Google "Westboro Baptist Church". Not Methodist, but it gives a modern
> example.

That's not a church. It's a bunch of lawyers who stir up shit so
they can sue people. That's how the 'earn' a living. That 'church' is
all members of one family.

A few years ago they announced that tehy would disrupt a soldier's
funeral in Gainsville, Florida. They changed their minds after a couple
biker gangs told them to plan their funerals before leaving home, if
they were going to try it.

hamilton

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 1:54:48 PM9/27/12

to

On 9/27/2012 11:28 AM, John Larkin wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 12:08:19 -0500, "Vladimir Vassilevsky"
> <nos...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> "John Larkin" wrote:
>>> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:19:24 -0700, miso <mi...@sushi.com> wrote:
>>>> All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.
>>
>>> You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web
>>> browsers, and fruit trees.
>>
>> It is relatively easy to avoid supermarkets and web browsers.
>> It is not so simple with governments and religions.
>
> It's easy to avoid religion in countries that don't have a state
> religion. Just ignore it.
>
>>
>>> But I don't recall many instances of
>>> Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.
>>
>> Salem witch trials ?
>
> Was that Methodists? Was it about enforcing a dress code?
>
>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials

I'd bet the "witches" were women that did not accept the advances of the
ministers of those churches.

Michael A. Terrell

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 1:55:04 PM9/27/12

to

Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:
>
> "John Larkin" wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:19:24 -0700, miso <mi...@sushi.com> wrote:
> >>All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.
>
> > You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web
> > browsers, and fruit trees.
>
> It is relatively easy to avoid supermarkets and web browsers.
> It is not so simple with governments and religions.
>
> > But I don't recall many instances of
> > Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.
>
> Salem witch trials ?

A couple centuries ago, and how do you know they weren't witches? :)

Michael A. Terrell

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 1:56:54 PM9/27/12

to

More likely, overbearing Mothers In Law.

@jeff-relf.me

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 2:25:55 PM9/27/12

to

"All religion is oppressive", Mr. Miso ? What isn't ?

You belong to tribes/religions of verious sizes.
Had you no "tribe", you'd have no "religion"; they are one and the same.

  "Mother Nature" is "The Supreme God": eternal, infinite¹ and perfect.
  She consumes fuel (EXergy) so, virtually², She's "alive".
  [ ¹: Certainly not limited to biblical times/places.
    ²: in a notional sort of way, like a map, not real. ]

  Humanity labors to breathe, eat, drink and breed.
  Nature has hard⋅wired us this way, it wasn't our doing.
  Our "objective" has been fixed by nature, not invented.

tm

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 2:58:16 PM9/27/12

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 4:37:45 PM9/27/12

to

"nu...@bid.nes" <alie...@gmail.com> writes:

>On Sep 27, 11:25 am, Autism Speaks and says:

>> "All religion is oppressive", Mr. Miso ? What isn't ? You belong to tribes/
>> religions of verious sizes.

> I see your crappy self-written newsreader still can't match minimal
>compatibility standards. Also, your font renders tiny.

And Jeff is proud of that fact.

> Anyway, bullshit. I am not the property of any tribe/religion/
>whatever.

And no matter how many times he reposts it, it is still wrong.

miso

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 6:08:03 PM9/27/12

to

Tod Akin.. member of the House Science Committee. Scary! BTW, not that
the deadline for Akin to withdraw has expired, the GOP is going to fund
that creep. Then again, there are plenty of GOP senators just as shitty
as Akin. Rand Paul for instance.

Rape is no joking matter, although if you tell a woman a joke about
rape, her ears secrete a special serum so that she can't hear it.

@jeff-relf.me

unread,

Sep 27, 2012, 6:17:09 PM9/27/12

to

If you ( Mark⋅Fergerson and Michael⋅Moroney ) were newsreader savvy,
you'd adjust the font size yourself, instead of asking me to do it.

I specify only one thing, the "PRE" tag, HTML.
Very simple.  I don't specify the font size.

For Mark⋅Fergerson to not belong to ANY group, as he claims,
he must be a TOTAL ANARCHIST; otherwise, yes, he has a "religion".

unread,

Sep 28, 2012, 2:05:48 PM9/28/12

to

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 21:52:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"

Just a few brooms.

dagmarg...@yahoo.com

unread,

Sep 28, 2012, 3:18:26 PM9/28/12

to

On Sep 27, 1:28 pm, John Larkin <jlar...@highlandtechnology.com>

wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 12:08:19 -0500, "Vladimir Vassilevsky"
>
> <nos...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> >"John Larkin" wrote:

> >> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:19:24 -0700, miso <m...@sushi.com> wrote:
> >>>All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.
>
> >> You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web
> >> browsers, and fruit trees.
>
> >It is relatively easy to avoid supermarkets and web browsers.
> >It is not so simple with governments and religions.
>
> It's easy to avoid religion in countries that don't have a state
> religion. Just ignore it.
>
>
>
> >> But I don't recall many instances of
> >> Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.
>
> >Salem witch trials ?
>
> Was that Methodists? Was it about enforcing a dress code?

http://www.powerlineblog.com/admin/ed-assets/2012/09/Taliban-Women-copy.jpg

--
Cheers,
James Arthur

Michael A. Terrell

unread,

Sep 28, 2012, 3:35:30 PM9/28/12

to

JW wrote:

>
> tm wrote:
> >
> >Pelosi is a modern day witch.
>
> Did she turn you into a newt?

He did that by himself.

Michael A. Terrell

unread,

Sep 28, 2012, 3:36:20 PM9/28/12

to

John Larkin wrote:
>
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 21:52:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >John Larkin wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 13:55:04 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> >> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> "John Larkin" wrote:
> >> >> > On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:19:24 -0700, miso <mi...@sushi.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.
> >> >>
> >> >> > You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web
> >> >> > browsers, and fruit trees.
> >> >>
> >> >> It is relatively easy to avoid supermarkets and web browsers.
> >> >> It is not so simple with governments and religions.
> >> >>
> >> >> > But I don't recall many instances of
> >> >> > Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.
> >> >>
> >> >> Salem witch trials ?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > A couple centuries ago, and how do you know they weren't witches? :)
> >>
> >> There's a parking lot near here. A sign says
> >>
> >> WITCH PARKING ONLY
> >>
> >> all other will be toad
> >
> >
> > Ever see anyone parked there?
>
> Just a few brooms.

That could be Dimbulb, on another six hour break.

Alie...@gmail.com

unread,

Sep 28, 2012, 4:11:07 PM9/28/12

to

On Friday, September 28, 2012 12:18:27 PM UTC-7, (unknown) wrote:

(snip)

> http://www.powerlineblog.com/admin/ed-assets/2012/09/Taliban-Women-copy.jpg

This is why radical Islamofascists will fail. If you're going to weaponize women, why restrict them to single-shot?

;>)

Mark L. Fergerson

John Fields

unread,

Sep 28, 2012, 5:11:29 PM9/28/12

to

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:38:09 -0700, John Larkin

<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:19:24 -0700, miso <mi...@sushi.com> wrote:
>

>>On 9/27/2012 9:14 AM, nu...@bid.nes wrote:
>>> From Al-Jazeera
>>>
>>> http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/09/201292745427434390.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark L. Fergerson
>>>
>>

>>All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.
>
>You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web

>browsers, and fruit trees. But I don't recall many instances of

>Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.

---
How are fruit trees oppressive and how do you define 'assault'?

--
JF

John Fields

unread,

Sep 28, 2012, 5:39:39 PM9/28/12

to

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 10:17:35 -0700, John Larkin
<jla...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 11:53:07 -0500, Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com>
>wrote:

>
>>On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:38:09 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:19:24 -0700, miso <mi...@sushi.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 9/27/2012 9:14 AM, nu...@bid.nes wrote:
>>>>> From Al-Jazeera
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/09/201292745427434390.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark L. Fergerson
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.
>>>
>>> You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web
>>> browsers, and fruit trees. But I don't recall many instances of
>>> Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.
>>

>>Google "Westboro Baptist Church". Not Methodist, but it gives a modern
>>example.
>

>How many people have they beheaded for blasphemy? How many women have
>they stoned for letting their hair show? How's their suicide bombing
>program coming along? Do they club people for holding hands in public?

---
You seem to be somewhat myopic in not believing that had they the
power, its likely that all of those atrocities would be visited upon
their detractors or non-believers.

Just look at history for a few examples.
---

>They do seem to object to people having sex in a public park, which is
>not a radically unreasonable position.

---
If it's public, and some of the public experiences joy by performing
sexually in public, and you'd deny them that pleasure because of your
own taste, then you'd also curtail speech, in a public place, with
which you disagree.

--
JF

John Larkin

unread,

Sep 28, 2012, 8:18:42 PM9/28/12

to

If you would "experience joy" from having sex with other men in a
public park, go for it. But be warned that it's illegal in most
cities.

Jasen Betts

unread,

Sep 28, 2012, 9:33:47 PM9/28/12

to

Ergotism is a more likely cause.

--
⚂⚃ 100% natural

Jasen Betts

unread,

Sep 28, 2012, 9:50:42 PM9/28/12

to

On 2012-09-27, @@@Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
> If you ( Mark⋅Fergerson and Michael⋅Moroney ) were newsreader savvy,
> you'd adjust the font size yourself, instead of asking me to do it.

That's not the only thing wrong with the junk yout newsreader emits.
like it puts garbage on the end of the subject line, and the message
content can at most be described as html-like

Michael Moroney

unread,

Sep 28, 2012, 10:44:21 PM9/28/12

to

@@@Jeff-Relf.Me writes:

Google Groups messes up HTML because nobody ever really debugged it.
That's because only spammers and n00bs post in HTML, no need to cater to
them.

Hey, Jeff, great news! I got "nn" for a Raspberry Pi. I installed it
and it works great!

@jeff-relf.me

unread,

Sep 28, 2012, 11:58:56 PM9/28/12

to

Jasen⋅Betts, the font size is your call, not mine.
Why tell me it's too small ? !

The header of my post ( Jeff-Relf.Me@2012_Sep.27^3.17^PM );
tells you it's HTML ( Content-Type: Text/HTML; charset=UTF-8 ).

Google Groups, gMail, Yahoo, Hotmail, Mozilla ThunderBird,
Windows Live Mail, etc. ( all the major players ) know
that my "Subject:" line contains a raw UTF⋅8 BOM ( U+FeFF ).
[ U+FeFF, the BOM, is a "zero⋅width space" ]

No RFC told them how to handle it, but they got it right anyway,
because they have to handle emails from major clients, like Outlook.

@jeff-relf.me

unread,

Sep 29, 2012, 12:59:02 AM9/29/12

to

HTML emails are here to stay, get used to it.
On the web, simple HTML posts (like mine), are pervasive.

Google Groups displays HTML posts fine, but it can't quote it.
If you know what you're doing, you can quote correctly, by hand.
⋅⋅⋅⋅⋅⋅⋅⋅⋅
All I need is a Windows 7 Desktop, VoIP, etc.
I've no use for a cell phone, much less a Raspberry Pi.

Jasen Betts

unread,

Sep 29, 2012, 12:51:23 AM9/29/12

to

On 2012-09-29, @@@Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:

> Jasen⋅Betts, the font size is your call, not mine.
> Why tell me it's too small ? !

font size doesn't bother me.

> Google Groups, gMail, Yahoo, Hotmail, Mozilla ThunderBird,
> Windows Live Mail, etc. ( all the major players ) know
> that my "Subject:" line contains a raw UTF⋅8 BOM ( U+FeFF ).
> [ U+FeFF, the BOM, is a "zero⋅width space" ]

The byte order mark is meningless in UTF8, besides which: there nothing
that indicates that the subject line is to be interpreted as UTF-8
I mean it might say

Subject: U+FeFF, the BOM, is a "zeroâ‹…width space". ï»¿ï»¿
Subject: U+FeFF, the BOM, is a "zeroâ‹…width space". ï»¿ï»¿
Subject: U+FeFF, the BOM, is a "zeroβ‹…width space". ο»Ώο»Ώ
Subject: U+FeFF, the BOM, is a "zeroΓÍàwidth space". ∩╗┐∩╗┐

The Content-Type header only applies to the message body.

> No RFC told them how to handle it, but they got it right anyway,
> because they have to handle emails from major clients, like Outlook.

Is RFC 2047 too hard for you?

@jeff-relf.me

unread,

Sep 29, 2012, 1:09:35 AM9/29/12

to

The world⋅class (non⋅esoteric) clients I listed
sniff out the charset, they have to.  No RFC tells them how to do it. 
The U+FeFF in my "Subject:" line guides the sniffers.

I'm not worried about slrn users, such as yourself ( Jasen⋅Betts ).

John Fields

unread,

Sep 29, 2012, 5:10:19 AM9/29/12

to

On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 17:18:42 -0700, John Larkin

---
Quite telling that anytime sex is mentioned you immediately jump to
the conclusion that it's homosexual in nature.

--
JF

John Devereux

unread,

Sep 29, 2012, 7:48:15 AM9/29/12

to

John Larkin <jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> writes:

> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:19:24 -0700, miso <mi...@sushi.com> wrote:
>
>>On 9/27/2012 9:14 AM, nu...@bid.nes wrote:
>>> From Al-Jazeera
>>>
>>> http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/09/201292745427434390.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark L. Fergerson
>>>
>>
>>All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.
>
> You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web
> browsers, and fruit trees. But I don't recall many instances of
> Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.

I think it is more a matter of cultural development. Some Islamic
countries seem to be where Christianity was up until a few hundred years
ago. Crusades, inquisitions, witch burning etc. Where it probably still
is in some countries.

Not that this makes the referenced behaviour any less evil.

--

John Devereux

notbob

unread,

Sep 29, 2012, 8:09:38 AM9/29/12

to

I think the subject line says it all.

--
Definition of objectivism:
"Eff you! I got mine."
http://www.nongmoproject.org/

John Larkin

unread,

Sep 29, 2012, 11:39:50 AM9/29/12

to

On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 04:10:19 -0500, John Fields

Well, it's mostly guys who have sex in public parks. Most women are
smarter than that.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators

Custom timing and laser controllers

Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links

VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

John Fields

unread,

Sep 29, 2012, 11:52:28 AM9/29/12

to

---
I'll defer to your greater knowledge in that field.

--
JF

John Larkin

unread,

Sep 29, 2012, 12:41:27 PM9/29/12

to

On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 10:52:28 -0500, John Fields

Yes, I do have some experience with women. Among other things, they
seem to have a good instinctive understanding of epidemiology. There
are parks around here that no doubt have higher death/sq meter
densities than any WWI battlefield.

John Fields

unread,

Sep 29, 2012, 1:57:32 PM9/29/12

to

On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 09:41:27 -0700, John Larkin

<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 10:52:28 -0500, John Fields
><jfi...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 08:39:50 -0700, John Larkin
>><jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

>>>Well, it's mostly guys who have sex in public parks.
>>
>>---
>>I'll defer to your greater knowledge in that field.
>
>Yes, I do have some experience with women. Among other things, they
>seem to have a good instinctive understanding of epidemiology. There
>are parks around here that no doubt have higher death/sq meter
>densities than any WWI battlefield.

---
Whoosh!!!

--
JF

jmfbahciv

unread,

Oct 2, 2012, 9:10:29 AM10/2/12

to

hamilton wrote:
> On 9/27/2012 11:28 AM, John Larkin wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 12:08:19 -0500, "Vladimir Vassilevsky"
>> <nos...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>>

>>> "John Larkin" wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:19:24 -0700, miso <mi...@sushi.com> wrote:
>>>>> All religion is oppressive. It is just a matter of degree.
>>>
>>>> You can say the same thing about all governments, supermarkets, web
>>>> browsers, and fruit trees.
>>>

>>> It is relatively easy to avoid supermarkets and web browsers.
>>> It is not so simple with governments and religions.
>>
>> It's easy to avoid religion in countries that don't have a state
>> religion. Just ignore it.
>>
>>>

>>>> But I don't recall many instances of
>>>> Methodists assaulting women for being improperly dressed in public.
>>>

>>> Salem witch trials ?
>>
>> Was that Methodists? Was it about enforcing a dress code?
>>
>>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials
>
> I'd bet the "witches" were women that did not accept the advances of the
> ministers of those churches.

No. They were property owners.

/BAH

josephkk

unread,

Oct 2, 2012, 10:32:44 PM10/2/12

to

On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:14:05 -0700 (PDT), "nu...@bid.nes"
<alie...@gmail.com> wrote:

> From Al-Jazeera
>
>http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/09/201292745427434390.html
>
>
> Mark L. Fergerson

I presume that you are aware that Al Jazeera is owned by BBC now.

?-)

josephkk

unread,

Oct 2, 2012, 10:40:27 PM10/2/12

to

On Sat, 29 Sep 2012 08:39:50 -0700, John Larkin
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

How strange, I once had a regular gal partner who wanted to have sex
rather more publicly than i did. She usually got her way.

?-)

josephkk

unread,

Oct 2, 2012, 10:47:26 PM10/2/12

to

The amphibole failed.

?-)

John Larkin

unread,

Oct 2, 2012, 10:49:07 PM10/2/12

to

I should hope she didn't want to do it with five different strangers
every night. As I said, most women are smarter than that.

Read "And The Band Played On." Fascinating and frightening. I was here
in SF when all that happened; very wild, very strange times, many
deaths.

tm

unread,

Oct 2, 2012, 10:54:22 PM10/2/12

to

"josephkk" <joseph_...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:3t8n68lgk87lhu6uf...@4ax.com...

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++?-)

Are you sure it's not the other way around, Al Jazeera owns the BBC?

unread,

Oct 3, 2012, 1:06:54 PM10/3/12

to

Interesting that no one brought up homosexual sex but you thought you needed
to.

>Strange little mind-set.

Indeed.

John Fields

unread,

Oct 3, 2012, 7:55:26 PM10/3/12

to

---
You must have either missed Larkin's earlier homosexual slur or
ignored it for your own porpoises - something fishy there -
---

>>Strange little mind-set.
>
>Indeed.

---
As is your adjudication.

--
JF

k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz

unread,

Oct 3, 2012, 8:27:28 PM10/3/12

to

On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 18:55:26 -0500, John Fields

<jfi...@austininstruments.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 13:06:54 -0400, "k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
><k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:53:28 -0500, John Fields
>><jfi...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 06:59:34 -0700, John Larkin
>>><jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I didn't insult the lady. I assumed that she, like most women, was
>>>>indeed smarter and more selective than the guys who have anonymous sex
>>>>in public parks, or, as JF delicately expresses it, "experience joy"
>>>>there.
>>>
>>>---
>>>I didn't mention sexual preference, you did, and as usual, seem to
>>>think that every encounter not specifically identified as being
>>>heterosexual _must_ be homosexual.
>>
>>Interesting that no one brought up homosexual sex but you thought you needed
>>to.
>
>---
>You must have either missed Larkin's earlier homosexual slur or
>ignored it for your own porpoises - something fishy there -
>---

It's interesting that you see queers who aren't there. Maybe your mirror is a
bit sensitive.

>>>Strange little mind-set.
>>
>>Indeed.
>
>---
>As is your adjudication.

You like big words. Perhaps you should get a dictionary to go with your
"vocabulary".

John Larkin

unread,

Oct 3, 2012, 8:40:55 PM10/3/12

to

On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 20:27:28 -0400, "k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"

In my career, I've only met one gay EE, and he wasn't very good. He
inherited some money and gave up engineering for some artistic thing.
I have never met a female circuit designer... lots of scientists,
programmers, like that. Circuit design seems to be mostly a straight
male thing.

My wife is a speech pathologist. That profession is, literally, 99%
female.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators

Custom laser drivers and controllers

Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links

VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation

hamilton

unread,

Oct 3, 2012, 9:40:38 PM10/3/12

to

I am sure its a touchy feally position.

What guy wants that !

;-)

>
>

k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz

unread,

Oct 3, 2012, 11:39:43 PM10/3/12

to

I've known three female design engineers, two good (one became a very good
manager and one was my lab partner in college), one not so much (a
double-affirmative action hire).

>> My wife is a speech pathologist. That profession is, literally, 99%
>> female.
>
>I am sure its a touchy feally position.
>
>What guy wants that !
>

Can't even blow things up! ;-)

Jasen Betts

unread,

Oct 4, 2012, 6:13:32 AM10/4/12

to

some sort of crystal?

--
⚂⚃ 100% natural

John Larkin

unread,

Oct 4, 2012, 2:20:56 PM10/4/12

to

On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 23:39:43 -0400, "k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"

Yeah, and you have to be nice, too.

John Fields

unread,

Oct 4, 2012, 3:14:48 PM10/4/12

to

On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 20:27:28 -0400, "k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"

---
Or yours not at all selective.
---

>>>>Strange little mind-set.
>>>
>>>Indeed.
>>
>>---
>>As is your adjudication.
>
>You like big words. Perhaps you should get a dictionary to go with your
>"vocabulary".

---
I like words, and sometimes the big ones can nail meaning exquisitely
without the peening required from littler ones.

--
JF

Michael A. Terrell

unread,

Oct 4, 2012, 4:07:22 PM10/4/12

to

John Larkin wrote:
>
> In my career, I've only met one gay EE, and he wasn't very good. He
> inherited some money and gave up engineering for some artistic thing.
> I have never met a female circuit designer...

We had one at Microdyne, around 2000. I even worked with one woman
who repaired TVs, about 35 years ago.

k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz

unread,

Oct 4, 2012, 8:23:01 PM10/4/12

to

On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 14:14:48 -0500, John Fields

Idiot, we're talking about *you*.

>
>>>>>Strange little mind-set.
>>>>
>>>>Indeed.
>>>
>>>---
>>>As is your adjudication.
>>
>>You like big words. Perhaps you should get a dictionary to go with your
>>"vocabulary".
>
>---
>I like words, and sometimes the big ones can nail meaning exquisitely
>without the peening required from littler ones.

You really need to invest in a dictionary, then.

The Great Attractor

unread,

Oct 4, 2012, 9:47:08 PM10/4/12

to

The idiot is "waxing witchlike".

John Fields

unread,

Oct 5, 2012, 11:38:06 AM10/5/12

to

On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 20:23:01 -0400, "k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"

---
Whoosh...
---

>>>>>>Strange little mind-set.
>>>>>
>>>>>Indeed.
>>>>
>>>>---
>>>>As is your adjudication.
>>>
>>>You like big words. Perhaps you should get a dictionary to go with your
>>>"vocabulary".
>>
>>---
>>I like words, and sometimes the big ones can nail meaning exquisitely
>>without the peening required from littler ones.
>
>You really need to invest in a dictionary, then.

---
I have several, plus the ones on the web, while you seem unable or
unwilling to access any of them.

--
JF

josephkk

unread,

Oct 5, 2012, 8:51:23 PM10/5/12

to

^ amphiboly

>>
>> ?-)
>
>some sort of crystal?

Damn, the spell checker led me astray.

>?-)

unread,

Oct 7, 2012, 5:43:56 PM10/7/12

to

---
Many do, and Larkin dotes on his wife, so maybe he's in that set.
---

>>Can't even blow things up! ;-)
>
>Yeah, and you have to be nice, too.

---
That's called being "pussywhipped", and relates to not demurring to
demands placed on you by your wife in return for sex.

--
JF

k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz

unread,

Oct 7, 2012, 7:04:27 PM10/7/12

to

On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 14:04:07 -0500, John Fields

No, I can use a dictionary, which you *obviously* cannot. You do like the big
words (but haven't a clue of their meanings).

John Larkin

unread,

Oct 7, 2012, 7:29:07 PM10/7/12

to

On Sun, 07 Oct 2012 16:43:56 -0500, John Fields

You have obviously had some very bad experiences with women, to
dislike them so much.

I think women are wonderful, especially my wife. I do things for her
because I like her.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc

www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators

Custom timing and laser controllers

unread,

Oct 8, 2012, 7:55:19 PM10/8/12

to

On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 07:08:05 -0700, John Larkin

>>---

>
>Your dislike of women has been obvious for some time.

---
You know, John, you keep harping on that fantasy as if it were real,
but it'd make no sense to my friends who are women and who like me
because I don't just like them because they're women.
---

>The thing about women making "demands... in return for sex" sure sounds like bitter >memories to me.

---
Knowledge is power.
---

>I've never had a woman do that to me;

---
Perhaps because you've never had anything worth bartering for?
---

>the very concept is meaningless in my world: people have sex if they like one another.

---

Then why do you demean the fags getting off on each other in the park?

---

>>>I think women are wonderful, especially my wife. I do things for her
>>>because I like her.
>>
>>---
>>So, instead of "have to be nice" you meant "want to be nice"?
>
>Neither. It's "enjoy being nice."

---
And, yet, your: "Yeah, and you have to be nice, too." indicates
subservience, accent on 'have'.
--
JF