The men for women's rights test
Pinku-Sensei
http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=10884316438150389912
Here are my results:
Not a BAD guy
You scored 51 feminism!
Ok, so you're not ALL bad. You have some good ideas making their way into
that cute little head of yours. You probably are still hung up on that
women as sex objects thing....granted- women ARE beautiful but we do have
feelings and brains too. You know this though...you ARE aware. Maybe you
were brought up by 1950's type parents and are still clinging to some old
fashioned ideas. Maybe you just haven't taken the time to THINK about
womens' place in society. Either way...you have potential...just keep your
eyes and ears open and listen to the women in your life. Women aren't
ALWAYS right, thats not what I am saying...but you just might learn to
respect us more and therefore...get along better with us too!
My test tracked 1 variable How you compared to other people your age and
gender:
You scored higher than 11% on feminism
So much for the meme that AUKers are all feminists.
Now, how about the rest of you?
--
Pinku-Sensei
The "Mr. Personality" of AUK
Tuco Ramirez
Do you think it's a coincidence that the USA started going downhill
right around the time women got the vote?
conn...@hotmail.com
Pinku-Sensei wrote:
> The men for women's rights test
> http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=10884316438150389912
>
> Here are my results:
>
Oh fuck me, I scored 18.
OINK. OINK! I'm no slave to pussy.
conn...@hotmail.com
Chadwick Stone© wrote:
>> >
> > Oh fuck me, I scored 18.
> >
> > OINK. OINK! I'm no slave to pussy.
>
> you prefer dick, time and time again.
>
Poodle pooooooop Cut N Paste Chadwick Stone© wrote!
I've dated feminist gals, gals who think they are guys taking jobs away
from guys.
See the diff, Cut N Paste Chadwick Stone© wrote?
And they all want this relationship cowshit, its so 20th century, I
just laugh, suck some booooooob N root.
Big Rich Soprano
>right around the time women got the vote?
Yes... NEXT...
conn...@hotmail.com
Chadwick Stone© wrote:
>
> Gee whiz, could you possibly make your supposed insult a little more
> germane? Just a *little* more?
Did you watch slaughterhouse 5 when the guys pet doggie goes up to his
wife and urinates on her leg while she craddles the .baby sitting down?
Legendary stuff! I wish I was the dog, Chadwick Stone© wrote!
> Don't try to blame women for your sexual preference, cunner. You're the
> one who CHOOSES to smoke the baloney pony.
No man should be expected to chase pussy, thats what men did in the
1950's.
Today. No. Thank. You.
Now, I like my testicles sucked, so please continue...
Rhonda Lea Kirk
news:1156484181.3...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com
> Chadwick Stone© wrote:
>>
>> Gee whiz, could you possibly make your supposed insult a little more
>> germane? Just a *little* more?
>
> Did you watch slaughterhouse 5 when the guys pet doggie goes up to his
> wife and urinates on her leg while she craddles the .baby sitting
> down?
>
> Legendary stuff! I wish I was the dog, Chadwick Stone© wrote!
Can you explain to me in short, simple words exactly what this means?
You seem to have a real gift for non-sequitur.
>> Don't try to blame women for your sexual preference, cunner. You're
>> the one who CHOOSES to smoke the baloney pony.
>
> No man should be expected to chase pussy, thats what men did in the
> 1950's.
It isn't about "chasing pussy," you dumb fuck.
It's about knowing what you want and then being the right person so you
can have it.
> Today. No. Thank. You.
If you don't want pussy, no one is forcing you to fuck a woman, Connor.
> Now, I like my testicles sucked, so please continue...
Hey, if usenet insults get you off, more power to you. It's a whole lot
less messy than liver in a milk carton.
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk
Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
willing to inflict on others. Phčdre nó Delaunay
conn...@hotmail.com
Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
>
>
> Can you explain to me in short, simple words exactly what this means?
>
Look them up, the words to understand the meaning "Rhonda".
> You seem to have a real gift for non-sequitur.
>
A whatever gift, wow does that translate into having a small cock as
well?
>
> It isn't about "chasing pussy," you dumb fuck.
The womens rights test scored me 18 points just because I didnt agree
with pussy ideology.
> It's about knowing what you want and then being the right person so you
> can have it.
Like being a woman and getting all these social perks just for having
two bumps and a cunt?
Can men perhaps buy a cunt and get the same perks?
>
> If you don't want pussy, no one is forcing you to fuck a woman, Connor.
>
You mean I won't get pussy UNLESS I chase pussy?
>
> Hey, if usenet insults get you off, more power to you. It's a whole lot
> less messy than liver in a milk carton.
Milk is for the babies, steroids are for men, so pass the deca,
sustanon, enanthate, eqiupoise, anadrol, primobolan, winstrol,
cypoinate.
The God of Odd Statements
Huh, same here. Since I self-identify as a feminist, I must say I don't
care for that test. The first two questions, in particular, I found to be
very puritanical and anti-sex. There were several good ones, though...
--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5
Demon Lord of Confusion, owner of rec.radio.amateur.policy trolls
July 2006 Looney Maroon Nomination:
http://www.lunarplanner.com/HolyCross.html#Timing
Vote Chuck Lysaght for Tar & Feathers!
Ballot coming Sept 1st!
Rhonda Lea Kirk
news:1156487394.7...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com
> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
>>
>>
>> Can you explain to me in short, simple words exactly what this means?
> Look them up, the words to understand the meaning "Rhonda".
I understand the individual words, Connor. I don't understand what
you've done to them.
>> You seem to have a real gift for non-sequitur.
> A whatever gift, wow does that translate into having a small cock as
> well?
Well, if you're taking all those steroids, your cock is going to shrink
and fall off.
But no, that's not what "non-sequitur" means.
>> It isn't about "chasing pussy," you dumb fuck.
>
> The womens rights test scored me 18 points just because I didnt agree
> with pussy ideology.
Get real. "Pussy ideology"? You didn't agree with a test on "Ok Cupid."
>> It's about knowing what you want and then being the right person so
>> you can have it.
>
> Like being a woman and getting all these social perks just for having
> two bumps and a cunt?
I was born in 1958, so I grew up up in a different world, and I remember
how it used to be.
I will grant you that in some cases, some women get special privileges,
but it's usually not because they're merely women, but because they're
hot.
Pretty women get a better life all the way around. Does that say
something about them, or about those who ease their way because of how
they look?
I'm not a feminist, Connor. I subscribe to Heinlein's theory of equal
rights.
I don't believe we did ourselves or our children any favors by demanding
equality, but one thing is certain, Connor. In the world of my
childhood, just like the world of today, you still wouldn't be getting
laid.
> Can men perhaps buy a cunt and get the same perks?
Have an operation, and hope that you end up easy on the eyes.
Just remember, good looking guys also do a lot better in the world.
>> If you don't want pussy, no one is forcing you to fuck a woman,
>> Connor.
> You mean I won't get pussy UNLESS I chase pussy?
Getting laid is not your birthright, and even in most ancient cultures,
wherein rape was a spoil of war, it remained a punishable offense if
committed within ones own tribe.
Draw your own conclusion.
But you're not getting pussy no matter what you do.
>> Hey, if usenet insults get you off, more power to you. It's a whole
>> lot less messy than liver in a milk carton.
>
> Milk is for the babies, steroids are for men, so pass the deca,
> sustanon, enanthate, eqiupoise, anadrol, primobolan, winstrol,
> cypoinate.
You're too young to be so fucked in the head.
It was a reference to /Portnoy's Complaint/.
Jim Blansett
Preach it!, Rhonda.
conn...@hotmail.com
Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
> <
> I understand the individual words, Connor. I don't understand what
> you've done to them.
Perhaps you can learn a bit more about gender b4 you post on this ng.
>
> Well, if you're taking all those steroids, your cock is going to shrink
> and fall off.
Really, and name one person where this has been the case? ;-)
> >> It isn't about "chasing pussy," you dumb fuck.
>
I'm waiting for eGALitarian girls to show their equal strength and
contact guys, do ya fink its gooona happen "Rhonda"?
Its 2050 and men are STILL waiting. Strange that huh.
> Get real. "Pussy ideology"? You didn't agree with a test on "Ok Cupid."
No, it was pussy ideology about whether the candidate is in agreeance
with fem0nazism.
>
> I was born in 1958, so I grew up up in a different world, and I remember
> how it used to be.
Yeah, all oppressed in a safe and nurturing environ, let me get that
microscopic violin!
> I will grant you that in some cases, some women get special privileges,
> but it's usually not because they're merely women, but because they're
> hot.
Nah, even UGLY women like you get cunt perks like not being socialised
to perform ALL the hard yakka.
>
> Pretty women get a better life all the way around. Does that say
> something about them, or about those who ease their way because of how
> they look?
Again, women just because they are women are in a gender/sex role less
ardous than that of the male.
> I'm not a feminist, Connor. I subscribe to Heinlein's theory of equal
> rights.
So go defend those "hard won" rights, sexist gal.
>
> I don't believe we did ourselves or our children any favors by demanding
> equality, but one thing is certain, Connor. In the world of my
> childhood, just like the world of today, you still wouldn't be getting
> laid.
Of course not. ;-)
> Have an operation, and hope that you end up easy on the eyes.
>
You can always tell me from the other gym bois, I'm always spotting the
other guys doing squats. Deeper! Yeah Deeper!
> Just remember, good looking guys also do a lot better in the world.
Not in the cannon fodder stakes, girleeeeee
> >> If you don't want pussy, no one is forcing you to fuck a woman,
> >> Connor.
If its free, why not take the opps?
> Getting laid is not your birthright, and even in most ancient cultures,
> wherein rape was a spoil of war, it remained a punishable offense if
> committed within ones own tribe.
Again, if its free, take the opps. ;-)
>
> Draw your own conclusion.
>
> But you're not getting pussy no matter what you do.
>
Its free for the taking so I'm glad I dont have to pay.
> You're too young to be so fucked in the head.
If you werent such a sexist, you'd be long dead.
Kadaitcha Man
evacuated:
>> I don't believe we did ourselves or our children any favors by
>> demanding equality, but one thing is certain, Connor. In the world
>> of my childhood, just like the world of today, you still wouldn't be
>> getting laid.
>
> Of course not. ;-)
Admission taken into evidence against you.
--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005 and April 2006
ObHint: Just because you argue with a notorious fuckwit netk0oK, it
does not necessarily follow that you are not also a fuckwit netk0oK.
MCP
"Chadwick Stone©" <chad_...@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:otyHg.44720$P02....@fe07.news.easynews.com...
> X-No-Archive: YES
> conn...@hotmail.com [conn...@hotmail.com] has entered into testimony
> 1156487394.7...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com
>
>> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Can you explain to me in short, simple words exactly what this means?
>>>
>>
>> Look them up, the words to understand the meaning "Rhonda".
>
> with those words, cunner.
>
>>> You seem to have a real gift for non-sequitur.
>>>
>>
>> A whatever gift, wow does that translate into having a small cock as
>> well?
>
>
>>> It isn't about "chasing pussy," you dumb fuck.
>>
>> The womens rights test scored me 18 points just because I didnt agree
>> with pussy ideology.
>
> designed to lead assholes to give assholish answers. You're as easy to
> h0oK and lead as Karczewski teh convict.
>
>>> It's about knowing what you want and then being the right person so
>>> you can have it.
>>
>> Like being a woman and getting all these social perks just for having
>> two bumps and a cunt?
>
>
>> Can men perhaps buy a cunt and get the same perks?
>
> have rendered you unable to take the man's role in such a liaison,
> meaning that you're the one wearing the fishnet stockings and spandex
> miniskirt.
>
>>> If you don't want pussy, no one is forcing you to fuck a woman,
>>> Connor.
>>>
>>
>> You mean I won't get pussy UNLESS I chase pussy?
>
> the method you support for those medicially capable?
>
>>> Hey, if usenet insults get you off, more power to you. It's a whole
>>> lot less messy than liver in a milk carton.
>>
>> Milk is for the babies, steroids are for men, so pass the deca,
>> sustanon, enanthate, eqiupoise, anadrol, primobolan, winstrol,
>> cypoinate.
>
> testicals, turn wood into rubber (ya know what I mean ;) ), causing
> sexual frustration which invariably leads to teh temper tantrums you
> throw on teh fr0oT farm.
hEY! Prickwick StUpId, why don't you AUKers learn to read and write like normal
people, you twat!
>
> --
>
> COOSN-266-06-70683
> Skepticult® Member# 581-00504-208
>
> HoT, March 2005
> BWMDW, Trainer of pSylvia pSullivan
>
> Usenet's most helpful netizen
> ChadwickStone at Gmail dot com
>
>
Rhonda Lea Kirk
news:1156512314....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com
> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
<snippage throughout, but not nearly enough>
>> I understand the individual words, Connor. I don't understand what
>> you've done to them.
>
> Perhaps you can learn a bit more about gender b4 you post on this ng.
Words have gender, living creatures have sex.
>> Well, if you're taking all those steroids, your cock is going to
>> shrink and fall off.
>
> Really, and name one person where this has been the case? ;-)
Well, it hasn't fallen off yet, but I know a guy whose cock shrunk by
quite a lot, according to our mutual acquaintances.
Among other things.
He was really kinda nuts. Started beating on his tandem passengers, got
his rating pulled.
He was only about 5'3 or so, but he compensated by being as wide as he
was tall. Just no discernible dick. He ended up in jail for beating his
wife.
>>>> It isn't about "chasing pussy," you dumb fuck.
> I'm waiting for eGALitarian girls to show their equal strength and
> contact guys, do ya fink its gooona happen "Rhonda"?
Contact?
You haven't been paying attention, Connor.
Some women have no hesitation about doing just that--if the guy is
worthwhile. It would explain why I'm going to spend the next three weeks
with a man who ran me a merry chase all over usenet until I caught him.
To me--from the very first time I saw him--it was apparent that he is
worth having and keeping, so I put forth the necessary effort.
What does that tell ya, ya dumb fuck?
> Its 2050 and men are STILL waiting. Strange that huh.
Not all of them, Connor. Just you and your ilk.
>> Get real. "Pussy ideology"? You didn't agree with a test on "Ok
>> Cupid."
>
> No, it was pussy ideology about whether the candidate is in agreeance
> with fem0nazism.
It was a "test" on "OK Cupid," Connor.
>> I was born in 1958, so I grew up up in a different world, and I
>> remember how it used to be.
>
> Yeah, all oppressed in a safe and nurturing environ, let me get that
> microscopic violin!
Let's see...sexually molested as a child, raped as a teen. I also had my
face beaten into the floor one night when I was 14.
I don't need a violin, Connor. I survived, and I'm neither rabid nor
bitter. I also like most of the men I meet.
I just don't like you...then again, you're not really a man, you're just
a whiny baby, and that's only attractive when you weigh less than 40
pounds.
>> I will grant you that in some cases, some women get special
>> privileges, but it's usually not because they're merely women, but
>> because they're hot.
>
> Nah, even UGLY women like you get cunt perks like not being socialised
> to perform ALL the hard yakka.
Hmmmm...I have a friend who is currently pining for his woman. She
recently deployed to Iraq.
What is it you're trying to say, Connor? Whatever it is, on its face, it
just doesn't seem to fit with reality.
>> Pretty women get a better life all the way around. Does that say
>> something about them, or about those who ease their way because of
>> how they look?
>
> Again, women just because they are women are in a gender/sex role less
> ardous than that of the male.
Ah...now I get it.
You're a feminist.
You think that women should be just like men, only with a higher-pitched
voice and an always-willing pussy.
Isn't that the underpinning of the whole ideology, Connor? That women
should be just like men?
Sorry. Not for me.
>> I'm not a feminist, Connor. I subscribe to Heinlein's theory of equal
>> rights.
>
> So go defend those "hard won" rights, sexist gal.
Obviously, you've never read Heinlein.
>> Just remember, good looking guys also do a lot better in the world.
>
> Not in the cannon fodder stakes, girleeeeee
See above.
>>>> If you don't want pussy, no one is forcing you to fuck a woman,
>>>> Connor.
>
> If its free, why not take the opps?
The woman who would fuck you...<shakes head>...shit, well...there's all
kinds of sickness in the world, ya fucking narcissist.
>> But you're not getting pussy no matter what you do.
>>
>
> Its free for the taking so I'm glad I dont have to pay.
Pussy is not free for the taking, Connor.
If that's what you do, you're going to jail.
>> You're too young to be so fucked in the head.
>
> If you werent such a sexist, you'd be long dead.
Eh?
MCP
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhon...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4l8814...@individual.net...
Ah! yet another fucked up feminazi prat to play with! :-)
Rhonda Lea Kirk
news:sEDHg.168330$9d4....@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk
What part of what I wrote qualifies me as a feminazi?
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk
Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay
Kadaitcha Man
> <conn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1156512314....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com
>> Perhaps you can learn a bit more about gender b4 you post on this ng.
>
> living creatures have sex.
Except connor.
Kadaitcha Man
pikelets and crumpets, brooded:
Hopefully you won't live to regret those words.
pandora
The part where you disagreed with connor.
Marg
> --
> Rhonda Lea Kirk
>
> Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
> willing to inflict on others. Phčdre nó Delaunay
>
>
Big Rich Soprano
>>It was a reference to /Portnoy's Complaint/.
>Preach it!, Rhonda.
Man is this another cross posted piece of crap? Hey Ron, is there some
way to not allow crossposting in Agent - i'm searching for that
answer...
The spell checker offered composting for crossposting! cool...
FreeSpeechStore
> "Chadwick StoneŠ" wrote...
Pleace to explain what are "normal people". Also pleace to give examples.
I've looked for them all my life, and never seen a sign of any.
--
__________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris!
Not Richard Scoville
VOTE DICK SCOVILLE FOR THE BOB ALLISAT H, L, & S!!!
And for Tinfoil Star in AFA-B!
Rookie Kook of the Year, 2005
Kook of the Month, December 2005
Clueless Newbie of the Month, October 2005
Palmjob Paddle, January 2006
George Pickett Memorial Trophy, October 2005
Coward of the Month, October 2005
George Armstrong Custer "Kicked @$$" Award
Kenny McCormick Memorial Medal
Order of the Holey Sockpuppet
Balsa Gavel
Richard M. Scoville is explicitly denied the right to archive any of my
posts, under any of my nyms, on his site, FreeSpeechStore.com, winner of
the Richbull.com Memorial Award for Kooksite of the Year, 2005
http://tinyurl.com/c222n
alt.fan.art-bell awards
GREEN LANTERN AWARD FOR PROJECTION for Spring 2006
TINFOIL STAR AWARD for Spring 2006
OFFICES OF KARCZEWSKI, WOLLMANN, & STAPLETON, ATTOURNEYS AT FLAW
(Incumbent, April 2006-present)
"It's claiming authority based on absurd myths and fantasy beings - that
creates anger." -- Kurt Gavin
"Al-Qaeda is solely responsible for 9/11" is just another k00ky
konspiracy theory.
FreeSpeechStore
> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote...
>> <conn...@hotmail.com> wrote
>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
<snip>
>>>> It's about knowing what you want and then being the right person so
>>>> you can have it.
>>>
>>> Like being a woman and getting all these social perks just for having
>>> two bumps and a cunt?
>>
>> I was born in 1958, so I grew up up in a different world, and I remember
>> how it used to be.
>>
>> I will grant you that in some cases, some women get special privileges,
>> but it's usually not because they're merely women, but because they're
>> hot.
>>
>> Pretty women get a better life all the way around. Does that say
>> something about them, or about those who ease their way because of how
>> they look?
>>
>> I'm not a feminist, Connor. I subscribe to Heinlein's theory of equal
>> rights.
>>
>> I don't believe we did ourselves or our children any favors by demanding
>> equality, but one thing is certain, Connor. In the world of my
>> childhood, just like the world of today, you still wouldn't be getting
>> laid.
>
> Ah! yet another fucked up feminazi prat to play with! :-)
The words, they are hard to read, yes?
Cardinal Snarky of the Fannish Inquisition
didst finally confess, after taking Muche Tea:
> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote...
>> "MCP" wrote
>> >>>> lot less messy than liver in a milk carton.
>> >>>
>> >>> Milk is for the babies, steroids are for men, so pass the deca,
>> >>> sustanon, enanthate, eqiupoise, anadrol, primobolan, winstrol,
>> >>> cypoinate.
>> >>
>> >> You're too young to be so fucked in the head.
>> >>
>> >> It was a reference to /Portnoy's Complaint/.
>> >
>>
>> What part of what I wrote qualifies me as a feminazi?
>
> The part where you disagreed with connor.
"Burn the Heretic! BURN HER!!!"
--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris!
Demon Prince of Absurdity
Looney Maroon nominee for August 2006 Johnny D Wentzky foamed:
"You never asked someone who goes into areas of the internet that are
only for adults who has an underage id somehow or another if they are a
cop posing as an underage person online?
I guess lots of people just don't watch dateline or read stories much.
Why don;t you go to pervertedjustice,com and see what they do. They are
awash in their self-proclaimed glory after they lied to membners of the
public.
They are awash in their self-proclaimed glory after they posed as an
underage person and agreed to do all sorts of sex acts wioth adult
males, and they are adults posing as teenager themselves. They make
themsleves into liars by falsely impersonating underage persons and by
not fuilfilling the words they tell the victims online in their chats.
Why don't you read it where they tell these victims of their deceit
about how they have been with grown men and such? Why don't you read it
where they say, "That would be cool." after someone makes an advance
towards an adult who is posing as a teenager? And, where they agree to
meet the person, etc.
Lost control, didn't you?
Is that why you feel as if you need to lie so much now? I see where lots
of these false impersonation games are not sticking. They feel as if
they can lie and then order the victims to get counseling in the
gayblade, governmental, pro-choice tax leech counseling centers. They
are doing nothing more than usury and fraud in many cases." -- Wentzky
almost comes out of the closet as a pedo/ephebophile in MID:
<H%%Eg.28916$Uq1....@bignews6.bellsouth.net>
The Demon Prince of Absurdity
screamed:
>>>You're too young to be so fucked in the head.
>
>>>It was a reference to /Portnoy's Complaint/.
>
>>Preach it!, Rhonda.
>
> Man is this another cross posted piece of crap? Hey Ron, is there some way
> to not allow crossposting in Agent - i'm searching for that answer...
Try *removing the other groups from the froups line besides your own*.
--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! TM#5
Cardinal Snarky of the Fannish Inquisition
No one expects the Fannish Inquisition!
Vote rec.radio.amateur.policy for Busted Urinal in August 2006!
Also vote Cletis Perkins for:
Bolo Bullis Foam Duck
Unabomber Surprise
Goofy @zzed Babboon
Joseph Bartlo "Pathetic Anal Pineapple" Award
Bookman
Inquisition <inqui...@smof.org> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 11:04:16 -0700, pandora sat in thee Comfee Chaire, and
>didst finally confess, after taking Muche Tea:
>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote...
>>> "MCP" wrote
>>> > "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote...
>>> >> <conn...@hotmail.com> wrote
>>> >>> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
><snip>
>>> >>>> Hey, if usenet insults get you off, more power to you. It's a whole
>>> >>>> lot less messy than liver in a milk carton.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Milk is for the babies, steroids are for men, so pass the deca,
>>> >>> sustanon, enanthate, eqiupoise, anadrol, primobolan, winstrol,
>>> >>> cypoinate.
>>> >>
>>> >> You're too young to be so fucked in the head.
>>> >>
>>> >> It was a reference to /Portnoy's Complaint/.
>>> >
>>> > Ah! yet another fucked up feminazi prat to play with! :-)
>>>
>>> What part of what I wrote qualifies me as a feminazi?
>>
>> The part where you disagreed with connor.
>
>"Burn the Heretic! BURN HER!!!"
BURN her, she's a witch!
She turned me into a newt...
ESL!
--
Bookman -The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in AFA-B
Kazoo Konspirator #668 (The Neighbor of the Beast)
Clue-Bat Wrangler
Keeper of the Nickname Lists
Despotic Kookologist of the New World Order
Hammer of Thor award, October 2005
COOSN-266-06-89425
"I'd love to kill you in a ring" - Bartmo gets all touchy-feely
"****SPV....... So yes I am an idiot."
"ASK THE NWS, YOUR TAX DOLLAR GOES TO THEM NOT TO DR.TURI."
- Mr. Turi explains how to accurately predict hurricanes
Bookman is yet another Usenet fignuten, meaning naysayer and/or
rusemaster of their incest cloned Third Reich. In other words, you're
communicating with an intellectual if not a biological clone of
Hitler.
- Brad Guth tries to wax "scientific", but invokes Godwin, instead.
WWFSMD?
Rhonda Lea Kirk
news:8a6dnW5WlrRmp3LZ...@scnresearch.com
Y'know...
I'm not a Christian, but I do adhere to some Christian principles, one
of which is that in a heterosexual pairing, the male partner is the head
of the household.
In the kind of relationship where female submission works as advertised,
the man actually listens to what the woman has to say. She may defer to
him ultimately, but he takes her seriously and heeds her advice.
The problem arises when a woman tries to submit to an abusive fucker
like Connor. It seems that what they want is blind obedience, not a
partnership.
Still, when one considers that I actually live what I believe, it gives
me something of a belly cramp to be referred to as a feminazi. I first
read the reply to my post about 7 hours ago, Marg, and I haven't stopped
laughing since.
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk
Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay
Rhonda Lea Kirk
news:l9gue2dfol4s71d9s...@4ax.com
Try using your killfile without making a production of it.
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 11:04:16 -0700, pandora sat in thee Comfee
> Chaire, and didst finally confess, after taking Muche Tea:
>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote...
>>> "MCP" wrote
>>>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote...
>>>>> <conn...@hotmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
> <snip>
>>>>>>> Hey, if usenet insults get you off, more power to you. It's a
>>>>>>> whole lot less messy than liver in a milk carton.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Milk is for the babies, steroids are for men, so pass the deca,
>>>>>> sustanon, enanthate, eqiupoise, anadrol, primobolan, winstrol,
>>>>>> cypoinate.
>>>>>
>>>>> You're too young to be so fucked in the head.
>>>>>
>>>>> It was a reference to /Portnoy's Complaint/.
>>>>
>>>> Ah! yet another fucked up feminazi prat to play with! :-)
>>>
>>> What part of what I wrote qualifies me as a feminazi?
>>
>> The part where you disagreed with connor.
>
> "Burn the Heretic! BURN HER!!!"
Um...
Snarky, can we hold off on that until I get back from Texas? I'd really
like my three weeks with the KMonster first.
Art Deco
The socmans remind me of Larry the Croc and his relatives.
--
COOSN-266-06-39716
Official Associate AFA-B Vote Rustler
Official Overseer of Kooks and Saucerheads in alt.astronomy
Official "Usenet psychopath and born-again LLPOF minion",
as designated by Brad Guth
"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen
conn...@hotmail.com
Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
> "
>
> The problem arises when a woman tries to submit to an abusive fucker
> like Connor. It seems that what they want is blind obedience, not a
> partnership.
LOL ... name one person of gender as evidence of Connor being "an
abusive fucker", KIRK.
>
> Still, when one considers that I actually live what I believe, it gives
> me something of a belly cramp to be referred to as a feminazi. I first
> read the reply to my post about 7 hours ago, Marg, and I haven't stopped
> laughing since.
Gal who consider themselves "feminist" had better start practicing what
they preach, huh, yu'all big girls now.
Rhonda Lea Kirk
news:1156563490.3...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com
> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
>> "
>>
>> The problem arises when a woman tries to submit to an abusive fucker
>> like Connor. It seems that what they want is blind obedience, not a
>> partnership.
>
> LOL ... name one person of gender as evidence of Connor being "an
> abusive fucker", KIRK.
wtf?
Does anyone understand what this fuckwit just wrote?
>> Still, when one considers that I actually live what I believe, it
>> gives me something of a belly cramp to be referred to as a feminazi.
>> I first read the reply to my post about 7 hours ago, Marg, and I
>> haven't stopped laughing since.
>
> Gal who consider themselves "feminist" had better start practicing
> what they preach, huh, yu'all big girls now.
I'm not a feminist, Connor. You snipped something important:
> in a heterosexual pairing, the male partner is the
> head of the household.
>
> In the kind of relationship where female submission works as
> advertised, the man actually listens to what the woman has to say.
> She may defer to him ultimately, but he takes her seriously and heeds
> her advice.
Taken with the part you didn't snip, your theory of women doesn't fit
the facts of /me/, Connor, and I'm not the only woman who believes what
I do. You can't discard the facts, therefore, you must adjust your
theory to take us into account.
Them's the rules.
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk
Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
willing to inflict on others. Phčdre nó Delaunay
The God of Odd Statements
> "Cardinal Snarky of the Fannish Inquisition" wrote
>> On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 11:04:16 -0700, pandora sat in thee Comfee Chaire,
>> and didst finally confess, after taking Muche Tea:
>>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote...
>>>> "MCP" wrote
>>>>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote...
>>>>>> <conn...@hotmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
>> <snip>
>>>>>>>> Hey, if usenet insults get you off, more power to you. It's a
>>>>>>>> whole lot less messy than liver in a milk carton.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Milk is for the babies, steroids are for men, so pass the deca,
>>>>>>> sustanon, enanthate, eqiupoise, anadrol, primobolan, winstrol,
>>>>>>> cypoinate.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're too young to be so fucked in the head.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was a reference to /Portnoy's Complaint/.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah! yet another fucked up feminazi prat to play with! :-)
>>>>
>>>> What part of what I wrote qualifies me as a feminazi?
>>>
>>> The part where you disagreed with connor.
>>
>> "Burn the Heretic! BURN HER!!!"
>
> Um...
>
> Snarky, can we hold off on that until I get back from Texas? I'd really
> like my three weeks with the KMonster first.
<surprised> ...Oh. All right. <to the gathering mob> Hang on, she's going
on vacation. The festivities can be resumed later.
--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5
Demon Lord of Confusion
Supreme High Overlord of rec.radio.*
Hyerdahl
If that's how you wish to live Rhonda....you are free to do so....or
not. IOW, while the laws protect you AS an equal, you are free to
submit.
>
> In the kind of relationship where female submission works as advertised,
> the man actually listens to what the woman has to say. She may defer to
> him ultimately, but he takes her seriously and heeds her advice.
>
Again, this is your choice. The minute you stipulate that other women
must do the same, is where we part ways in debate. It's rather like
wearing the veil in Islam....women can't CHOOSE to wear it if there is
no choice. :-)
> The problem arises when a woman tries to submit to an abusive fucker
> like Connor. It seems that what they want is blind obedience, not a
> partnership.
That's what insecure men want, blind obedience. This is nothing new.
>
> Still, when one considers that I actually live what I believe, it gives
> me something of a belly cramp to be referred to as a feminazi. I first
> read the reply to my post about 7 hours ago, Marg, and I haven't stopped
> laughing since.
Indeed.
Rhonda Lea Kirk
news:1156566588.8...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com
Exactly.
It is a choice. And it's not a choice I would make in a relationship
with someone like Connor.
It's only a safe choice with someone who loves and respects his partner.
It is only a safe choice to give such power to a man who has no vested
interest in being in control.
I'm still responsible for my choices, even when I give the final
decision-making authority to another. So I choose to give such authority
only to one who will not put me in the position of taking responsibility
for a fucked-up decision.
It's a lot more complex than I made it out to be in my earlier post, and
even as elaborated here, but for me, at the present time, it hasn't
failed to work out well.
>> In the kind of relationship where female submission works as
>> advertised, the man actually listens to what the woman has to say.
>> She may defer to him ultimately, but he takes her seriously and
>> heeds her advice.
>>
>
> Again, this is your choice. The minute you stipulate that other women
> must do the same, is where we part ways in debate. It's rather like
> wearing the veil in Islam....women can't CHOOSE to wear it if there is
> no choice. :-)
I would never think of telling another *person* what to do.
Control is the basis of abuse. And the pathological need to control is,
first, evidence of a lack of self-control, and second, of a personality
disorder.
My basic precept is "my right to swing stops at the end of your nose."
And whatever you want to do is also fine...until your swing hits my
nose. In an imperfect world, it's a hard way to live, but I do my best.
Where I fail is in my desire to send control freaks to the moon--without
an air supply. :)
>> The problem arises when a woman tries to submit to an abusive fucker
>> like Connor. It seems that what they want is blind obedience, not a
>> partnership.
>
> That's what insecure men want, blind obedience. This is nothing new.
Been there. Had that.
My ex-husband was diagnosed with NPD years before I met him. At the
time, it was trendy for New York lawyers to see a shrink twice a week.
Given the nature of his issue, it never occurred to him to ask for a
diagnosis. After all, he was a respected professional with a good job
and a whole load of coke-snorting acquaintances. What could possibly be
wrong?
He spent the entirety of our marriage trying to prove that I
was...certifiable. He once brought home razor blades and suggested to me
that perhaps I would feel better if I took up cutting. I suggested to
him that if anyone was going to bleed, it would be him.
His last ditch effort was to call his old shrink and ask her--with me
listening on the extension--what his diagnosis was. This was done under
the theory that she would say to him "there's nothing wrong with you,"
and it would therefore become clear to me that the sheer insanity of our
marriage was all my doing.
Imagine his surprise. :) To this day, on the rare occasions I think to
recall the look on his face, I can only laugh.
Needless to say, but I'll say it anyway, submission to a pathological
fuckhead is a form of slow suicide...and I love life altogether too much
to end mine prematurely.
>> Still, when one considers that I actually live what I believe, it
>> gives me something of a belly cramp to be referred to as a feminazi.
>> I first read the reply to my post about 7 hours ago, Marg, and I
>> haven't stopped laughing since.
>
> Indeed.
Still laughing. :)
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk
Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
willing to inflict on others. Phčdre nó Delaunay
Rhonda Lea Kirk
message news:pan.2006.08.26....@statements.likeyours
Thanks. You're my hero. :)
I am, at this moment, like a six-year old waiting for Christmas. It
would just be too much to bear if Christmas didn't come.
MCP
lol! well if connor a is an abusive fucker so is all the stinky twats on this
newsgroup (MCP trying to wind up Sissysam) :-)
>
> Still, when one considers that I actually live what I believe, it gives me
> something of a belly cramp to be referred to as a feminazi. I first read the
> reply to my post about 7 hours ago, Marg, and I haven't stopped laughing
> since.
>
> --
> Rhonda Lea Kirk
>
> Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
> willing to inflict on others. Phčdre nó Delaunay
>
Jude Alexander
Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
> "pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
> news:8a6dnW5WlrRmp3LZ...@scnresearch.com
> > "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhon...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:4l8fk5...@individual.net...
> >> "MCP" <gf010...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> >> news:sEDHg.168330$9d4....@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk
> >>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhon...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:4l8814...@individual.net...
> >>>> <conn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:1156487394.7...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com
> >>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
(snipped)
> I'm not a Christian, but I do adhere to some Christian principles, one
> of which is that in a heterosexual pairing, the male partner is the head
> of the household.
If that's how you wish to live Rhonda....you are free to do so....or
not. IOW, while the laws protect you AS an equal, you are free to
submit.
She's parroting the Fundamentalist Christian's ideal relationship where the
man is in charge yet listens and responds to all her needs and wishes. To
continue, the ideal is said to be the man makes all the final choices but
he's supposed to love his wife as his own body and sacrifice for her like
Jesus did for his believers. Iows, die for her and take care of her like he
takes care of his body.
If a man loves his wife as his own body and would die for her, then his
choices would be uniquely senstive to all her needs. Thus, the woman would
have no fear of submitting to such a man.
The funny thing about that relatedness is that IF men could actually pull it
off, perfectly love their wives, love them as they own body and would
actually, without thinking, die for her, it just makes the man only a
mouthpiece of both their wishes and needs. He isn't truly dominating her
and there is no submission to one who is just mouthing your needs. Thus, it
really isn't dominance and submission, although it is clear that Paul said
that God said that women should be submission to their husbands, EVEN IF
THEY WERE BRUTES. (As a side note: submitting to brutes would "lead them
to Christ." lol) Thus, another contradiction in the bible, once anybody
with half a brain seeks to look deeply into many of it's precepts.
HOWEVER, (big however too) people aren't ideals. They're human and make
mistakes and fall into self centered reactions too often.
Did I mention that some people are just goats?
Rhonda Lea Kirk
news:0y_Hg.15356$C6....@bignews1.bellsouth.net
I guess I shouldn't have brought Christianity into it at all, given that
I'm not Christian, and I would not submit (and have never submitted) to
a man who is abusive to me.
There is another example that would describe what I'm talking about:
that of a general partnership, wherein the model includes a managing
partner.
Most relationships turn into power struggles, but I have no interest in
winning for the sake of the victory. If I say, "Have you considered
these items?" and the items of concern to me are given credence, the
right decision will be made.
So, I'm asking you nicely not to put words into my mouth or to turn the
concept I adhere to into something it was never intended to be, at least
not as it applies to me. I parrot no one--I think for myself, and I
happen to have a relationship wherein that quality is highly valued.
On the other hand, to anyone who is so rabid as to insist that their way
is the only way for everyone, I would say, 'I don't really give a flying
fuck what you think, because you're just as bad as Connor."
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk
Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
willing to inflict on others. Phčdre nó Delaunay
Hyerdahl
Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
> "Hyerdahl" <Hyer...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1156566588.8...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com
> > Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
> >> "pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
> >> news:8a6dnW5WlrRmp3LZ...@scnresearch.com
> >>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhon...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:4l8fk5...@individual.net...
> >>>> "MCP" <gf010...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> >>>> news:sEDHg.168330$9d4....@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk
> >>>>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhon...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:4l8814...@individual.net...
> >>>>>> <conn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>> news:1156487394.7...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com
> >>>>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >> I'm not a Christian, but I do adhere to some Christian principles,
> >> one of which is that in a heterosexual pairing, the male partner is
> >> the head of the household.
> >
> > If that's how you wish to live Rhonda....you are free to do so....or
> > not. IOW, while the laws protect you AS an equal, you are free to
> > submit.
>
> Exactly.
>
> It is a choice. And it's not a choice I would make in a relationship
> with someone like Connor.
Indeed.
>
> It's only a safe choice with someone who loves and respects his partner.
> It is only a safe choice to give such power to a man who has no vested
> interest in being in control.
>
Well, IMO, it's not a good choice because people change and I wouldn't
want to hand off my own power to another in that manner. However, you
are free to make that choice, and that's as it should be, just as I am
free to make mine.
> I'm still responsible for my choices, even when I give the final
> decision-making authority to another. So I choose to give such authority
> only to one who will not put me in the position of taking responsibility
> for a fucked-up decision.
IMO, that places a lot of responsibility on the other person. Why
would you not want to share the burden of a man you love? However,
again....it's totally your choice.
>
> It's a lot more complex than I made it out to be in my earlier post, and
> even as elaborated here, but for me, at the present time, it hasn't
> failed to work out well.
That's fortunate. I guess I'm not much of a gambler. :-)
> >> In the kind of relationship where female submission works as
> >> advertised, the man actually listens to what the woman has to say.
> >> She may defer to him ultimately, but he takes her seriously and
> >> heeds her advice.
> >>
> > Again, this is your choice. The minute you stipulate that other women
> > must do the same, is where we part ways in debate. It's rather like
> > wearing the veil in Islam....women can't CHOOSE to wear it if there is
> > no choice. :-)
>
> I would never think of telling another *person* what to do.
That's fair.
> Control is the basis of abuse. And the pathological need to control is,
> first, evidence of a lack of self-control, and second, of a personality
> disorder.
Sure.
> My basic precept is "my right to swing stops at the end of your nose."
> And whatever you want to do is also fine...until your swing hits my
> nose. In an imperfect world, it's a hard way to live, but I do my best.
> Where I fail is in my desire to send control freaks to the moon--without
> an air supply. :)
Sounds like a plan I would endorse.
>
> >> The problem arises when a woman tries to submit to an abusive fucker
> >> like Connor. It seems that what they want is blind obedience, not a
> >> partnership.
> >
> > That's what insecure men want, blind obedience. This is nothing new.
>
> Been there. Had that.
>
> My ex-husband was diagnosed with NPD years before I met him. At the
> time, it was trendy for New York lawyers to see a shrink twice a week.
> Given the nature of his issue, it never occurred to him to ask for a
> diagnosis. After all, he was a respected professional with a good job
> and a whole load of coke-snorting acquaintances. What could possibly be
> wrong?
Wow. Tough break for you.
>
> He spent the entirety of our marriage trying to prove that I
> was...certifiable. He once brought home razor blades and suggested to me
> that perhaps I would feel better if I took up cutting. I suggested to
> him that if anyone was going to bleed, it would be him.
So...how long after that did you leave?
>
> His last ditch effort was to call his old shrink and ask her--with me
> listening on the extension--what his diagnosis was. This was done under
> the theory that she would say to him "there's nothing wrong with you,"
> and it would therefore become clear to me that the sheer insanity of our
> marriage was all my doing.
>
> Imagine his surprise. :) To this day, on the rare occasions I think to
> recall the look on his face, I can only laugh.
>
> Needless to say, but I'll say it anyway, submission to a pathological
> fuckhead is a form of slow suicide...and I love life altogether too much
> to end mine prematurely.
Yes. You made a healthy choice there.
> >> Still, when one considers that I actually live what I believe, it
> >> gives me something of a belly cramp to be referred to as a feminazi.
> >> I first read the reply to my post about 7 hours ago, Marg, and I
> >> haven't stopped laughing since.
> >
> > Indeed.
>
> Still laughing. :)
Yup. These bitter boys like to label all women who are not doormats as
feminazi, but I guess I've just grown used to that. It used to be
funny to me, but now, it's just another signe of their insecurity....
>
> --
> Rhonda Lea Kirk
>
> Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
> willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay
Hyerdahl
At the risk of changing the subject just a bit, there's 'submitting'
and there's SUBMITTING. :-) Being willing to give ones power over to
another requires, at the very LEAST, a degree of trust. If you're
married to a person you trust, either partner could submit, and often.
:-) Sex is a union that requires submission, and I'm not talking about
one-sided submission. :-) When there are partnerships, business or
intimate, usually the partners take turns submitting on different
issues. I am in a business partnership right now, where my partner has
more knowledge about the business end, and I have more knowledge about
the legal end. We both submit. :-)
> > The funny thing about that relatedness is that IF men could actually
> > pull it off, perfectly love their wives, love them as they own body
> > and would actually, without thinking, die for her, it just makes the
> > man only a mouthpiece of both their wishes and needs. He isn't truly
> > dominating her and there is no submission to one who is just mouthing
> > your needs. Thus, it really isn't dominance and submission, although
> > it is clear that Paul said that God said that women should be
> > submission to their husbands, EVEN IF THEY WERE BRUTES. (As a side
> > note: submitting to brutes would "lead them to Christ." lol) Thus,
> > another contradiction in the bible, once anybody with half a brain
> > seeks to look deeply into many of it's precepts.
> > HOWEVER, (big however too) people aren't ideals. They're human and
> > make mistakes and fall into self centered reactions too often.
> >
> > Did I mention that some people are just goats?
That's a cute observation.
>
> I guess I shouldn't have brought Christianity into it at all, given that
> I'm not Christian, and I would not submit (and have never submitted) to
> a man who is abusive to me.
Again, in any kind of partnership, submission is usually a two way
street.
> There is another example that would describe what I'm talking about:
> that of a general partnership, wherein the model includes a managing
> partner.
This is more of a limited partnership. Marriage is veiwed, legally as
a general partnership where both partners have equal rights. If you
want to LIVE your relationship as a limited partner, you are free to do
so, but legally, you will still have all the rights of a general
partner.
> Most relationships turn into power struggles, but I have no interest in
> winning for the sake of the victory. If I say, "Have you considered
> these items?" and the items of concern to me are given credence, the
> right decision will be made.
This is often the way Mormon women view their marraiges since men hold
the priesthood. I suppose strict Catholics and Southern Baptists view
it the same way. On a personal note, I would never accept membership
in an organization that would not allow me the full rights of that
membership. But again, you are free to do so. What I am observing,
however, is more and more women deciding on churches that equally
reflect the sacred feminine, i.e. that these women want equality.
>
> So, I'm asking you nicely not to put words into my mouth or to turn the
> concept I adhere to into something it was never intended to be, at least
> not as it applies to me. I parrot no one--I think for myself, and I
> happen to have a relationship wherein that quality is highly valued.
There's alot to say for that.
>
> On the other hand, to anyone who is so rabid as to insist that their way
> is the only way for everyone, I would say, 'I don't really give a flying
> fuck what you think, because you're just as bad as Connor."
>
Again, CIVIL RIGHTS give you equal rights, including the equal right to
make your own choices. And that's as it should be, whether or not
others agree with those choices.
> --
> Rhonda Lea Kirk
>
> Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
> willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
>> "Hyerdahl" <Hyer...@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:1156566588.8...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com
>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
>>>> "pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
>>>> news:8a6dnW5WlrRmp3LZ...@scnresearch.com
>>>>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhon...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:4l8fk5...@individual.net...
>>>>>> "MCP" <gf010...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:sEDHg.168330$9d4....@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk
>>>>>>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhon...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:4l8814...@individual.net...
>>>>>>>> <conn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:1156487394.7...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
> (edit)
>> I'm still responsible for my choices, even when I give the final
>> decision-making authority to another. So I choose to give such
>> authority only to one who will not put me in the position of taking
>> responsibility for a fucked-up decision.
>
> IMO, that places a lot of responsibility on the other person. Why
> would you not want to share the burden of a man you love? However,
> again....it's totally your choice.
He's also free to choose to ask me to choose. :)
It is clear to me that I have not made myself clear.
All I can tell is the other day he told me to do something I didn't want
to do. He listened to my argument, and he still said "do it." He knew
more about it than I did, so I listened.
It saved me $100, and a world of trouble.
OTOH, if he ever lost his mind and told me to jump off a bridge, you can
be sure I wouldn't do it with a properly packed BASE rig.
But that's not likely to happen. :)
>> It's a lot more complex than I made it out to be in my earlier post,
>> and even as elaborated here, but for me, at the present time, it
>> hasn't failed to work out well.
>
> That's fortunate. I guess I'm not much of a gambler. :-)
If someone becomes abusive--no matter how a relationship is
structured--it's time to leave.
Abusive people have serious issues that they cannot resolve within the
context of a relationshp. Staying is stupid.
>> My ex-husband was diagnosed with NPD years before I met him. At the
>> time, it was trendy for New York lawyers to see a shrink twice a
>> week. Given the nature of his issue, it never occurred to him to ask
>> for a diagnosis. After all, he was a respected professional with a
>> good job and a whole load of coke-snorting acquaintances. What could
>> possibly be wrong?
>
> Wow. Tough break for you.
Shit happens. I learned things. But thanks. A show of empathy is always
welcome. :)
>> He spent the entirety of our marriage trying to prove that I
>> was...certifiable. He once brought home razor blades and suggested
>> to me that perhaps I would feel better if I took up cutting. I
>> suggested to him that if anyone was going to bleed, it would be him.
>
> So...how long after that did you leave?
The marriage lasted a total of 3 years. We stayed together for a little
over one year. I was very ill at the time--thyrotoxicosis resulting
from undiagnosed Hashimoto's thyroiditis--so I did not leave
immediately, because I was in neither the condition nor the position to.
My mind was functioning worse than my body--it's the only reason he was
able to do to me the things he did.
We saw five therapists. Each time one got close to what was going on, he
manufactured a reason to find a new therapist.
Understand...I did not submit to him voluntarily, ever, but I also was
in no shape to put up much of a fight.
>> Still laughing. :)
>
> Yup. These bitter boys like to label all women who are not doormats
> as feminazi, but I guess I've just grown used to that. It used to be
> funny to me, but now, it's just another signe of their insecurity....
Insecurity is far too mild a word, IMO.
MCP
And so say's Parg, as she sticks her brown nose up RLKs bum.
> --
> Rhonda Lea Kirk
>
> Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
> willing to inflict on others. Phčdre nó Delaunay
Hyerdahl
Yes, but you just admitted that if he makes the choice, he gets the
blame. I guess I kind of see that as a cop-out, of sorts.
>
> It is clear to me that I have not made myself clear.
>
> All I can tell is the other day he told me to do something I didn't want
> to do. He listened to my argument, and he still said "do it." He knew
> more about it than I did, so I listened.
>
> It saved me $100, and a world of trouble.
Specific situations don't help here tho. Suppose he had told you to do
it and it COST you $500. :-) To me a better choice, would involve the
'twoheadsarebetterthanone" approach.
:-) That way, both share the decision and both the praise or blame.
>
> OTOH, if he ever lost his mind and told me to jump off a bridge, you can
> be sure I wouldn't do it with a properly packed BASE rig.
>
> But that's not likely to happen. :)
>
:-) Again, anyone who has a good marriage today must be doing
something right. :-)
> >> It's a lot more complex than I made it out to be in my earlier post,
> >> and even as elaborated here, but for me, at the present time, it
> >> hasn't failed to work out well.
> >
> > That's fortunate. I guess I'm not much of a gambler. :-)
>
> If someone becomes abusive--no matter how a relationship is
> structured--it's time to leave.
>
I agree.
> Abusive people have serious issues that they cannot resolve within the
> context of a relationshp. Staying is stupid.
Sure.
>
> >> My ex-husband was diagnosed with NPD years before I met him. At the
> >> time, it was trendy for New York lawyers to see a shrink twice a
> >> week. Given the nature of his issue, it never occurred to him to ask
> >> for a diagnosis. After all, he was a respected professional with a
> >> good job and a whole load of coke-snorting acquaintances. What could
> >> possibly be wrong?
> >
> > Wow. Tough break for you.
>
> Shit happens. I learned things. But thanks. A show of empathy is always
> welcome. :)
>
> >> He spent the entirety of our marriage trying to prove that I
> >> was...certifiable. He once brought home razor blades and suggested
> >> to me that perhaps I would feel better if I took up cutting. I
> >> suggested to him that if anyone was going to bleed, it would be him.
> >
> > So...how long after that did you leave?
>
> The marriage lasted a total of 3 years. We stayed together for a little
> over one year. I was very ill at the time--thyrotoxicosis resulting
> from undiagnosed Hashimoto's thyroiditis--so I did not leave
> immediately, because I was in neither the condition nor the position to.
> My mind was functioning worse than my body--it's the only reason he was
> able to do to me the things he did.
>
Where was your family during this horrible time? Did they witness your
pain?
> We saw five therapists. Each time one got close to what was going on, he
> manufactured a reason to find a new therapist.
>
> Understand...I did not submit to him voluntarily, ever, but I also was
> in no shape to put up much of a fight.
>
> >> Still laughing. :)
When you stop laughing, you start crying. :-(
>
> > Yup. These bitter boys like to label all women who are not doormats
> > as feminazi, but I guess I've just grown used to that. It used to be
> > funny to me, but now, it's just another sign of their insecurity....
>
> Insecurity is far too mild a word, IMO.
Probably. But I try not to use my potty mouth when talking to decent
folk. :-)
Rhonda Lea Kirk
How so? Not the part about the cop out, but the underlying premise? If I
agree to a decision, it's my decision, and then the responsibility for
that decision is mine.
In skydiving, one is totally responsible for ones own safety. If someone
else fucks up and kicks you in the head, you're still responsible,
because you made the choice to jump with that person. Them's the rules.
I apply that to the rest of my life as well.
>> It is clear to me that I have not made myself clear.
>>
>> All I can tell is the other day he told me to do something I didn't
>> want to do. He listened to my argument, and he still said "do it."
>> He knew more about it than I did, so I listened.
>>
>> It saved me $100, and a world of trouble.
>
> Specific situations don't help here tho. Suppose he had told you to
> do it and it COST you $500. :-) To me a better choice, would involve
> the 'twoheadsarebetterthanone" approach.
> :-) That way, both share the decision and both the praise or blame.
Hmmm...
I really haven't been clear if this is how you understand what I'm
saying.
That's a much longer story than I have time for right now. I have a
plane to catch at six and we're leaving for the airport at three. I'll
probably have time on Monday to answer this, if you don't mind waiting.
>> We saw five therapists. Each time one got close to what was going
>> on, he manufactured a reason to find a new therapist.
>>
>> Understand...I did not submit to him voluntarily, ever, but I also
>> was in no shape to put up much of a fight.
>>
>>>> Still laughing. :)
>
> When you stop laughing, you start crying. :-(
It's over. The past is done, and I don't carry it with me, except as an
object lesson or fodder for a usenet discussion or to empathize with
those who are still in a bad way.
The only tears I cry these days are tears of joy
>>> Yup. These bitter boys like to label all women who are not doormats
>>> as feminazi, but I guess I've just grown used to that. It used to
>>> be funny to me, but now, it's just another sign of their
>>> insecurity....
>>
>> Insecurity is far too mild a word, IMO.
>
> Probably. But I try not to use my potty mouth when talking to decent
> folk. :-)
:)
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk
Happiness limits the amount of suffering one is
willing to inflict on others. Phčdre nó Delaunay
Hyerdahl
I think you have been pretty clear.
> willing to inflict on others. Phèdre nó Delaunay
pandora
You forgot to say, for yourself. For me, it is otherwise. There can be no,
to me, partnership where one is the head over the other. However, unlike
some, I don't care if that's the kind of life you want for yourself as long
as you don't try to force it onto me or others.
> In the kind of relationship where female submission works as advertised,
> the man actually listens to what the woman has to say. She may defer to
> him ultimately, but he takes her seriously and heeds her advice.
>
> The problem arises when a woman tries to submit to an abusive fucker
> like Connor. It seems that what they want is blind obedience, not a
> partnership.
Of course. That's how guys like connor see things.
> Still, when one considers that I actually live what I believe, it gives
> me something of a belly cramp to be referred to as a feminazi.
It is a nonsense word that means nothing, except to pigs like connor.
I first
> read the reply to my post about 7 hours ago, Marg, and I haven't stopped
> laughing since.
Good. Laughter is very good for one.
Marg
Hyerdahl
pandora wrote:
>
> > >>connor said:>
> > >>> Ah! yet another fucked up feminazi prat to play with! :-)
> > >>
> > >> What part of what I wrote qualifies me as a feminazi?
> > >
> > > The part where you disagreed with connor.
:-) :-) :-) :-) Yup.
> > >
> > > Marg
The Curmudgeon
<pinku-...@netcabal.com> wrote:
>The men for women's rights test
>http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=10884316438150389912
>
>Here are my results:
>
>Not a BAD guy
>
>You scored 51 feminism!
>
>Ok, so you're not ALL bad. You have some good ideas making their way into
>that cute little head of yours. You probably are still hung up on that
>women as sex objects thing....granted- women ARE beautiful but we do have
>feelings and brains too. You know this though...you ARE aware. Maybe you
>were brought up by 1950's type parents and are still clinging to some old
>fashioned ideas. Maybe you just haven't taken the time to THINK about
>womens' place in society. Either way...you have potential...just keep your
>eyes and ears open and listen to the women in your life. Women aren't
>ALWAYS right, thats not what I am saying...but you just might learn to
>respect us more and therefore...get along better with us too!
>
>My test tracked 1 variable How you compared to other people your age and
>gender:
>
> You scored higher than 11% on feminism
>
>So much for the meme that AUKers are all feminists.
>
>Now, how about the rest of you?
OK - the web page says I have to log in, yada yada, and all that
bullshit. To be honest, I don't think its worth the trouble just to
see if feminist women approve of you. I myself don't really give a
shit what they think - I just wish they'd all go away. So give this
guy a big zero for a score.......
the Curmudgeon
P.S.: American feminist women aren't the only game in town when it
comes to women. I married a non-feminist (aka good) woman......
The Demon Prince of Absurdity
screamed:
> "Hyerdahl" wrote
>> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
>>> "Hyerdahl" wrote
>>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
>>>> (edit)
>>> <snip>
>>>> Yup. These bitter boys like to label all women who are not doormats
>>>> as feminazi, but I guess I've just grown used to that. It used to be
>>>> funny to me, but now, it's just another sign of their insecurity....
>>>
>>> Insecurity is far too mild a word, IMO.
>>
>> Probably. But I try not to use my potty mouth when talking to decent
>> folk. :-)
>
> :)
In my opinion, Rhonda, you /are/ a feminist -- not in the sense of lIving
by any manifesto, as such, but because you live life on your own terms,
and tell anyone whom you haven't given permission to tell you to do
anything to get anally fucked by a spike (metaphorically speaking).
--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! TM#5
Cardinal Snarky of the Fannish Inquisition
Jude Alexander
Hyerdahl, did you take the test? lol
I came out with a 54 and I just can't understand why. Perhaps, if you took
the test and we could compare answers. Even though I came out ahead of 99%
of testers, I didn't rate as a feminist.
Hyer...@aol.com
Jude Alexander wrote:
> "Hyerdahl" <Hyer...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1156632081.9...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>
> Hyerdahl, did you take the test? lol
No.
>
> I came out with a 54 and I just can't understand why. Perhaps, if you took
> the test and we could compare answers. Even though I came out ahead of 99%
> of testers, I didn't rate as a feminist.
Is there some easy way to take the test without logging onto the
service? :-)
pandora
"The Demon Prince of Absurdity" <absurd_numb...@hell.corn> wrote in
message news:pan.2006.08.27....@hell.corn...
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 13:51:31 -0400, Rhonda Lea Kirk did the cha-cha, and
> screamed:
> > "Hyerdahl" wrote
> >> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
> >>> "Hyerdahl" wrote
> >>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk wrote:
> >>>> (edit)
> >>> <snip>
> <snip>
> >>>> Yup. These bitter boys like to label all women who are not doormats
> >>>> as feminazi, but I guess I've just grown used to that. It used to
be
> >>>> funny to me, but now, it's just another sign of their insecurity....
> >>>
> >>> Insecurity is far too mild a word, IMO.
> >>
> >> Probably. But I try not to use my potty mouth when talking to decent
> >> folk. :-)
> >
> > :)
>
> In my opinion, Rhonda, you /are/ a feminist -- not in the sense of lIving
> by any manifesto, as such, but because you live life on your own terms,
> and tell anyone whom you haven't given permission to tell you to do
> anything to get anally fucked by a spike (metaphorically speaking).
I agree with that. I find it rather interesting that someone who is as
outspoken as Rhonda is and lives her life as SHE wishes to, would be
*afraid* of the label of feminist. Perhaps she's fallen for the negative
propaganda dissminated by the idiots on newsgroups and elsewhere? Could
be......... If so, I find that rather amusing.
Marg
Jude Alexander
You know how you deal with women like "Rhonda?" You ask them if women
should not work outside the home, not hold office, not vote, not own
property, etc. If they say, "yes," you might as well walk away. lol
They're either a man playing with you or a Fundamentalist Jew, Christian or
Moslem. IF they say these things are good things, then ask them how they
can be against woman's rights/feminism when all these things were brought
about by the continued work done by women and men in the movement and by
those who listened to them and to reason.
Jude Alexander
<Hyer...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1156695953.3...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
I just clicked on the link and took the test. I'm not sure what you mean by
"logging onto the service."
Jude Alexander
you.
1. Do you enjoy going to strip clubs?
Yes...they know me by name there
No they are degrading to women
I'll go if I am dragged there
never been but I'd like to go
2. Do you think porno mags tend to be degrading to women?
Yes they usually portray women as objects
No they rock
never saw one but i'd like to
don't have any but they don't bother me either
3. Do you think boob jobs and other plastic surgery make a woman
better?
Yes, the bigger the boobs the better
No, a natural woman is the best
Don't care /not sure
4. Are you bothered by music that includes lyrics referring to
women as bitches or ho's?
Yes, I refuse to buy/listen to music like that
No, I love that music...my bitch does too
I listen to/buy that music but don't agree with the names
5. Do women still get paid less than men for the same quality
work at the same job?
Yes they get paid less than men
No they get paid the same
I don't know
6. Could a woman be a successful president for the u.s.a.?
Yes, ofcourse
No way...women are too emotional
maybe...I don't know
7. Are you a possesive boyfriend/husband/lover? Do you try and
control what your spouse/lover wears, where she goes or who she spends time
with?
Yes, she can't be trusted
No, why would I?
Only every now and then....
8. Women working at jobs like carpentry, menchanics, and
construction worker...what do you think of it?
Women can do any work as well as men
Women don't belong in physically demanding jobs
Maybe SOME women could do those jobs but they'd have to prove
themselves before I'd trust their work
9. When you first got together with your spouse/lover she was
thin and hot; as the years went by she became overweight. Do you accept her
still or leave her?
I love her for who she is not what she looks like
I'd leave her for a hotter, younger, thinner girl
I like em big anyway
I'd stay with her but tell her to go on a diet
10. What is the first thing you notice about a girl when you
first meet her?
Her body...breast size, ass, waiste size, legs etc
face/eyes/smile
her personality....how she greets you
what she is wearing (clothes/jewelry...is she rich?)
11. Who should be 'in charge' in a marriage?
the man is always the head of the household
husband and wife should be equal in everything
who ever makes more money
12. Is there such a thing as the 'stronger or weaker sex'?
Yes everyone knows women are weaker
No there is no such thing..men and women are equal
men are physically stronger but women are mentally stronger
women are the stronger sex
13. Frank likes to drink wine, bake, knit and does ballet. He
doesn't like watching sports, rarely swears, reads alot and is always
gentle. Is frank gay?
Yes, definitely
No, he's just got class
probably but I don't know
14. Are patriarchal religions oppressive to women? (such as eve
being blamed for humans being cast from eden, not allowing women to be
preists,women having to wear veils, women being taught to obey their
husbands,..)
Yes they are very oppressive
No thats the way things are supposed to be
I don't know what you mean by patriarchal religions
the religions aren't meant to be taken literally/ no one really
is affected by these teachings
15. You are engaged to be married. Your partner tells you she
doesn't want to change her last name...she wants to keep her maiden name and
not take yours. Are you ok with this?
Yes, its just a name...I respect her beliefs
No, its tradition to take the man's name. I won't accept this
Couldn't she just do the hyphenated thing?
no problem...heck I'll take HER last name!
16. When giving your new-born child a last name.....
my kid automatically get MY last name..I am the father!
If my spouse/partner wants to we can give the baby a hyphenated
combination of both of our last names
17. Is it ok for children to play with toys normally used by the
opposite gender?
Yes, let the kids play with what ever they want to!
No...girls should play with dolls and boys should play with
trucks
its ok for girls to play with trucks but boys should not play
with dolls or play dress up in girls clothes
18. Sojourner Truth....
She's awsome...."Ain't I a Woman?"
She's cool...that chick that dances on that mtv show
who?
She should have kept her mouth shut and stayed in the kitchen
19. What is your opinion of women in general?
I love to have sex with them
Some are good some are bad
They have come a long way in terms of historical progress
they are all money hungry, lying, cheating bitches
20. When you have sex with your spouse/lover, how important is
it to you that she enjoys it?
Not important, I just want to please myself
Very important, her enjoyment is my goal
sometimes I pay attention to what she wants but sometimes I am a
selfish lover
it is important that we both reach orgasm and that we are both
getting what we want
Hyerdahl
I think the word, "feminist" has been used by the right much the same
way that the word "liberal" has been used, but, in the end, the slave
will STILL never love the master, no matter how words are abused. And,
in the end, those women who don't stand in line to give up their rights
have accepted feminism, to one degree or another.
Hyerdahl
ok...I'll try again and get back to you.
Bookman
wrote:
I don't see that "afraid" applies to Rhonda on this. Where does she
express that she'sd "afraid" of this?
>Perhaps she's fallen for the negative
>propaganda dissminated by the idiots on newsgroups and elsewhere? Could
>be......... If so, I find that rather amusing.
Could be that she's too classy to want to associate with teh political
nut-jobs of radical "feminism". I know more than a few women,
Heinlein-influenced or not, who don't care for the politics of "NOW",
et alia. Are you a big fan of the late Andrea "sex is rape"
Dworkin?
ESL!
--
Bookman -The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in AFA-B
Kazoo Konspirator #668 (The Neighbor of the Beast)
Clue-Bat Wrangler
Keeper of the Nickname Lists
Despotic Kookologist of the New World Order
Hammer of Thor award, October 2005
COOSN-266-06-89425
"I'd love to kill you in a ring" - Bartmo gets all touchy-feely
"****SPV....... So yes I am an idiot."
"ASK THE NWS, YOUR TAX DOLLAR GOES TO THEM NOT TO DR.TURI."
- Mr. Turi explains how to accurately predict hurricanes
Bookman is yet another Usenet fignuten, meaning naysayer and/or
rusemaster of their incest cloned Third Reich. In other words, you're
communicating with an intellectual if not a biological clone of
Hitler.
- Brad Guth tries to wax "scientific", but invokes Godwin, instead.
WWFSMD?
Hyerdahl
Jude Alexander wrote:
> These are the questions. However, taking it here won't let whoever score
> you.
I got a 54 :-)
>
>
> 1. Do you enjoy going to strip clubs?
> Yes...they know me by name there
> No they are degrading to women
> I'll go if I am dragged there
> never been but I'd like to go
I said degrading
>
>
> 2. Do you think porno mags tend to be degrading to women?
> Yes they usually portray women as objects
> No they rock
> never saw one but i'd like to
> don't have any but they don't bother me either
I said yes...they portray women as sex objects
>
>
> 3. Do you think boob jobs and other plastic surgery make a woman
> better?
> Yes, the bigger the boobs the better
> No, a natural woman is the best
> Don't care /not sure
I said "don't care/not sure"
>
>
> 4. Are you bothered by music that includes lyrics referring to
> women as bitches or ho's?
> Yes, I refuse to buy/listen to music like that
> No, I love that music...my bitch does too
> I listen to/buy that music but don't agree with the names
I said I refuse to buy
>
>
> 5. Do women still get paid less than men for the same quality
> work at the same job?
> Yes they get paid less than men
> No they get paid the same
> I don't know
I said I don't know
>
>
> 6. Could a woman be a successful president for the u.s.a.?
> Yes, ofcourse
> No way...women are too emotional
> maybe...I don't know
I said yes...of course.
>
>
> 7. Are you a possesive boyfriend/husband/lover? Do you try and
> control what your spouse/lover wears, where she goes or who she spends time
> with?
> Yes, she can't be trusted
> No, why would I?
> Only every now and then....
I said the one you left out. :-)
>
>
> 8. Women working at jobs like carpentry, menchanics, and
> construction worker...what do you think of it?
> Women can do any work as well as men
> Women don't belong in physically demanding jobs
> Maybe SOME women could do those jobs but they'd have to prove
> themselves before I'd trust their work
I said women can do any work as well as men
>
>
> 9. When you first got together with your spouse/lover she was
> thin and hot; as the years went by she became overweight. Do you accept her
> still or leave her?
> I love her for who she is not what she looks like
> I'd leave her for a hotter, younger, thinner girl
> I like em big anyway
> I'd stay with her but tell her to go on a diet
I said I'l love the person for who they are ...not what they look like
>
>
> 10. What is the first thing you notice about a girl when you
> first meet her?
> Her body...breast size, ass, waiste size, legs etc
> face/eyes/smile
> her personality....how she greets you
> what she is wearing (clothes/jewelry...is she rich?)
I said "face eyes smile"
>
>
> 11. Who should be 'in charge' in a marriage?
> the man is always the head of the household
> husband and wife should be equal in everything
> who ever makes more money
I said both equal
>
>
> 12. Is there such a thing as the 'stronger or weaker sex'?
> Yes everyone knows women are weaker
> No there is no such thing..men and women are equal
> men are physically stronger but women are mentally stronger
> women are the stronger sex
I said no...both equal
>
>
> 13. Frank likes to drink wine, bake, knit and does ballet. He
> doesn't like watching sports, rarely swears, reads alot and is always
> gentle. Is frank gay?
> Yes, definitely
> No, he's just got class
> probably but I don't know
I said no...he's just got class
>
>
> 14. Are patriarchal religions oppressive to women? (such as eve
> being blamed for humans being cast from eden, not allowing women to be
> preists,women having to wear veils, women being taught to obey their
> husbands,..)
> Yes they are very oppressive
> No thats the way things are supposed to be
> I don't know what you mean by patriarchal religions
> the religions aren't meant to be taken literally/ no one really
> is affected by these teachings
>
I said yes...very oppressive.
>
> 15. You are engaged to be married. Your partner tells you she
> doesn't want to change her last name...she wants to keep her maiden name and
> not take yours. Are you ok with this?
> Yes, its just a name...I respect her beliefs
> No, its tradition to take the man's name. I won't accept this
> Couldn't she just do the hyphenated thing?
> no problem...heck I'll take HER last name!
I said no problem... (but this was a tough one for me)
>
>
> 16. When giving your new-born child a last name.....
> my kid automatically get MY last name..I am the father!
> If my spouse/partner wants to we can give the baby a hyphenated
> combination of both of our last names
I said...hyphenated
>
>
> 17. Is it ok for children to play with toys normally used by the
> opposite gender?
> Yes, let the kids play with what ever they want to!
> No...girls should play with dolls and boys should play with
> trucks
> its ok for girls to play with trucks but boys should not play
> with dolls or play dress up in girls clothes
I said let the kids play with what they like.
>
>
> 18. Sojourner Truth....
> She's awsome...."Ain't I a Woman?"
> She's cool...that chick that dances on that mtv show
> who?
> She should have kept her mouth shut and stayed in the kitchen
I said "she's awesome..."
>
>
> 19. What is your opinion of women in general?
> I love to have sex with them
> Some are good some are bad
> They have come a long way in terms of historical progress
> they are all money hungry, lying, cheating bitches
I said some good some bad.
>
>
> 20. When you have sex with your spouse/lover, how important is
> it to you that she enjoys it?
> Not important, I just want to please myself
> Very important, her enjoyment is my goal
> sometimes I pay attention to what she wants but sometimes I am a
> selfish lover
> it is important that we both reach orgasm and that we are both
> getting what we want
I said very important to please partner
Kali
pan...@peak.org said:
:
: "The Demon Prince of Absurdity" <absurd_numb...@hell.corn> wrote in
The stereotype has another source; there are women who are
simply hostile to men and call themselves feminists, without
understanding the philosophy of feminism. They can be the most
vocal leaders of some groups - on the internet or elsewhere. Yet
what they are calling for is not equality for women, but power
over men. This is unfortunate.
After my naive dealings with one such group several years ago, I
did some introspecting and research and concluded that I was
more a humanist. I consider Rhonda to be a humanist.
Feminism (and 'masculism', as we see extreme cases of in
soc.men) are about shifting power toward equality, and the
momentum of the shift is gender centric. This is a worthy goal
in some instances, e.g. the workplace. Humanism's concern is
with the individual, regardless of gender. There is no bias
toward male or female. Gloria Steinum on the equal pay issue:
?This is no simple reform. It really is a revolution. Sex and
race because they are easy and visible differences have been the
primary ways of organizing human beings into superior and
inferior groups and into the cheap labor in which this system
still depends. We are talking about a society in which there
will be no roles other than those chosen or those earned. We are
really talking about humanism.? -Gloria Steinem
Ms. Steinem, imo, views feminism as a way of achieving humanism.
The revolution (feminism) is the agent of change, and humanism
the ultimate goal. There are interesting philosophical
differences here.
In coupling there are sex differences that must be acknowledged.
Rhonda's awareness that power differences will exist in intimate
heterosexual relationships - and her decision to trust in her
partner's relationship power - is humanistic. There are similar
relationships where the male partner places this trust in the
female.
Kali
--
There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former
begets knowledge, the latter ignorance.
Hippocrates (c460-c.377 BCE) Greek physician. Law
pandora
> should not work outside the home, not hold office, not vote, not own
> property, etc. If they say, "yes," you might as well walk away. lol
> They're either a man playing with you or a Fundamentalist Jew, Christian
or
> Moslem. IF they say these things are good things, then ask them how they
> can be against woman's rights/feminism when all these things were brought
> about by the continued work done by women and men in the movement and by
> those who listened to them and to reason.
>
"I'm not a feminist, BUT" line. You either, as a woman, accept the equal
rights that have been hard fought and won for you OR you give it up and get
back in the kitchen. At the same time, giving up your right to vote, work,
or otherwise even speak up. I don't bother talking to women who claim to
not be feminists. You either are or you don't exist, to me. You're not
worth my talking to you if you believe you're not worthy of equality. Why
should *I* bother with such?
Marg
pandora
"Bookman" <thebo...@kc.rr.comNULL> wrote in message
news:lpv3f2p27nnh4dcg4...@4ax.com...
If you won't accept the name, then what gives? You either are a feminist,
as a women, or you're not worthy of talking to, IMO.
> >Perhaps she's fallen for the negative
> >propaganda dissminated by the idiots on newsgroups and elsewhere? Could
> >be......... If so, I find that rather amusing.
>
> Could be that she's too classy to want to associate with teh political
> nut-jobs of radical "feminism". I know more than a few women,
> Heinlein-influenced or not, who don't care for the politics of "NOW",
> et alia. Are you a big fan of the late Andrea "sex is rape"
> Dworkin?
When did you stop beating your wife/girlfriend?
> ESL!
Marg
pandora
>
> Jude Alexander wrote:
>
>
> > These are the questions. However, taking it here won't let whoever
score
> > you.
>
> I got a 54 :-)
What the URL again? When *I* tried it, it wouldn't give me a score without
joining. Sorry, I don't join such things.
Marg
Bookman
wrote:
That doesn't answer my question.
>You either are a feminist,
>as a women, or you're not worthy of talking to, IMO.
What, pray tell, is a "feminist"? Be precise.
I've seen the word used a lot, but last I looked, it had as many
definitions as users.
>
>> >Perhaps she's fallen for the negative
>> >propaganda dissminated by the idiots on newsgroups and elsewhere? Could
>> >be......... If so, I find that rather amusing.
>>
>> Could be that she's too classy to want to associate with teh political
>> nut-jobs of radical "feminism". I know more than a few women,
>> Heinlein-influenced or not, who don't care for the politics of "NOW",
>> et alia. Are you a big fan of the late Andrea "sex is rape"
>> Dworkin?
>
>When did you stop beating your wife/girlfriend?
I have never beat any of the women I have had relationships with.
Looks like you are laboring under false assumptions , or projecting
your prejudices. It'll do for a preliminary premise, subject to
further data.
ESL!
pandora
"Kali" <ka...@lake.breeze> wrote in message
news:ect0nj$680$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...: "The Demon Prince of Absurdity" <absurd_numb...@hell.corn> wrote
The stereotype has another source; there are women who are
simply hostile to men and call themselves feminists, without
understanding the philosophy of feminism. They can be the most
vocal leaders of some groups - on the internet or elsewhere. Yet
what they are calling for is not equality for women, but power
over men. This is unfortunate.
**You mean like the guys who call ME hostile to men simply because I
disagree with some of them and don't fondle their dicks for them? That kind
of hostility? Please.
After my naive dealings with one such group several years ago, I
did some introspecting and research and concluded that I was
more a humanist. I consider Rhonda to be a humanist.
***You can call yourself whatever you like but IF You believe and live by
the tenets of feminism, you are a feminist no matter what you say. Unless,
of course, you're willing to publically give up your right to vote, your
rifht to own property, and your right to an education and to not be
discriminated against in the workplace.
Feminism (and 'masculism', as we see extreme cases of in
soc.men) are about shifting power toward equality, and the
momentum of the shift is gender centric. This is a worthy goal
in some instances, e.g. the workplace. Humanism's concern is
with the individual, regardless of gender. There is no bias
toward male or female.
***Nor with feminism. You've fallen for that old line given out by the
MCP's and connor's of the world.
Gloria Steinum on the equal pay issue:
?This is no simple reform. It really is a revolution. Sex and
race because they are easy and visible differences have been the
primary ways of organizing human beings into superior and
inferior groups and into the cheap labor in which this system
still depends. We are talking about a society in which there
will be no roles other than those chosen or those earned. We are
really talking about humanism.? -Gloria Steinem
Ms. Steinem, imo, views feminism as a way of achieving humanism.
The revolution (feminism) is the agent of change, and humanism
the ultimate goal. There are interesting philosophical
differences here.
*** I don't see any differences there at all. We're either equal or back
into the kitchen YOU go, dear. Just because you're afraid to acknowledge
the name doesn't mean you're not playiang the *game*. Sheesh!
In coupling there are sex differences that must be acknowledged.
Rhonda's awareness that power differences will exist in intimate
heterosexual relationships - and her decision to trust in her
partner's relationship power - is humanistic. There are similar
relationships where the male partner places this trust in the
female.
***Now you're treating me as if I were an idiot. I'm married, have been for
41 years, had 3 children, and now have 5 grandchildren. What do you think
YOU can tell me about sex differences, dear? Nothing as I expected. Now
run along and suck some more patriachal nonsense.
Marg
Bookman
wrote:
So, a woman is required to self-identify in a manner politically
acceptible to you, or she's a non-huiman? What if a woman rejects the
label "feminist", but nevertheless operates as an equal in society?
>I don't bother talking to women who claim to
>not be feminists. You either are or you don't exist, to me. You're not
>worth my talking to you if you believe you're not worthy of equality. Why
>should *I* bother with such?
Sounds like you have a pretty exclusive world-view. You must be a
Republican.
Hyerdahl
circumstances. First, she may be a religious fundamentalist, whether
she is Mormon or Islamic or some other...and if you have a family
raised under some form of fundamentalism, it is difficult to
dissasociate without harming that family. Also, under fundamentalism,
men have some distinct role, to bring men into the picture, and she
might support that, with her view of religion; keep in mind that men
are less attracted to religion than women, and they often need perks
(like those 72 virgins) to get them to sign on for the long haul.
Secondly, Rhonda might associate feminism as some bitter boys do, with
negative aspects of society and she might be expressing her position in
a different way. For example, if it were not for feminism, women
wouldn't have as many opportunities as they have today, and would be
subject to remaining in loveless marriages if they cannot support
themselves. Rhonda migh prefer that to the high divorce rate we now
experience. Also, she might not have really considered whether or
not women should have to PAY more for the high cost of the kind of
society she might prefer; she may think women STRONGER or MORE CAPABLE
of sustaining loss. Of course, none of that means you must associate
with someone who won't even consider the hypocrisy of such a position.
For me, tho...feminism means fighting for women just like Rhonda, and
demanding nothing in return. :-)
> Marg
Bookman
>In <2vSdneyor-J4aGzZ...@scnresearch.com>, pandora
>pan...@peak.org said:
>: I agree with that. I find it rather interesting that someone who is as
>: outspoken as Rhonda is and lives her life as SHE wishes to, would be
>: *afraid* of the label of feminist. Perhaps she's fallen for the negative
>: propaganda dissminated by the idiots on newsgroups and elsewhere? Could
>: be......... If so, I find that rather amusing.
>:
>: Marg
>:
>
>The stereotype has another source; there are women who are
>simply hostile to men and call themselves feminists, without
>understanding the philosophy of feminism. They can be the most
>vocal leaders of some groups - on the internet or elsewhere. Yet
>what they are calling for is not equality for women, but power
>over men. This is unfortunate.
Nicely put, Kali. IMO there are other dynamics in the mix, too.
>
>After my naive dealings with one such group several years ago, I
>did some introspecting and research and concluded that I was
>more a humanist. I consider Rhonda to be a humanist.
That's one way of looking at it. Labels have their hazards, of
course. I have little use for people who mistake labels for reality.
>
>Feminism (and 'masculism', as we see extreme cases of in
>soc.men) are about shifting power toward equality, and the
>momentum of the shift is gender centric. This is a worthy goal
>in some instances, e.g. the workplace. Humanism's concern is
>with the individual, regardless of gender. There is no bias
>toward male or female. Gloria Steinum on the equal pay issue:
N.B. On the EPI, I've seen a couple of articles which claim that
women who live like men, i.e. equivalent education, career choice, and
most of all, no children, have pay that is equal or superior to men.
While I won't go so far as to k'lame this to be the absolute truth,
there may be a point there. And of course there are probably _plenty_
of individual cases of discrimination, and probably will be for the
rest of our life expectancies. But more damage can be done in
attempting to eliminate fringe behavior than any theoretical benefits
from the "beneficial" actions.
The problem with a confrontational style of activism is that it can be
self-defeating. If your (generic 'your') group insists upon treating
their target group as the enemy, it will most probably not only lose
sympathy among moderate members of the group, but also create enemies
along the way. Feminist political groups didn't do them selves any
favors with the Super Bowl causes domestic violence lie. (An
over-simplified label, but I expect you've heard about it.)
>
>?This is no simple reform. It really is a revolution. Sex and
>race because they are easy and visible differences have been the
>primary ways of organizing human beings into superior and
>inferior groups and into the cheap labor in which this system
>still depends. We are talking about a society in which there
>will be no roles other than those chosen or those earned. We are
>really talking about humanism.? -Gloria Steinem
>
>Ms. Steinem, imo, views feminism as a way of achieving humanism.
>The revolution (feminism) is the agent of change, and humanism
>the ultimate goal. There are interesting philosophical
>differences here.
That's putting it mildly.
>
>In coupling there are sex differences that must be acknowledged.
True. It isn't sexism that keeps the NFL male-dominated, for the most
part.
>Rhonda's awareness that power differences will exist in intimate
>heterosexual relationships - and her decision to trust in her
>partner's relationship power - is humanistic. There are similar
>relationships where the male partner places this trust in the
>female.
Among others. Some couples have strictly defined authority roles
specific to different aspects of their life together, where one is the
authority and the other is not, and vice-versa.
Bookman
Assumes facts not in evidence.
"I'm not a Christian, but I do adhere to some Christian principles,
one of which is that in a heterosexual pairing, the male partner is
the head of the household."
No mention made of any "fundamentalist" religious belief.
>and if you have a family
>raised under some form of fundamentalism, it is difficult to
>dissasociate without harming that family. Also, under fundamentalism,
>men have some distinct role, to bring men into the picture, and she
>might support that, with her view of religion;
Just what is "her view of of religion"? Facts only, please - no
speculation.
>keep in mind that men
>are less attracted to religion than women, and they often need perks
>(like those 72 virgins) to get them to sign on for the long haul.
>Secondly, Rhonda might associate feminism as some bitter boys do, with
>negative aspects of society and she might be expressing her position in
>a different way. For example, if it were not for feminism, women
>wouldn't have as many opportunities as they have today, and would be
>subject to remaining in loveless marriages if they cannot support
>themselves. Rhonda migh prefer that to the high divorce rate we now
>experience. Also, she might not have really considered whether or
>not women should have to PAY more for the high cost of the kind of
>society she might prefer;
Your speculation says much more about you than it does Rhonda.
>she may think women STRONGER or MORE CAPABLE
>of sustaining loss. Of course, none of that means you must associate
>with someone who won't even consider the hypocrisy of such a position.
> For me, tho...feminism means fighting for women just like Rhonda, and
>demanding nothing in return. :-)
I highly doubt that Rhonda is the "hypocrite" you imply her to be.
IMO, someone who is only "fighting for women" has too limited a
worldview to be very beneficialto the society in which they operate.
This differs from groups with specific goals, such as the
Suffragettes.
Bookman
wrote:
>
>"Hyerdahl" <Hyer...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:1156711574.0...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Jude Alexander wrote:
>>
>>
>> > These are the questions. However, taking it here won't let whoever
>score
>> > you.
>>
>> I got a 54 :-)
>
>What the URL again? When *I* tried it, it wouldn't give me a score without
>joining. Sorry, I don't join such things.
http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=10884316438150389912
Just don't fill in the details, and click "you're done". If you dive
your age, it will cough up how you compare to your age group.
kope...@yahoo.com
Christians Banned Muslims Women Headscarf
i always said that human are dumb creature.
Kali
pan...@peak.org said:
:
: "Kali" <ka...@lake.breeze> wrote in message
I'm not seeing where I made any reference to you at all. For
some unknown to me reason you've interjected your personal
sexual experiences into the discussion. You seem to be asking me
to draw an analogy between a crass accusation made by a former
lover of yours to the broader issues I have commented on,
something I don't find appropriate.
: After my naive dealings with one such group several years ago, I
: did some introspecting and research and concluded that I was
: more a humanist. I consider Rhonda to be a humanist.
:
: ***You can call yourself whatever you like but IF You believe and live by
: the tenets of feminism, you are a feminist no matter what you say. Unless,
: of course, you're willing to publically give up your right to vote, your
: rifht to own property, and your right to an education and to not be
: discriminated against in the workplace.
I'll simply state that we disagree. Labels are context-dependent
and they are only useful for sorting. One can endorse feminist
principles without wearing the badge.
: Feminism (and 'masculism', as we see extreme cases of in
: soc.men) are about shifting power toward equality, and the
: momentum of the shift is gender centric. This is a worthy goal
: in some instances, e.g. the workplace. Humanism's concern is
: with the individual, regardless of gender. There is no bias
: toward male or female.
:
: ***Nor with feminism.
I disagree, and think I've explained my pov sufficiently in the
earlier post (quoted below).
: You've fallen for that old line given out by the
: MCP's and connor's of the world.
:
: Gloria Steinum on the equal pay issue:
:
: ?This is no simple reform. It really is a revolution. Sex and
: race because they are easy and visible differences have been the
: primary ways of organizing human beings into superior and
: inferior groups and into the cheap labor in which this system
: still depends. We are talking about a society in which there
: will be no roles other than those chosen or those earned. We are
: really talking about humanism.? -Gloria Steinem
:
: Ms. Steinem, imo, views feminism as a way of achieving humanism.
: The revolution (feminism) is the agent of change, and humanism
: the ultimate goal. There are interesting philosophical
: differences here.
:
:
: *** I don't see any differences there at all. We're either equal or back
: into the kitchen YOU go, dear.
Or something else, and all the nuances.
: Just because you're afraid to acknowledge
: the name doesn't mean you're not playiang the *game*. Sheesh!
You seem to be contradicting yourself. Which is it: a woman
must wear the label or else be categorically denied equal
rights, or what you've just stated, which reduces to "all women
are feminists, whether they wear the label, or not"... Or
something else, entirely?
: In coupling there are sex differences that must be acknowledged.
: Rhonda's awareness that power differences will exist in intimate
: heterosexual relationships - and her decision to trust in her
: partner's relationship power - is humanistic. There are similar
: relationships where the male partner places this trust in the
: female.
:
: ***Now you're treating me as if I were an idiot.
Again, I made no reference to you at all. I was discussing as a
means of thinking through, and offering my opinion.
: I'm married, have been for
: 41 years, had 3 children, and now have 5 grandchildren.
Again, you seem make this be "about you" when it isn't.
Seriously.
: What do you think
: YOU can tell me about sex differences, dear? Nothing as I expected. Now
: run along and suck some more patriachal nonsense.
:
: Marg
Your posture toward me in this post is quite hostile, Marg. I'm
guessing it's because you turn general issues into personal
issues sometimes. I didn't mean to confront you, only to discuss
(with the group) something of interest.
Kali
thebo...@kc.rr.comNULL said:
:
: >In <2vSdneyor-J4aGzZ...@scnresearch.com>, pandora
: >pan...@peak.org said:
:
: >: I agree with that. I find it rather interesting that someone who is as
: >: outspoken as Rhonda is and lives her life as SHE wishes to, would be
: >: *afraid* of the label of feminist. Perhaps she's fallen for the negative
: >: propaganda dissminated by the idiots on newsgroups and elsewhere? Could
: >: be......... If so, I find that rather amusing.
: >:
: >: Marg
: >:
: >
: >The stereotype has another source; there are women who are
: >simply hostile to men and call themselves feminists, without
: >understanding the philosophy of feminism. They can be the most
: >vocal leaders of some groups - on the internet or elsewhere. Yet
: >what they are calling for is not equality for women, but power
: >over men. This is unfortunate.
:
: Nicely put, Kali. IMO there are other dynamics in the mix, too.
Appreciate the compliment, Bookman, esp. since this is a subject
I am not accustomed to discussing. And yes, there are other
dynamics.
: >After my naive dealings with one such group several years ago, I
: >did some introspecting and research and concluded that I was
: >more a humanist. I consider Rhonda to be a humanist.
:
: That's one way of looking at it. Labels have their hazards, of
: course. I have little use for people who mistake labels for reality.
They come in handy for categorical sorting <g>
: >Feminism (and 'masculism', as we see extreme cases of in
: >soc.men) are about shifting power toward equality, and the
: >momentum of the shift is gender centric. This is a worthy goal
: >in some instances, e.g. the workplace. Humanism's concern is
: >with the individual, regardless of gender. There is no bias
: >toward male or female. Gloria Steinum on the equal pay issue:
:
: N.B. On the EPI, I've seen a couple of articles which claim that
: women who live like men, i.e. equivalent education, career choice, and
: most of all, no children, have pay that is equal or superior to men.
I'd like to see it (EPI?)
: While I won't go so far as to k'lame this to be the absolute truth,
: there may be a point there. And of course there are probably _plenty_
: of individual cases of discrimination, and probably will be for the
: rest of our life expectancies. But more damage can be done in
: attempting to eliminate fringe behavior than any theoretical benefits
: from the "beneficial" actions.
:
: The problem with a confrontational style of activism is that it can be
: self-defeating. If your (generic 'your') group insists upon treating
: their target group as the enemy, it will most probably not only lose
: sympathy among moderate members of the group, but also create enemies
: along the way.
I think it always happens when complex issues are viewed in
black and white terms.
: Feminist political groups didn't do them selves any
: favors with the Super Bowl causes domestic violence lie. (An
: over-simplified label, but I expect you've heard about it.)
No, I am not familiar with it, but will look for it.
: >?This is no simple reform. It really is a revolution. Sex and
: >race because they are easy and visible differences have been the
: >primary ways of organizing human beings into superior and
: >inferior groups and into the cheap labor in which this system
: >still depends. We are talking about a society in which there
: >will be no roles other than those chosen or those earned. We are
: >really talking about humanism.? -Gloria Steinem
: >
: >Ms. Steinem, imo, views feminism as a way of achieving humanism.
: >The revolution (feminism) is the agent of change, and humanism
: >the ultimate goal. There are interesting philosophical
: >differences here.
:
: That's putting it mildly.
Well, yes, lol, esp. when you compare the nature of the
philosophy and the approach taken by activists.
: >In coupling there are sex differences that must be acknowledged.
:
: True. It isn't sexism that keeps the NFL male-dominated, for the most
: part.
No, certainly not.
: >Rhonda's awareness that power differences will exist in intimate
: >heterosexual relationships - and her decision to trust in her
: >partner's relationship power - is humanistic. There are similar
: >relationships where the male partner places this trust in the
: >female.
:
: Among others. Some couples have strictly defined authority roles
: specific to different aspects of their life together, where one is the
: authority and the other is not, and vice-versa.
And it makes a lot of sense, don't you think?
: ESL!
:
ESL!
("what does ESL mean?", she asked, after all these years...)
:)
Kali
thebo...@kc.rr.comNULL said:
: On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 14:27:43 -0700, "pandora" <pan...@peak.org>
: wrote:
:
: >
: >"Hyerdahl" <Hyer...@aol.com> wrote in message
: >news:1156711574.0...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
: >>
: >> Jude Alexander wrote:
: >>
: >>
: >> > These are the questions. However, taking it here won't let whoever
: >score
: >> > you.
: >>
: >> I got a 54 :-)
: >
: >What the URL again? When *I* tried it, it wouldn't give me a score without
: >joining. Sorry, I don't join such things.
:
: http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=10884316438150389912
:
: Just don't fill in the details, and click "you're done". If you dive
: your age, it will cough up how you compare to your age group.
:
: ESL!
"I am writing this test to find out if there are really any guys
out there with some 'feminist tendencies'! In other words...are
there any of you that can REALLY respect us women or are you
just PRETENDING to respect us so you can get us in bed!?"
Wanna play Spot the Irony? <g>
Bookman
>In <6444f2l6j2reqg9ca...@4ax.com>, Bookman
>thebo...@kc.rr.comNULL said:
>: On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 15:53:12 -0500, Kali <ka...@lake.breeze> wrote:
>:
>: >In <2vSdneyor-J4aGzZ...@scnresearch.com>, pandora
>: >pan...@peak.org said:
>:
>: >: I agree with that. I find it rather interesting that someone who is as
>: >: outspoken as Rhonda is and lives her life as SHE wishes to, would be
>: >: *afraid* of the label of feminist. Perhaps she's fallen for the negative
>: >: propaganda dissminated by the idiots on newsgroups and elsewhere? Could
>: >: be......... If so, I find that rather amusing.
>: >:
>: >: Marg
>: >:
>: >
>: >The stereotype has another source; there are women who are
>: >simply hostile to men and call themselves feminists, without
>: >understanding the philosophy of feminism. They can be the most
>: >vocal leaders of some groups - on the internet or elsewhere. Yet
>: >what they are calling for is not equality for women, but power
>: >over men. This is unfortunate.
>:
>: Nicely put, Kali. IMO there are other dynamics in the mix, too.
>
>Appreciate the compliment, Bookman, esp. since this is a subject
>I am not accustomed to discussing. And yes, there are other
>dynamics.
Not at all, Kali. You deserved it.
>
>: >After my naive dealings with one such group several years ago, I
>: >did some introspecting and research and concluded that I was
>: >more a humanist. I consider Rhonda to be a humanist.
>:
>: That's one way of looking at it. Labels have their hazards, of
>: course. I have little use for people who mistake labels for reality.
>
>They come in handy for categorical sorting <g>
True enough, so long as one doesn't mistake the label for something
for the thing itself.
>
>: >Feminism (and 'masculism', as we see extreme cases of in
>: >soc.men) are about shifting power toward equality, and the
>: >momentum of the shift is gender centric. This is a worthy goal
>: >in some instances, e.g. the workplace. Humanism's concern is
>: >with the individual, regardless of gender. There is no bias
>: >toward male or female. Gloria Steinum on the equal pay issue:
>:
>: N.B. On the EPI, I've seen a couple of articles which claim that
>: women who live like men, i.e. equivalent education, career choice, and
>: most of all, no children, have pay that is equal or superior to men.
>
>I'd like to see it (EPI?)
Unfortunately, it's been years. That sort of thing doesn't get the
same level of coverage. EPI = equal pay issue. Sorry, thought it was
obvious.
>
>: While I won't go so far as to k'lame this to be the absolute truth,
>: there may be a point there. And of course there are probably _plenty_
>: of individual cases of discrimination, and probably will be for the
>: rest of our life expectancies. But more damage can be done in
>: attempting to eliminate fringe behavior than any theoretical benefits
>: from the "beneficial" actions.
>:
>: The problem with a confrontational style of activism is that it can be
>: self-defeating. If your (generic 'your') group insists upon treating
>: their target group as the enemy, it will most probably not only lose
>: sympathy among moderate members of the group, but also create enemies
>: along the way.
>
>I think it always happens when complex issues are viewed in
>black and white terms.
Yep. And I think that there's a black-and-white-er or two in this
thread. You know the sort: "everything must be discussed in _my_
terms and viewpoints, or you;re not worthy".
>
>: Feminist political groups didn't do them selves any
>: favors with the Super Bowl causes domestic violence lie. (An
>: over-simplified label, but I expect you've heard about it.)
>
>No, I am not familiar with it, but will look for it.
http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/superbowl.asp
Here's a start.
>
>: >?This is no simple reform. It really is a revolution. Sex and
>: >race because they are easy and visible differences have been the
>: >primary ways of organizing human beings into superior and
>: >inferior groups and into the cheap labor in which this system
>: >still depends. We are talking about a society in which there
>: >will be no roles other than those chosen or those earned. We are
>: >really talking about humanism.? -Gloria Steinem
>: >
>: >Ms. Steinem, imo, views feminism as a way of achieving humanism.
>: >The revolution (feminism) is the agent of change, and humanism
>: >the ultimate goal. There are interesting philosophical
>: >differences here.
>:
>: That's putting it mildly.
>
>Well, yes, lol, esp. when you compare the nature of the
>philosophy and the approach taken by activists.
Part of the problem with professional avtivists is that they have
difficulty admitting that they have achieved their goals. If they
did, they'd be out of their job, if not their purpose in life.
>
>: >In coupling there are sex differences that must be acknowledged.
>:
>: True. It isn't sexism that keeps the NFL male-dominated, for the most
>: part.
>
>No, certainly not.
D'oh! I missed the critical term "in coupling". Sorry, and thanks
for putting up with my non sequitur.
>
>: >Rhonda's awareness that power differences will exist in intimate
>: >heterosexual relationships - and her decision to trust in her
>: >partner's relationship power - is humanistic. There are similar
>: >relationships where the male partner places this trust in the
>: >female.
>:
>: Among others. Some couples have strictly defined authority roles
>: specific to different aspects of their life together, where one is the
>: authority and the other is not, and vice-versa.
>
>And it makes a lot of sense, don't you think?
Works for me!
>
>: ESL!
>:
>ESL!
>
>("what does ESL mean?", she asked, after all these years...)
http://makeashorterlink.com/?O23E535AD
(post 6 or 7, toward the bottom. If you have trouble, ask again, or
drop me a note.)
>
> :)
^_^
Bookman
>In <l774f2990t486r7uq...@4ax.com>, Bookman
>thebo...@kc.rr.comNULL said:
>: On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 14:27:43 -0700, "pandora" <pan...@peak.org>
>: wrote:
>:
>: >
>: >"Hyerdahl" <Hyer...@aol.com> wrote in message
>: >news:1156711574.0...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>: >>
>: >> Jude Alexander wrote:
>: >>
>: >>
>: >> > These are the questions. However, taking it here won't let whoever
>: >score
>: >> > you.
>: >>
>: >> I got a 54 :-)
>: >
>: >What the URL again? When *I* tried it, it wouldn't give me a score without
>: >joining. Sorry, I don't join such things.
>:
>: http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=10884316438150389912
>:
>: Just don't fill in the details, and click "you're done". If you dive
>: your age, it will cough up how you compare to your age group.
>:
>: ESL!
>
>"I am writing this test to find out if there are really any guys
>out there with some 'feminist tendencies'! In other words...are
>there any of you that can REALLY respect us women or are you
>just PRETENDING to respect us so you can get us in bed!?"
>
>Wanna play Spot the Irony? <g>
LOL. I'm not really interested when a gal wants to do
"wham-bam-here's-the-irony-man". Can't you women ever take the time
to work up to it, maybe some teasing and other foreplay? <WEG>
Ken Chaddock
Yea, so did I...too bad it's so predjudicial..."have you stopped
beating you dog" type questions...not even much fun...I think a "man"
would have to be a real doormat to be considered a "feminist" on this
test...
...Ken
...Ken
pandora
"Bookman" <thebo...@kc.rr.comNULL> wrote in message
It has one and only one definition; women are to be treated equally under
the law. Period.
> >
> >> >Perhaps she's fallen for the negative
> >> >propaganda dissminated by the idiots on newsgroups and elsewhere?
Could
> >> >be......... If so, I find that rather amusing.
> >>
> >> Could be that she's too classy to want to associate with teh political
> >> nut-jobs of radical "feminism". I know more than a few women,
> >> Heinlein-influenced or not, who don't care for the politics of "NOW",
> >> et alia. Are you a big fan of the late Andrea "sex is rape"
> >> Dworkin?
> >
> >When did you stop beating your wife/girlfriend?
>
> I have never beat any of the women I have had relationships with.
> Looks like you are laboring under false assumptions , or projecting
> your prejudices. It'll do for a preliminary premise, subject to
> further data.
If there's any projection going on, you started it. Look to yourself.
Marg'
pandora
"Bookman" <thebo...@kc.rr.comNULL> wrote in message
Stop putting words in my mouth if you wish to continue.
What if a woman rejects the
> label "feminist", but nevertheless operates as an equal in society?
Then she's a hypocrite IMO and I already mentioned what I thought of
hypocrites. However, nothing happens to her and she is perfectly able to
accept all the benefits of being a feminist and free woman without anything
more than my scorn.
> >I don't bother talking to women who claim to
> >not be feminists. You either are or you don't exist, to me. You're not
> >worth my talking to you if you believe you're not worthy of equality.
Why
> >should *I* bother with such?
>
> Sounds like you have a pretty exclusive world-view. You must be a
> Republican.
Bwahahahaha. Far from it, bubba. However, I don't believe in listening to
people who believe they are inferior beings. Not MY problem but theirs.
Sorry.
Marg
pandora
I used to, but no longer. I'm fed up with naysayers who still benefit from
our society as it is. I consider them to be hypocrites of the highest order
and not much better than the MCPs of this world.
First, she may be a religious fundamentalist, whether
> she is Mormon or Islamic or some other...and if you have a family
> raised under some form of fundamentalism, it is difficult to
> dissasociate without harming that family.
Sorry, but fuckem! I've had it with that sort too.
Also, under fundamentalism,
> men have some distinct role, to bring men into the picture, and she
> might support that, with her view of religion; keep in mind that men
> are less attracted to religion than women, and they often need perks
> (like those 72 virgins) to get them to sign on for the long haul.
Again I say, fuckem. Not my problem.
> Secondly, Rhonda might associate feminism as some bitter boys do, with
> negative aspects of society and she might be expressing her position in
> a different way. For example, if it were not for feminism, women
> wouldn't have as many opportunities as they have today, and would be
> subject to remaining in loveless marriages if they cannot support
> themselves. Rhonda migh prefer that to the high divorce rate we now
> experience. Also, she might not have really considered whether or
> not women should have to PAY more for the high cost of the kind of
> society she might prefer; she may think women STRONGER or MORE CAPABLE
> of sustaining loss. Of course, none of that means you must associate
> with someone who won't even consider the hypocrisy of such a position.
Correct and I'm frankly sick and tired of hearing the bleating from these
hypocrites who live the life that feminists fought for, for THEM, and yet
disparage the movement. Go to hell, I say with your hypocracy. I'm tired
of it.
> For me, tho...feminism means fighting for women just like Rhonda, and
> demanding nothing in return. :-)
>
I used to believe that way, but I'm way too old to listen to their whining
and bleating anymore. "I'm not a feminist, I'm GOOD looking, I WANT to wear
short skirts and seethrough blouses and makeup, I LIKE MEN, I'm not like
those OTHER WOMEN, but yeah, I want my job and I want to get the same pay as
men, oh and I etc." Bah, humbug. They simply don't realize just how
ridiculous they sound. Plus, they give the MCPS and the connors of this
world fuel for their arguments. You take the high road if you wish to.
I'm taking the low road from here on in. And if they don't like it, well,
they can just go ..............
Marg
>
>
> > Marg
>
pandora
"Bookman" <thebo...@kc.rr.comNULL> wrote in message
And just how many men do YOU know who have no children? As well, I consider
this to be playing dirty pool.
Marg
pandora
"Bookman" <thebo...@kc.rr.comNULL> wrote in message
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 14:27:43 -0700, "pandora" <pan...@peak.org>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Hyerdahl" <Hyer...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:1156711574.0...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >> Jude Alexander wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> > These are the questions. However, taking it here won't let whoever
> >score
> >> > you.
> >>
> >> I got a 54 :-)
> >
> >What the URL again? When *I* tried it, it wouldn't give me a score
without
> >joining. Sorry, I don't join such things.
>
> http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=10884316438150389912
>
> Just don't fill in the details, and click "you're done". If you dive
> your age, it will cough up how you compare to your age group.
Thanks! Mine came up with a 54.
Marg
Bookman
wrote:
>
>"Bookman" <thebo...@kc.rr.comNULL> wrote in message
>news:ts34f2hfh5mdkhedq...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 14:15:07 -0700, "pandora" <pan...@peak.org>
>> wrote:
>
<Snip>
>> >Indeed. You're absolutely right. I'm pretty sick and tired of the old,
>> >"I'm not a feminist, BUT" line. You either, as a woman, accept the equal
>> >rights that have been hard fought and won for you OR you give it up and
>get
>> >back in the kitchen. At the same time, giving up your right to vote,
>work,
>> >or otherwise even speak up.
>>
>> So, a woman is required to self-identify in a manner politically
>> acceptible to you, or she's a non-huiman?
>
>Stop putting words in my mouth if you wish to continue.
I did not "put words in your mouth". I simply restated what you said
in a more blunt fashion:
"OR you give it up and get ack in the kitchen. At the same time,
giving up your right to vote, work, or otherwise even speak up."
The Romans said the same of slaves: "pro nullis, pro mortis, pro
quadrupedis". It comes to the same thing, either way.
Besides, if you wanted a courteous discussion, you wouldn't have
pulled out the old "stopped beating your wife" saw.
>
>What if a woman rejects the
>> label "feminist", but nevertheless operates as an equal in society?
>
>Then she's a hypocrite IMO
So, she in your view, must self-identify with your political label, on
the pain of being labeled "hypocrite", eh? How small minded of you.
>and I already mentioned what I thought of
>hypocrites. However, nothing happens to her and she is perfectly able to
>accept all the benefits of being a feminist and free woman without anything
>more than my scorn.
That's because you aren't in charge, which is a very good thing
indeed.
>
>> >I don't bother talking to women who claim to
>> >not be feminists. You either are or you don't exist, to me. You're not
>> >worth my talking to you if you believe you're not worthy of equality.
>Why
>> >should *I* bother with such?
>>
>> Sounds like you have a pretty exclusive world-view. You must be a
>> Republican.
>
>Bwahahahaha. Far from it, bubba.
Well, you are certainly of a similar mindset. You simply have
different goals.
>However, I don't believe in listening to
>people who believe they are inferior beings. Not MY problem but theirs.
A-hem. You just complained about me "putting words in your mouth",
and here you go, doing it yourself. There's a word for that, which I
seem to recall you using...
>Sorry.
I rather doubt you are, but it was polite of you to say so.
Bookman
wrote:
Than k you.
So, does that mean that you believe that women should not be given
maternal leave? Just as an example.
How do you feel about those who misuse "feminist" for their own
political gains?
>
>> >
>> >> >Perhaps she's fallen for the negative
>> >> >propaganda dissminated by the idiots on newsgroups and elsewhere?
>Could
>> >> >be......... If so, I find that rather amusing.
>> >>
>> >> Could be that she's too classy to want to associate with teh political
>> >> nut-jobs of radical "feminism". I know more than a few women,
>> >> Heinlein-influenced or not, who don't care for the politics of "NOW",
>> >> et alia. Are you a big fan of the late Andrea "sex is rape"
>> >> Dworkin?
>> >
>> >When did you stop beating your wife/girlfriend?
>>
>> I have never beat any of the women I have had relationships with.
>> Looks like you are laboring under false assumptions , or projecting
>> your prejudices. It'll do for a preliminary premise, subject to
>> further data.
>
>If there's any projection going on, you started it. Look to yourself.
Nope. I asked about AD because it is a touchstone question, IME.
Your response would have given me considerable insight into your
beliefs, whether you had asnwered "yes", or "no", or had given a
qualified answer with or without an explanation.
What you handed back was a tired, old loaded question of little
informative value at all, in short, the insult direct. Nevertheless,
I gave you an honest answer to your dishonest question.
If you like, I will give you my asessment of yourself, or even AD.
Not that it is likely to be of any use beyond pissing you off. But I
could be wrong. Life is full of that, after all - even for you, even
right now. Up to you whether you ask or not
Myself, I prefer to keep seeking information and testing my
assumptions, but not everyone feels that way.
Bookman
wrote:
>
>"Bookman" <thebo...@kc.rr.comNULL> wrote in message
>news:l774f2990t486r7uq...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 14:27:43 -0700, "pandora" <pan...@peak.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Hyerdahl" <Hyer...@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >news:1156711574.0...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> >>
>> >> Jude Alexander wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > These are the questions. However, taking it here won't let whoever
>> >score
>> >> > you.
>> >>
>> >> I got a 54 :-)
>> >
>> >What the URL again? When *I* tried it, it wouldn't give me a score
>without
>> >joining. Sorry, I don't join such things.
>>
>> http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=10884316438150389912
>>
>> Just don't fill in the details, and click "you're done". If you dive
>> your age, it will cough up how you compare to your age group.
>
>Thanks! Mine came up with a 54.
You're welcome. Mine came up rather lower, but nearly every question
was so loaded that is was difficult to answer honestly. I did the
best i could, and only skipped one. The time I re-checked it for you,
I answered nothing, and got a "sexist pig" response, which says
something about the "scoring" method used.
IMO, it says much more about the question-writer than the poll-takers.
Out of curiosity, how do you feel about Robert A. Heinlein?
The Demon Prince of Absurdity
screamed:
> These are the questions. However, taking it here won't let whoever score
> you.
The answers I /wanted/ to give to the first two...and the ones I gave to
the others. Well, most of the others.
> 1. Do you enjoy going to strip clubs?
Yes, though I enjoy male strippers as well as female.
> 2. Do you think porno mags tend to be degrading to women?
The ones aimed at straight men (soc.fr00t straight, not real straight)
by other (presumably) straight men do tend in that direction, yes. Their
publishers & editors know their readership...However, the superset of
"porno mags" includes many being made by women, and one hopes that
female pornographers would tend to avoid degrading other women (I know
of one production company which is run by women who specifically set out
to make porn which is _not_ degrading). "On Our Backs" is one example of
a magazine avoiding such tendencies.
> 3. Do you think boob jobs and other plastic surgery make a
> woman better?
> No, a natural woman is the best
Unquestionably, though it is of course a given woman's own choice.
Furthermore, since I'm transgendered (M2F, pre-hormones), I can hardly
begrudge any other woman that choice.
> 4. Are you bothered by music that includes lyrics referring
> to women as bitches or ho's?
> I listen to that music but don't agree with the names
Haven't bought much in the way of cassettes or DVDs in ages, and I have
no iPod.
> 5. Do women still get paid less than men for the same
> quality work at the same job?
> Yes they get paid less than men
Mmm-hmmm.
> 6. Could a woman be a successful president for the u.s.a.?
> Yes, ofcourse
Duh.
> 7. Are you a possesive boyfriend/husband/lover? Do you try
> and control what your spouse/lover wears, where she goes or
> who she spends time with?
> No, why would I?
Indeed.
> 8. Women working at jobs like carpentry, menchanics, and
> construction worker...what do you think of it?
> Women can do any work as well as men
Definitely.
> 9. When you first got together with your spouse/lover she
> was thin and hot; as the years went by she became
> overweight. Do you accept her still or leave her?
> I love her for who she is not what she looks like
Yup.
> 10. What is the first thing you notice about a girl when you
> first meet her?
Depends on which aspect of her is the first one I perceive -- if I'm
seated, and she sits down across a table from me, saying "Hi", the
first thing I'll see is her torso, the fIrst thing I'll hear is her
greeting, and if they're simultaneous, then they'd each be half of the
first thing I'd notice about her. Sometimes I notice hair first, or a
face. Basically, it varies. Unfortunately, this answer was unavailable...
> 11. Who should be 'in charge' in a marriage?
> husband and wife should be equal in everything
Uh-huh.
> 12. Is there such a thing as the 'stronger or weaker sex'?
> No there is no such thing..men and women are equal
O'course!
> 13. Frank likes to drink wine, bake, knit and does ballet.
> He doesn't like watching sports, rarely swears, reads alot
> and is always gentle. Is frank gay?
> No, he's just got class
Well, actually, he *could* be gay, yes -- but you can't tell from that
bullshit lits.
> 14. Are patriarchal religions oppressive to women? (such as
> eve being blamed for humans being cast from eden, not
> allowing women to be preists,women having to wear veils,
> women being taught to obey their husbands,..)
> Yes they are very oppressive
Quite.
> 15. You are engaged to be married. Your partner tells you
> she doesn't want to change her last name...she wants to keep
> her maiden name and not take yours. Are you ok with this?
> Yes, its just a name...I respect her beliefs
> Couldn't she just do the hyphenated thing? no problem...heck
> I'll take HER last name!
I picked the first answer, but either of the latter would do. It's just a
name.
> 16. When giving your new-born child a last name.....
> If my spouse/partner wants to we can give the baby a
> hyphenated combination of both of our last names
Certainly!
> 17. Is it ok for children to play with toys normally used by
> the opposite gender?
> Yes, let the kids play with what ever they want to!
Oh, absolutely.
> 18. Sojourner Truth....
> She's awsome...."Ain't I a Woman?"
Dig it!
> 19. What is your opinion of women in general? I love to have
> sex with them
> Some are good some are bad
> They have come a long way in terms of historical progress
Picked the latter, but the first also applies.
> 20. When you have sex with your spouse/lover, how important
> is it to you that she enjoys it?
> Very important, her enjoyment is my goal
> it is important that we both reach orgasm and that we are
> both getting what we want
I picked one of these, but I can't remember which.
--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! TM#5
Cardinal Snarky of the Fannish Inquisition
http://www6.kingdomofloathing.com/login.php
http://www.runescape.com/
No one expects the Fannish Inquisition!
Vote rec.radio.amateur.policy for Busted Urinal in August 2006!
Also vote Cletis Perkins for:
Bolo Bullis Foam Duck
Unabomber Surprise
Goofy @zzed Babboon
Joseph Bartlo "Pathetic Anal Pineapple" Award
FreeSpeechStore
>
> "Jude Alexander" <Cajun@middle of the swamp.com> wrote in message
> news:KMmIg.20023$e9.1...@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
>>
>> "pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
>> news:2vSdneyor-J4aGzZ...@scnresearch.com...
>> >
>> > "The Demon Prince of Absurdity" <absurd_numb...@hell.corn>
>> > wrote in
>> > message news:pan.2006.08.27....@hell.corn...
>> >> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 13:51:31 -0400, Rhonda Lea Kirk did the cha-cha,
> and
>> >> screamed:
>> > be *afraid* of the label of feminist. Perhaps she's fallen for the
> negative
>> > propaganda dissminated by the idiots on newsgroups and elsewhere?
>> > Could be......... If so, I find that rather amusing.
>> >
>> > Marg
>>
>>
>> You know how you deal with women like "Rhonda?" You ask them if women
>> should not work outside the home, not hold office, not vote, not own
>> property, etc. If they say, "yes," you might as well walk away. lol
>> They're either a man playing with you or a Fundamentalist Jew, Christian
> or
>> Moslem. IF they say these things are good things, then ask them how
>> they can be against woman's rights/feminism when all these things were
>> brought about by the continued work done by women and men in the
>> movement and by those who listened to them and to reason.
>>
> Indeed. You're absolutely right. I'm pretty sick and tired of the old,
> "I'm not a feminist, BUT" line. You either, as a woman, accept the equal
> rights that have been hard fought and won for you OR you give it up and
> get back in the kitchen. At the same time, giving up your right to vote,
> work, or otherwise even speak up. I don't bother talking to women who
> claim to not be feminists. You either are or you don't exist, to me.
> You're not worth my talking to you if you believe you're not worthy of
> equality. Why should *I* bother with such?
The label isn't especially significant, if her behaviour is that of a
liberated woman -- there've been some "bad example" feminists, over the
years, who've given feminism a bad name in certain circles. However, I
do take your point. Accepting feminism's gains for women, but declining
any association with the movement, is kind of questionable. Indeed, I
have oft ridiculed women who outright opposed feminism while doing all
sorts of things that would have been out of the question for them fifty
years ago. Jill Deel, for example.
--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris!
Not Richard Scoville
VOTE DICK SCOVILLE FOR THE BOB ALLISAT H, L, & S AND PALMJOB PADDLE!!!
And for Tinfoil Star in AFA-B!
Rookie Kook of the Year, 2005
Kook of the Month, December 2005
Clueless Newbie of the Month, October 2005
Palmjob Paddle, January 2006
George Pickett Memorial Trophy, October 2005
Coward of the Month, October 2005
George Armstrong Custer "Kicked @$$" Award
Kenny McCormick Memorial Medal
Order of the Holey Sockpuppet
Balsa Gavel
Richard M. Scoville is explicitly denied the right to archive any of my
posts, under any of my nyms, on his site, FreeSpeechStore.com, winner of
the Richbull.com Memorial Award for Kooksite of the Year, 2005
http://tinyurl.com/c222n
alt.fan.art-bell awards
GREEN LANTERN AWARD FOR PROJECTION for Spring 2006
TINFOIL STAR AWARD for Spring 2006
OFFICES OF KARCZEWSKI, WOLLMANN, & STAPLETON, ATTOURNEYS AT FLAW
(Incumbent, April 2006-present)
"It's claiming authority based on absurd myths and fantasy beings - that
creates anger." -- Kurt Gavin
"Al-Qaeda is solely responsible for 9/11" is just another k00ky
konspiracy theory.
Bookman
<freespe...@meow.fuckhead> wrote:
>On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 14:15:07 -0700, pandora wildly foamed:
>
>> Indeed. You're absolutely right. I'm pretty sick and tired of the old,
>> "I'm not a feminist, BUT" line. You either, as a woman, accept the equal
>> rights that have been hard fought and won for you OR you give it up and
>> get back in the kitchen. At the same time, giving up your right to vote,
>> work, or otherwise even speak up. I don't bother talking to women who
>> claim to not be feminists. You either are or you don't exist, to me.
>> You're not worth my talking to you if you believe you're not worthy of
>> equality. Why should *I* bother with such?
>
>The label isn't especially significant, if her behaviour is that of a
>liberated woman -- there've been some "bad example" feminists, over the
>years, who've given feminism a bad name in certain circles.
Rather more than a few, in fact. Some don't seem to be able to tell
the difference between "feminism" as pandora defined it, and unrelated
personal or political beliefs.
>However, I
>do take your point. Accepting feminism's gains for women, but declining
>any association with the movement, is kind of questionable.
I disagree. There's some difference between teh "movement", and the
ideal. The worst point of the "movement" is the rather common
assertion that "a woman is either with us or against us/unworthy". I
have little use for exclusive/no comromise attitudes.
>Indeed, I
>have oft ridiculed women who outright opposed feminism while doing all
>sorts of things that would have been out of the question for them fifty
>years ago. Jill Deel, for example.
Plenty of ignorant wretches of all stripes out there. Did you see the
Man Show_ segemnt where they had a petition against sufferage? With
the tag line of "End the suffering!"? They got a few women to
kloolessly sign on. Rather reminiscent of teh guy who got reviled for
using the word "niggardly".
DrDeath
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 15:14:18 -0500, Jude Alexander did the cha-cha, and
> screamed:
>
>> These are the questions. However, taking it here won't let whoever score
>> you.
I think the questions are biased. I scored a 26 and I consider my wife an
equal in many ways. I have areas that I am more dominate as does she.
> The answers I /wanted/ to give to the first two...and the ones I gave to
> the others. Well, most of the others.
>
>> 1. Do you enjoy going to strip clubs?
>
> Yes, though I enjoy male strippers as well as female.
I go because they sell beer until 4am as compared to the bars which close at
1:30
>
>> 2. Do you think porno mags tend to be degrading to women?
>
> The ones aimed at straight men (soc.fr00t straight, not real straight)
> by other (presumably) straight men do tend in that direction, yes. Their
> publishers & editors know their readership...However, the superset of
> "porno mags" includes many being made by women, and one hopes that
> female pornographers would tend to avoid degrading other women (I know
> of one production company which is run by women who specifically set out
> to make porn which is _not_ degrading). "On Our Backs" is one example of
> a magazine avoiding such tendencies.
If a women wants to sell pictures to magazines then it's all good. Nobody is
forcing them to strip and that goes for men that pose nude.
>
>> 3. Do you think boob jobs and other plastic surgery make a
>> woman better?
>
>> No, a natural woman is the best
>
> Unquestionably, though it is of course a given woman's own choice.
> Furthermore, since I'm transgendered (M2F, pre-hormones), I can hardly
> begrudge any other woman that choice.
I like boobs, all shapes and sizes. When I work bike rallies I take as many
pics as I can.
>> 4. Are you bothered by music that includes lyrics referring
>> to women as bitches or ho's?
>
>> I listen to that music but don't agree with the names
>
> Haven't bought much in the way of cassettes or DVDs in ages, and I have
> no iPod.
Some of it is just plain ass funny, like ICP. My wife thinks it's funny
also. If I think it will offend someone, I assess who it is, and decide if I
want to offend them or not.
>> 5. Do women still get paid less than men for the same
>> quality work at the same job?
>
>> Yes they get paid less than men
>
> Mmm-hmmm.
It depends on the person and the job. My wife and I compete each year at tax
time to see who made more money. She's taking her masters in psychology so
she will be kicking my ass in a couple of years, but it's all good.
>> 6. Could a woman be a successful president for the u.s.a.?
>
>> Yes, ofcourse
>
> Duh.
I think Condolezza Rice would do a great job.
>> 7. Are you a possesive boyfriend/husband/lover? Do you try
>> and control what your spouse/lover wears, where she goes or
>> who she spends time with?
>
>> No, why would I?
>
> Indeed.
No, I trust her totally, we are partners in life.
>> 8. Women working at jobs like carpentry, menchanics, and
>> construction worker...what do you think of it?
>
>> Women can do any work as well as men
>
> Definitely.
Some can and some can't. Depends on the women, you have to take it case by
case.
>> 9. When you first got together with your spouse/lover she
>> was thin and hot; as the years went by she became
>> overweight. Do you accept her still or leave her?
>
>> I love her for who she is not what she looks like
>
> Yup.
My wife is my best friend and life partner. Looks are unimportant.
>> 10. What is the first thing you notice about a girl when you
>> first meet her?
>
> Depends on which aspect of her is the first one I perceive -- if I'm
> seated, and she sits down across a table from me, saying "Hi", the
> first thing I'll see is her torso, the fIrst thing I'll hear is her
> greeting, and if they're simultaneous, then they'd each be half of the
> first thing I'd notice about her. Sometimes I notice hair first, or a
> face. Basically, it varies. Unfortunately, this answer was unavailable...
Depends on the women. For that matter it applies to anyone, different things
stands out on different people.
>> 11. Who should be 'in charge' in a marriage?
>
>> husband and wife should be equal in everything
>
> Uh-huh.
We all have our strengths and weaknesses. My wife takes care of the bills,
she is much better at it. I cook (when I have time) as I am by far better at
it.
>> 12. Is there such a thing as the 'stronger or weaker sex'?
>
>> No there is no such thing..men and women are equal
>
> O'course!
I've seen women kicks mens asses. In fact I worked on a commercial project
that had these two women running the pipefitter crew. There was no way I
would want to tangle with them and I'm no punk.
>
>> 13. Frank likes to drink wine, bake, knit and does ballet.
>> He doesn't like watching sports, rarely swears, reads alot
>> and is always gentle. Is frank gay?
>
>> No, he's just got class
>
> Well, actually, he *could* be gay, yes -- but you can't tell from that
> bullshit lits.
Some men have effeminate qualities but are not gay.
>> 14. Are patriarchal religions oppressive to women? (such as
>> eve being blamed for humans being cast from eden, not
>> allowing women to be preists,women having to wear veils,
>> women being taught to obey their husbands,..)
>
>> Yes they are very oppressive
>
> Quite.
Agreed, very oppresive.
>> 15. You are engaged to be married. Your partner tells you
>> she doesn't want to change her last name...she wants to keep
>> her maiden name and not take yours. Are you ok with this?
>
>> Yes, its just a name...I respect her beliefs
>
>> Couldn't she just do the hyphenated thing? no problem...heck
>> I'll take HER last name!
>
> I picked the first answer, but either of the latter would do. It's just a
> name.
I want my wife to have my name. Less confusion, and I don't have to watch
some asshole hit on her in front of me because he doesn't know we are
married.
>> 16. When giving your new-born child a last name.....
>
>> If my spouse/partner wants to we can give the baby a
>> hyphenated combination of both of our last names
>
> Certainly!
Agreed!
>> 17. Is it ok for children to play with toys normally used by
>> the opposite gender?
>
>> Yes, let the kids play with what ever they want to!
>
> Oh, absolutely.
I think the question isn't relevent to women's rights. It would be a more
appropriate question in another type of test.
>> 18. Sojourner Truth....
>
>> She's awsome...."Ain't I a Woman?"
>
> Dig it!
Who is she?
>> 19. What is your opinion of women in general? I love to have
>> sex with them
>
>> Some are good some are bad
>
>> They have come a long way in terms of historical progress
>
> Picked the latter, but the first also applies.
As with anyone, there are good and bad.
>> 20. When you have sex with your spouse/lover, how important
>> is it to you that she enjoys it?
>
>> Very important, her enjoyment is my goal
>
>> it is important that we both reach orgasm and that we are
>> both getting what we want
>
> I picked one of these, but I can't remember which.
Depends on if she is in the mood, sometimes she just gives it to me without
being in the mood and she doesn't always want an orgasm.
FreeSpeechStore
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 20:11:35 -0700, "pandora" wrote:
>>"Bookman" wrote...
>>> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 14:27:43 -0700, "pandora" wrote:
>>> >"Hyerdahl" wrote...
>>> >> Jude Alexander wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> > These are the questions. However, taking it here won't let
>>> >> > whoever
>>> >score
>>> >> > you.
>>> >>
>>> >> I got a 54 :-)
>>> >
>>> >What the URL again? When *I* tried it, it wouldn't give me a score
>>without
>>> >joining. Sorry, I don't join such things.
>>>
>>> http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=10884316438150389912
>>>
>>> Just don't fill in the details, and click "you're done". If you dive
>>> your age, it will cough up how you compare to your age group.
>>
>>Thanks! Mine came up with a 54.
>
> You're welcome. Mine came up rather lower, but nearly every question was
> so loaded that is was difficult to answer honestly. I did the best i
> could, and only skipped one. The time I re-checked it for you, I answered
> nothing, and got a "sexist pig" response, which says something about the
> "scoring" method used.
If I got a 51, along with Jude (answering the way I did), and Marg got 54,
then I think she did as well as anyone could have done. Meaning, neither
Jude or I did at all poorly.;-{P}
But it wasn't well-written.
> IMO, it says much more about the question-writer than the poll-takers.
Alas, I fear you're right. That particular feminist isn't a very clear
thinker.
> Out of curiosity, how do you feel about Robert A. Heinlein?
Best sf writer of the 20th century.
> ESL!
ESL!
Bookman
<drdeat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"The Demon Prince of Absurdity" <absurd_numb...@hell.corn> wrote in
>message news:pan.2006.08.28....@hell.corn...
>> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 15:14:18 -0500, Jude Alexander did the cha-cha, and
>> screamed:
>>
>>> These are the questions. However, taking it here won't let whoever score
>>> you.
>
>I think the questions are biased. I scored a 26 and I consider my wife an
>equal in many ways. I have areas that I am more dominate as does she.
>
>> The answers I /wanted/ to give to the first two...and the ones I gave to
>> the others. Well, most of the others.
>>
>>> 1. Do you enjoy going to strip clubs?
>>
>> Yes, though I enjoy male strippers as well as female.
>
>I go because they sell beer until 4am as compared to the bars which close at
>1:30
I don't see anything wrong with enjoying watching pretty women shake
it. There's worse jobs, and far more demeaning. I am quite
well-versed in the hazards and drawbacks of the field, too.
>
>>
>>> 2. Do you think porno mags tend to be degrading to women?
>>
>> The ones aimed at straight men (soc.fr00t straight, not real straight)
>> by other (presumably) straight men do tend in that direction, yes. Their
>> publishers & editors know their readership...However, the superset of
>> "porno mags" includes many being made by women, and one hopes that
>> female pornographers would tend to avoid degrading other women (I know
>> of one production company which is run by women who specifically set out
>> to make porn which is _not_ degrading). "On Our Backs" is one example of
>> a magazine avoiding such tendencies.
>
>If a women wants to sell pictures to magazines then it's all good. Nobody is
>forcing them to strip and that goes for men that pose nude.
>
>>
>>> 3. Do you think boob jobs and other plastic surgery make a
>>> woman better?
>>
>>> No, a natural woman is the best
>>
>> Unquestionably, though it is of course a given woman's own choice.
>> Furthermore, since I'm transgendered (M2F, pre-hormones), I can hardly
>> begrudge any other woman that choice.
>
>I like boobs, all shapes and sizes. When I work bike rallies I take as many
>pics as I can.
Works for me. If one is gonna whine about boob-jobs, then one had
better whine about _all_ forms of body modification/enhancement.
pandora has a word for it when one doesn't.
Besides, freaking out over plastic surgery buys into the whole ethic,
just from the flip side, in the same way that a satanist or even an
atheist buys into godism.
>
>>> 4. Are you bothered by music that includes lyrics referring
>>> to women as bitches or ho's?
>>
>>> I listen to that music but don't agree with the names
>>
>> Haven't bought much in the way of cassettes or DVDs in ages, and I have
>> no iPod.
>
>Some of it is just plain ass funny, like ICP. My wife thinks it's funny
>also. If I think it will offend someone, I assess who it is, and decide if I
>want to offend them or not.
>
>>> 5. Do women still get paid less than men for the same
>>> quality work at the same job?
>>
>>> Yes they get paid less than men
>>
>> Mmm-hmmm.
>
>It depends on the person and the job. My wife and I compete each year at tax
>time to see who made more money. She's taking her masters in psychology so
>she will be kicking my ass in a couple of years, but it's all good.
OTOH, if a woman is doing as good or better at a job, she should be
paid the same/better, modified by salary negotiation skillz.
>
>>> 6. Could a woman be a successful president for the u.s.a.?
>>
>>> Yes, ofcourse
>>
>> Duh.
>
>I think Condolezza Rice would do a great job.
Could do worse. Of course certain nuts would keep screaming "house
nigger", because they don't think the melanin-enhanced have the right
of political freedom.
>
>>> 7. Are you a possesive boyfriend/husband/lover? Do you try
>>> and control what your spouse/lover wears, where she goes or
>>> who she spends time with?
>>
>>> No, why would I?
>>
>> Indeed.
>
>No, I trust her totally, we are partners in life.
Good for y'all. Without trust, it isn't reall a relationship. More
like a co-dependency.
>
>>> 8. Women working at jobs like carpentry, menchanics, and
>>> construction worker...what do you think of it?
>>
>>> Women can do any work as well as men
>>
>> Definitely.
>
>Some can and some can't. Depends on the women, you have to take it case by
>case.
True enough, although realities shouldn't be ignored, IMO, such as
"dumbing down" physical requirements for the _sole_ purpose of getting
the right number of women in the mix. Making the requirements more
relative to reality is something else again.
>
>>> 9. When you first got together with your spouse/lover she
>>> was thin and hot; as the years went by she became
>>> overweight. Do you accept her still or leave her?
>>
>>> I love her for who she is not what she looks like
>>
>> Yup.
>
>My wife is my best friend and life partner. Looks are unimportant.
Love is blind, too. But looks fade, and a nasty personality often
gets worse.
>
>>> 10. What is the first thing you notice about a girl when you
>>> first meet her?
>>
>> Depends on which aspect of her is the first one I perceive -- if I'm
>> seated, and she sits down across a table from me, saying "Hi", the
>> first thing I'll see is her torso, the fIrst thing I'll hear is her
>> greeting, and if they're simultaneous, then they'd each be half of the
>> first thing I'd notice about her. Sometimes I notice hair first, or a
>> face. Basically, it varies. Unfortunately, this answer was unavailable...
>
>Depends on the women. For that matter it applies to anyone, different things
>stands out on different people.
>
>>> 11. Who should be 'in charge' in a marriage?
>>
>>> husband and wife should be equal in everything
>>
>> Uh-huh.
>
>We all have our strengths and weaknesses. My wife takes care of the bills,
>she is much better at it. I cook (when I have time) as I am by far better at
>it.
>
>>> 12. Is there such a thing as the 'stronger or weaker sex'?
>>
>>> No there is no such thing..men and women are equal
>>
>> O'course!
>
>I've seen women kicks mens asses. In fact I worked on a commercial project
>that had these two women running the pipefitter crew. There was no way I
>would want to tangle with them and I'm no punk.
Yep, BTDT. I've also known women who wern't up to the job do the
blink-blink, flirt flirt to get by in thier job - then bitch about
"femeinism" injust as ruthlessly as someone else in this thread has
done. Now _that_ is the real kind of hypocrite, as opposed to someone
who fails to spout goodthink jargon but does the right thing.
>
>>
>>> 13. Frank likes to drink wine, bake, knit and does ballet.
>>> He doesn't like watching sports, rarely swears, reads alot
>>> and is always gentle. Is frank gay?
>>
>>> No, he's just got class
>>
>> Well, actually, he *could* be gay, yes -- but you can't tell from that
>> bullshit lits.
>
>Some men have effeminate qualities but are not gay.
>
>>> 14. Are patriarchal religions oppressive to women? (such as
>>> eve being blamed for humans being cast from eden, not
>>> allowing women to be preists,women having to wear veils,
>>> women being taught to obey their husbands,..)
>>
>>> Yes they are very oppressive
>>
>> Quite.
>
>Agreed, very oppresive.
Don't entirely agree. Terming something "patriarchal" no more makes
it opressive than tagging something else "matriarchal". Actions
count for much, much more than labels.
>
>>> 15. You are engaged to be married. Your partner tells you
>>> she doesn't want to change her last name...she wants to keep
>>> her maiden name and not take yours. Are you ok with this?
>>
>>> Yes, its just a name...I respect her beliefs
>>
>>> Couldn't she just do the hyphenated thing? no problem...heck
>>> I'll take HER last name!
>>
>> I picked the first answer, but either of the latter would do. It's just a
>> name.
>
>I want my wife to have my name. Less confusion, and I don't have to watch
>some asshole hit on her in front of me because he doesn't know we are
>married.
Do the male members of a relationship get a say, even?
>
>>> 16. When giving your new-born child a last name.....
>>
>>> If my spouse/partner wants to we can give the baby a
>>> hyphenated combination of both of our last names
>>
>> Certainly!
>
>Agreed!
See above. Hyphenated or not, each partner gets a say in the matter.
If they agree, whichever way, well enough. If not, then the
possibility of children should be reconsedered.
>
>>> 17. Is it ok for children to play with toys normally used by
>>> the opposite gender?
>>
>>> Yes, let the kids play with what ever they want to!
>>
>> Oh, absolutely.
>
>I think the question isn't relevent to women's rights. It would be a more
>appropriate question in another type of test.
Well put.
>
>>> 18. Sojourner Truth....
>>
>>> She's awsome...."Ain't I a Woman?"
>>
>> Dig it!
>
>Who is she?
The object of a loaded question. One need not adore ST in order to be
a "feminist". Just another of the false-to-fact questions in this
little gag.
>
>>> 19. What is your opinion of women in general? I love to have
>>> sex with them
>>
>>> Some are good some are bad
>>
>>> They have come a long way in terms of historical progress
>>
>> Picked the latter, but the first also applies.
>
>As with anyone, there are good and bad.
>
>>> 20. When you have sex with your spouse/lover, how important
>>> is it to you that she enjoys it?
>>
>>> Very important, her enjoyment is my goal
>>
>>> it is important that we both reach orgasm and that we are
>>> both getting what we want
>>
>> I picked one of these, but I can't remember which.
>
>Depends on if she is in the mood, sometimes she just gives it to me without
>being in the mood and she doesn't always want an orgasm.
Sexuality is so central to humanity that it gets dragged in where it
doesn't belong. Is is sexist for a male dominant to have a consensual
sexual relationship with a female submissive? What about the other
way around? If the answers don't match, then there's that word again.
I heard of a couple at a very left-wing SF-type convention getting
reamed by all and sundry there because for the costume contest he went
as a barbarian (or such), and she went as his elvish sex-slave.
Totally voluntary for both. That sort of shit is what makes sane
women reject the tag "feminist", and no amount of falsly squalling
"hypocrite" makes it so, so long as that hateful nonsense goes on
among "feminists". First remove the beam vrom your own eye..." and
all that.
Bookman
I ran it again and tried to figure the "right" answers, and got a 59.
Tweaked it, and got a 60. Prolly the max, but I'm bored with it now.
>
>But it wasn't well-written.
Exacly.
>
>> IMO, it says much more about the question-writer than the poll-takers.
>
>Alas, I fear you're right. That particular feminist isn't a very clear
>thinker.
To say the least. IMO she mistakes her prejudices for "feminism" and
re perceptions for reality.
>
>> Out of curiosity, how do you feel about Robert A. Heinlein?
>
>Best sf writer of the 20th century.
I've got a suggestion for you. Drop me an email, mind the munge.
>
>> ESL!
>
>ESL!
The Demon Prince of Absurdity
> : What do you think
> : YOU can tell me about sex differences, dear? Nothing as I expected.
> : Now run along and suck some more patriachal nonsense.
> :
> : Marg
>
> Your posture toward me in this post is quite hostile, Marg. I'm guessing
> it's because you turn general issues into personal issues sometimes. I
> didn't mean to confront you, only to discuss (with the group) something of
> interest.
Well, the personal _is_ political, though, and vice versa. Politicians
like to obscure that point in loads of (usually ego-related) bullshit,
much (even most) of the tIme, but it's always true, for all humans.
Humans in places of privilege can generally manage to insulate
themselves from the more negative effects, mind you. OTOH, that doesn't
equate to /taking/ things personally...But usenet is a text medium,
binaries aside, and emoticons often carry little real emotional weight.
Bookman
wrote:
>
>"Bookman" <thebo...@kc.rr.comNULL> wrote in message
>news:6444f2l6j2reqg9ca...@4ax.com...
>> N.B. On the EPI, I've seen a couple of articles which claim that
>> women who live like men, i.e. equivalent education, career choice, and
>> most of all, no children, have pay that is equal or superior to men.
>
>And just how many men do YOU know who have no children?
Whether by accident or intent, you have misunderstood me. "No
children" means, in fine, "give birth to no children". On thatt, I
have never known any men who have given birth to children and needed
maternity leave for it. I expect that there have been men who have
taken a few years off in order to parent through the crucial first few
years of their child's life. Do they have the "same pay" when they
return? I'd expect not, but if you have hard evidence to the
contrary, please do post your sources.
>As well, I consider
>this to be playing dirty pool.
What, noting that when women live in the male role, they get paid like
men? What's "dirty pool" about that? Or is it that when women behave
diferently, they get paid differently? I thought you were insisting
on equality.