What Women's Studies is NOT
Chive Mynde
Women's Studies is Not:
Anti-Male:
It is an intellectual and political means of seeking equality and
justice for all people.
Victim Oriented:
It emphasizes women's potential for achievement and leadership.
Anti-Family:
It validates and examines the many forms family relations take in the
United States and around the world.
A Fad:
It has a 30-year history of scholarship about women and gender that
transforms conventional fields of knowledge
-
Science is not belief, but the will to find out.
Michael Snyder
>
> http://womens-studies.ohio-state.edu/general/geninfo.htm
>
> Women's Studies is Not:
>
> Anti-Male:
> It is an intellectual and political means of seeking equality and
> justice for all people.
Must be why it has the word "Women" in its name...
Bob
Chive Mynde wrote:
> http://womens-studies.ohio-state.edu/general/geninfo.htm
>
> Women's Studies is Not:
>
> Anti-Male:
> It is an intellectual and political means of seeking equality and
> justice for all people.
Women's studies IS: Anti male hate propaganda and education. The
propaganda lies notwithstanding.
> Victim Oriented:
> It emphasizes women's potential for achievement and leadership.
Women's studies IS: Anti male hate propaganda and education. It
emphasizes victimology as a primary method of propaganda.
> Anti-Family:
> It validates and examines the many forms family relations take in the
> United States and around the world.
Women's studies IS: Anti male hate propaganda and education. By teaching
anti-male hate to young women it teaches and promotes the destruction of
healthy heterosexual relationships.
> A Fad:
> It has a 30-year history of scholarship about women and gender that
> transforms conventional fields of knowledge
Women's studies IS: Anti male hate propaganda and education. The
propaganda lies notwithstanding.
> Science is not belief, but the will to find out.
But hate is a belief.
Bob
Rich
Chive Mynde wrote:
>
> http://womens-studies.ohio-state.edu/general/geninfo.htm
>
> Women's Studies is Not:
About anything but women. It's sexist people.
Rich
Mitchell Holman
>http://womens-studies.ohio-state.edu/general/geninfo.htm
>
>Women's Studies is Not:
>
>Anti-Male:
>It is an intellectual and political means of seeking equality and
>justice for all people.
>
So why is it not called Gender Studies
or Equality Studies?
Nobody
There are a few colleges and universities that offer Gender Studies
rather than Women's Studies. Would be interesting to note whether and
how the information presented or the philosophy espoused is different
...
Philip Lewis
"Nobody" <now...@nohow.net> wrote in message
news:3BE0082A...@nohow.net...
I ahve been on listserv's where some of the participants have spoken about
their involvement or participation in "Gender Studies" what it usually
amounts to is proseletysing a feminist "take" no matter which "gender" is
the subject of "study".
Phil
> ...
Kurtz
Government endorsed sexism, I might add.
Michael Snyder
Nobody wrote in message <3BE0082A...@nohow.net>...
Probably not different at all -- but the majority of colleges and universities
call it what it really is -- Women's. Studies for, about, and for the benefit
of women. Nothing remotely concerning equality or justice for ALL people.
Bob
Mitchell Holman wrote:
As anyone who reads these days knows, "Gender Studies" is a euphemism for women's studies anyway. That lie
doesn't make it any different. Its just one more lie from the bigots.
Bob
Bob
Nobody wrote:
"Gender studies" is just a lying euphamism for women's studies. It's the same old bigotry with another lie to
hide it. You can tell they are lying if they use that title.
Bob
John LaVoy
Chive Mynde wrote:
> http://womens-studies.ohio-state.edu/general/geninfo.htm
>
> Women's Studies is Not:
>
>
>
> A Fad:
> It has a 30-year history of scholarship about women and gender that
> transforms conventional fields of knowledge
It has a 30 year history of arguing that such principles as logic and
evidence are not necessary in the field because there are alternative
ways of "knowing" things. It has a 30 year history of arguing that such
male concepts as peer review are unnecessary and oppressive.
And, apparently, it has a 30 year history of fooling you.
>
Chive Mynde
> Chive Mynde wrote:
>
> > http://womens-studies.ohio-state.edu/general/geninfo.htm
> >
> > Women's Studies is Not:
> >
> >
> >
> > A Fad:
> > It has a 30-year history of scholarship about women and gender that
> > transforms conventional fields of knowledge
>
> It has a 30 year history of arguing that such principles as logic and
> evidence are not necessary in the field because there are alternative
> ways of "knowing" things.
Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
> It has a 30 year history of arguing that such
> male concepts as peer review are unnecessary and oppressive.
Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
> And, apparently, it has a 30 year history of fooling you.
Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
HTH.
- Chive
Philip Lewis
"Chive Mynde" <chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:ccd55c9c.01103...@posting.google.com...
John Lavoy is not the only person to criticise the doctrinaire nature of
womens studies it has also been heavilly criticised by Australias first
FEMALE proffessor of politics - See mypost entitled "Australia's Australia's
first woman professor of politics finds womens studies "objectionable"! "
Phil
Andre Lieven
One might also want to add to that, the book about wimmins studies,
entitked " Professing Feminism ". It has two co-authors, one of whom
is the indefatigatble Daphne Patai.
It well demolishes the so called " academe " going on in there,
and Rene Denfeld's " The New Victorians " takes the subject on,
as well.
So, if Jive wants evidence, there are two fine books.
Game, set and match. <g>
Andre
--
" The noblest achievement of the imagination is to make time run some
other way, and terminate in beauty and forgiveness "
David Gelernter, " 1939 "
Michael Snyder
Philip Lewis wrote in message <9rq7bc$vh6v9$1...@ID-59530.news.dfncis.de>...
>
>"Chive Mynde" <chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>news:ccd55c9c.01103...@posting.google.com...
>> John LaVoy <jla...@pobox.upenn.edu> wrote in message
>news:<3BE04F76...@pobox.upenn.edu>...
>> > Chive Mynde wrote:
>> >
>> > > http://womens-studies.ohio-state.edu/general/geninfo.htm
>> > >
>> > > Women's Studies is Not:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > A Fad:
>> > > It has a 30-year history of scholarship about women and gender that
>> > > transforms conventional fields of knowledge
>> >
>> > It has a 30 year history of arguing that such principles as logic and
>> > evidence are not necessary in the field because there are alternative
>> > ways of "knowing" things.
>>
>> Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
I got your evidence right here: see below.
>>
>> > It has a 30 year history of arguing that such
>> > male concepts as peer review are unnecessary and oppressive.
>>
>> Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
>>
>> > And, apparently, it has a 30 year history of fooling you.
>>
>> Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
>
>
>John Lavoy is not the only person to criticise the doctrinaire nature of
>womens studies it has also been heavilly criticised by Australias first
>FEMALE proffessor of politics - See mypost entitled "Australia's Australia's
>first woman professor of politics finds womens studies "objectionable"! "
See also:
"Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World
of Women's Studies" by Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge
"Heterophobia: Sexual Harassment and the Future of Feminism"
by Daphne Patai
"The Morning After: Sex, Fear, and Feminism" by Katie Roiphe
"The New Victorians: A Young Woman's Challenge to the
Old Feminist Order" by Rene Denfeld
Philip Lewis
"Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:9rqjr8$cnk$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
Thanks for the refs - Daphne Patai is formidable' - I haven't read Rene
Denfields efforts - but I am now inspired to do so. :-o)
Phil
Philip Lewis
"Michael Snyder" <msn...@redhat.com> wrote in message
news:KJ4E7.200$p4.2...@newsrump.sjc.telocity.net...
Excellent refs -btw did we miss out Sommers classic "Who Stole Feminism"??
Phil
>
>
>
Andre Lieven
>> is the indefatigatble Daphne Patai.
>>
>> It well demolishes the so called " academe " going on in there,
>> and Rene Denfeld's " The New Victorians " takes the subject on,
>> as well.
>>
>> So, if Jive wants evidence, there are two fine books.
>>
>> Game, set and match. <g>
>
> Thanks for the refs - Daphne Patai is formidable' - I haven't read Rene
> Denfields efforts - but I am now inspired to do so. :-o)
Its one error is that the author seems to think that modern feminism
is salvagable. But, that really only comes in towards the end of the
book, and before that, you get a wealth of information, cites and
quotes about why women are abandoning feminism in droves.
With plenty of reasons for this, that feminism is anti-man, and
that many women don't agree with hating men.
Its common enough that it even made it as a throw away joke
( A real joke, "jet" ) on the Simpsons, where, in one scene,
someone is reading an issue of Ms. Magazine, with the title
cover reading " Dating and Hating: Do They Mix ? "
Philip Lewis
Well it is possible that she put that in to try and avoid upsetting a
"sensitive" publisher so that she could claim that the book wasn't really
anti-feminist - but thinking about this the real reason is that having a
well defined (even if heavilly flawed!) social theory could perhaps be
som,eewhat "addictive" and the thought of meeting the chaos unprepared could
be daunting for all those who once had cosy little "crutches" to lean
upon...
> and before that, you get a wealth of information, cites and
> quotes about why women are abandoning feminism in droves.
Yes - the time is ripe for a revolution in social philosphy - too bad that
most of the "expected" places for such germs of potential wisdom are still
hamstrung by political correctness!
>
> With plenty of reasons for this, that feminism is anti-man, and
> that many women don't agree with hating men.
>
> Its common enough that it even made it as a throw away joke
> ( A real joke, "jet" ) on the Simpsons, where, in one scene,
> someone is reading an issue of Ms. Magazine, with the title
> cover reading " Dating and Hating: Do They Mix ? "
*LOL* I will have to look out for that episode with a blank VCR tape handy!
Phil
Andre Lieven
> "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
> news:9rrmic$t6h$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
>> "Philip Lewis" (phill...@hotmail.com) writes:
>> > "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
>> > news:9rqjr8$cnk$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
>> >> "Philip Lewis" (phill...@hotmail.com) writes:
> be daunting for all those who once had cosy little "crutches" to lean
> upon...
Could be. It did read as if she did think that some sort of good
could come out of a salvage attempt. In that, were a genuine humanist
movement made from it, mainly in taking aboard the real women who
are more humanistic in their views about life, women, and men.
>> and before that, you get a wealth of information, cites and
>> quotes about why women are abandoning feminism in droves.
>
> Yes - the time is ripe for a revolution in social philosphy - too bad that
> most of the "expected" places for such germs of potential wisdom are still
> hamstrung by political correctness!
Then, that just shows one place where we have to fight it, right ?
>> With plenty of reasons for this, that feminism is anti-man, and
>> that many women don't agree with hating men.
>>
>> Its common enough that it even made it as a throw away joke
>> ( A real joke, "jet" ) on the Simpsons, where, in one scene,
>> someone is reading an issue of Ms. Magazine, with the title
>> cover reading " Dating and Hating: Do They Mix ? "
>
> *LOL* I will have to look out for that episode with a blank VCR tape handy!
It was a very surprising moment, thats for sure. I wish that I could
tell you something about the specific episode, but I don't know them
well enough to do that.
There is a fair amount of rather " subversive " humour in the show.
One early 2001 episode had Bart writing on the chalkboard, in the
opening, " I will not scare the vice-president "...
Michael Snyder
;-) Can't be quoting her for _everything_! Gotta give
someone else a chance now and then.
Philip Lewis
"Michael Snyder" <msn...@cygnus.com> wrote in message
news:3BE1D89C...@cygnus.com...
Yeah well it was just a "stage aside" for the potential benefit of any
lurking newbies. ;-o)
Phil
Boinkers
btw, somers is NOT a feminist, that's a media bullshit
"Michael Snyder" <msn...@cygnus.com> wrote in message
news:3BE1D89C...@cygnus.com...
John_Jones
"Boinkers" <mrsr...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:18qE7.127552$5h5.51...@news3.rdc2.on.home.com...
> if ya wants more references, let me know :)
>
> btw, somers is NOT a feminist, that's a media bullshit
Somebody better tell Sommers, then. She certainly thinks she's a
feminist. Of course, I expected her to get drummed-out of the
movement by the likes of those such as yourself.
Society
news:3BE0082A...@nohow.net...
>
> Mitchell Holman wrote:
> >
> >
> > >http://womens-studies.ohio-state.edu/general/geninfo.htm
> > >
> > >Women's Studies is Not:
> > >
> > >Anti-Male:
> > >It is an intellectual and political means of seeking equality
> > >and justice for all people.
> >
> > So why is it not called Gender Studies or Equality Studies?
Lessee, because men aren't considered people?
BTW, isn't pursuit of "political means" inappropriate
in a State sponsored, coercively funded institution
within a democratic republic?
Devin, like so many other feminist true believers
and their fellow travellers, is amusingly self-refuting
in his posts. :-) Ohio State's Women's Studies
program isn't "anti-male" when it can't include
men in "all people"? Feminism is soooo riddled
with internal contradictions.
> There are a few colleges and universities that offer
> Gender Studies rather than Women's Studies.
> Would be interesting to note whether and how
> the information presented or the philosophy
> espoused is different.
California State University, Stanislaus www.csustan.edu
has a program named "Gender Studies". D'ya suppose
it's a pasted-on name for disguise purposes? All the courses
in the department are coded "WMST". Here are examples
of one lower and one upper division course, respectively:
WMST 2020 Introduction to Women's Studies (3 units).
An introduction to the political, literary, and critical history
of feminist thinking... Satisfies G.E. area D2.
WMST 3000 Women's Studies Colloquium (3 units).
An in-depth examination of current issues contemporary
women face. ...
There are no courses named "Men's Studies" *anything*.
Kinda gives the game away.
--
All excuses for feminism depend on censorship
of reality to appear plausible to rubes, boobs,
and graduates of clown colleges.
Michael Snyder
Boinkers wrote in message <18qE7.127552$5h5.51...@news3.rdc2.on.home.com>...
>if ya wants more references, let me know :)
>
>btw, somers is NOT a feminist, that's a media bullshit
Glad to hear it -- I respect her more now.
Tom Smith
soc...@feminism.is.invalid says...
> Devin, like so many other feminist true believers
> and their fellow travellers, is amusingly self-refuting
> in his posts. :-) Ohio State's Women's Studies
> program isn't "anti-male" when it can't include
> men in "all people"? Feminism is soooo riddled
> with internal contradictions.
Society, you're so damn good at this, how are you at public speaking?
I'm shopping for good masculist public speakers. Can you do it? Do you
know of any anti-feminists that are good at it?
The best I have seen so far are Mel Feit and Matt Daniels of the Marriage
Alliance, but he doen't have that ideological pizazz that you have.
Tom
Philip Lewis
>
> btw, somers is NOT a feminist, that's a media bullshit
So what IS a "feminist" in your opinion???
Phil
Boinkers
a feminist advocates for womyn's rights and since there are many "camps" she
does so using the theoretical preference she is comfortable with........for
example, here is a list of the different theories she might
adopt..........she may also adopt portions of more than one
marxist feminism
liberal feminism
socialist feminism
psychoanalytical feminism
post-modern feminism
post-structural feminism
material feminism
international feminism
transformative feminism
radical feminism
anti-racist feminism
anyone who tells you a "conservative" feminism exists, is lying - Somers
falls under this category and so does REAL Womyn
i have a degree in womyn studies, i would put myself somewhere between
radical/post-structuralist/socialist and at times radical.............all
depends on which problem i am investigating
i am a legal scholar as well, so i specifically examine what in law is
sexist, racist and class based (all of it :) )
they "claim" to be feminists, but their agenda is anti-feminism which is one
of the reasons the general public gets so confused about what IS feminism
if u want a short description of any of them, just ask or go get some
primary sources...............do not assume the Internet gives accurate
information..........i've been on sites claiming to be feminist that were
actually dedicated to misogyny..........and sometimes its so subtle, u need
a degree in this to decipher it...........i have that degree, i know the
discourse of feminism versus the rhetoric of misogyny
hope this helps
:)
"Philip Lewis" <phill...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9ru6ed$ufm8f$1...@ID-59530.news.dfncis.de...
Andre Lieven
> In article <9GqE7.1416$qL3.1...@nntp1.onemain.com>,
> soc...@feminism.is.invalid says...
>
>> Devin, like so many other feminist true believers
>> and their fellow travellers, is amusingly self-refuting
>> in his posts. :-) Ohio State's Women's Studies
>> program isn't "anti-male" when it can't include
>> men in "all people"? Feminism is soooo riddled
>> with internal contradictions.
>
> Society, you're so damn good at this, how are you at public speaking?
> I'm shopping for good masculist public speakers. Can you do it? Do you
> know of any anti-feminists that are good at it?
Well, assuming that i could get there, I could do this sort of thing.
I do public speaking very frequently, mostly at sf conventions. I've
done some where I was the sole speaker, as well as panel discussions.
And ( cough, cough ), I've done well enough with it, that I can often
get a speaking gig at any con I want to do so at.
> The best I have seen so far are Mel Feit and Matt Daniels of the Marriage
> Alliance, but he doen't have that ideological pizazz that you have.
I might need some " polishing " to get it down to sound-bit-isms,
though. <g>
MH__
>what is a feminist? well, i am one.............
>
>a feminist advocates for womyn's rights and since there are many "camps" she
>does so using the theoretical preference she is comfortable with........for
>example, here is a list of the different theories she might
>adopt..........she may also adopt portions of more than one
>
>marxist feminism
>liberal feminism
>socialist feminism
>psychoanalytical feminism
>post-modern feminism
>post-structural feminism
>material feminism
>international feminism
>transformative feminism
>radical feminism
>anti-racist feminism
When do we get naked feminism?
Bob
There is a National Association of Men's Studies. They have
a web site at http://mensstudies.org/ They have national
conventions, call for papers, etc.
They used to keep a nation wide list of all the men's
studies courses taught. Last time I checked their web site
the list had a course in 1999 as its most recent entry.
Today I see that the list is no longer on the server.
Bob
Bob
Women Studies is NOT:
Not studies
Not equal
Not educational
Not honest
Not truthful
Not right
Not free
Not intellectual
Not academic
Not studious
Not scholastic
Not scholarly
Not learned
Not friendly
Not fair
Not just
Not welcome
Not moral
Not reasonable
Not trustworthy
Not feminine
Not heterosexual
Not motherly
Not sacred
Not safe
Not wholesome
Not good
Not compatible
Not genuine
Not loving
Not tolerant
Not amicable
Not polite
Not kind
Not cordial
Not convivial
Not amiable
Not sociable
Not good-natured
Not agreeable
Not family friendly
Not happy
Not sane
Not normal
Not sane
Not sound
Not prudent
Not judicious
Not shrewd
Not wise
Not sensible
Not natural
Not positive
Not constructive
Not beneficial to heterosexual women
Not anything other than hate propaganda
Not acceptable
Stephen Morgan
> what is a feminist? well, i am one.............
You certainly are.
> a feminist advocates for womyn's rights and since there are many "camps" she
> does so using the theoretical preference she is comfortable with........for
> example, here is a list of the different theories she might
> adopt..........she may also adopt portions of more than one
Clever tactic, that one.
> marxist feminism
A movement to oppress the poor under the guise of marxism.
> liberal feminism
> socialist feminism
A movement to oppress the poor by pretending to be socialist.
> psychoanalytical feminism
A movement to oppress the poor with their control of psychology.
> post-modern feminism
> post-structural feminism
Movements to shield other types of feminism.
> material feminism
ŁŁŁ feminism.
> international feminism
Commies.
> transformative feminism
Movement to transform our society into a society more oppressive for the
poor.
> radical feminism
Kill the poor.
> anti-racist feminism
Mythological, feminism is based on racism, sexism and oppression of the
poor.
> anyone who tells you a "conservative" feminism exists, is lying - Somers
> falls under this category and so does REAL Womyn
Sommers is a feminist.
> i have a degree in womyn studies, i would put myself somewhere between
> radical/post-structuralist/socialist and at times radical.............all
> depends on which problem i am investigating
You know of only one problem, that men and the poor are insufficiently
oppressed.
> i am a legal scholar as well, so i specifically examine what in law is
> sexist, racist and class based (all of it :) )
No doubt do that you can find ways to further oppress poor men.
> they "claim" to be feminists, but their agenda is anti-feminism which is one
> of the reasons the general public gets so confused about what IS feminism
Feminism is an anti-man, anti-poor hate movement.
> if u want a short description of any of them, just ask or go get some
> primary sources...............do not assume the Internet gives accurate
> information..........i've been on sites claiming to be feminist that were
> actually dedicated to misogyny..........and sometimes its so subtle, u need
> a degree in this to decipher it...........i have that degree, i know the
> discourse of feminism versus the rhetoric of misogyny
You are a lunatic, you know only your hatred for your betters, men and
the poor. Just wait, we'll get you.
--
Hugh You never knew, did you? You thought lettuces just
came in little sterilised polythene bags, and grew
on supermarket shelves. Never occurred to you
that a lettuce might have feelings, hopes, dreams, a
family ...
-- Hugh Laurie, "Chicken"
John LaVoy
Chive Mynde wrote:
>
> >
> > It has a 30 year history of arguing that such principles as logic and
> > evidence are not necessary in the field because there are alternative
> > ways of "knowing" things.
>
> Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
Try this one: I liked it a lot. Or you could read some Paglia. Heard her talk last night: She's a
bit of a loon, but has the right idea at least.
http://www.salon.com/jan97/women970113.html
>
> > It has a 30 year history of arguing that such
> > male concepts as peer review are unnecessary and oppressive.
>
> Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
God, not again.
>
> > And, apparently, it has a 30 year history of fooling you.
>
> Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
You are my evidence.
>
Bob
In other words, all feminism is feminism, and all feminism
is pro female sexism.
Bob
Artemesia
>
> When do we get naked feminism?
Marg, Parg, Asia and Chive Nekkid?
Eeeeeeuuuuuuuuuuwwwwwwwww!
Please, not in prime time!
Artemesia
Chive Mynde
Thanks for your honesty.
Chive Mynde
> "Chive Mynde" <chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:ccd55c9c.01103...@posting.google.com...
> > John LaVoy <jla...@pobox.upenn.edu> wrote in message
> news:<3BE04F76...@pobox.upenn.edu>...
> > > Chive Mynde wrote:
> > >
> > > > http://womens-studies.ohio-state.edu/general/geninfo.htm
> > > >
> > > > Women's Studies is Not:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > A Fad:
> > > > It has a 30-year history of scholarship about women and gender that
> > > > transforms conventional fields of knowledge
> > >
> > > It has a 30 year history of arguing that such principles as logic and
> > > evidence are not necessary in the field because there are alternative
> > > ways of "knowing" things.
> >
> > Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
> >
> > > male concepts as peer review are unnecessary and oppressive.
> >
> > Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
> >
> > > And, apparently, it has a 30 year history of fooling you.
> >
> > Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
>
>
> John Lavoy is not the only person to criticise the doctrinaire nature of
> womens studies it has also been heavilly criticised by Australias first
> FEMALE proffessor of politics -
Where's the evidence for his claims?
Where's the evidence for your claims?
Oh, that's right -- anti-feminists don't require evidence since
their claims are based on FAITH and religious BELIEFS.
Thanks for clearing that up.
> See mypost entitled "Australia's Australia's
> first woman professor of politics finds womens studies "objectionable"! "
>
> Phil
Why, so you can waste some more of my time?
No thanks.
Either start producing evidence or admit that anti-feminism
is a RELIGION subscribed by a religious congregation of
bitter, lonely boys.
HTH.
Bob
Boinkers wrote:
> i have a degree in womyn studies,
Hate, hate, hate. I guess if you call organized hate
propaganda a "study." Pathetic morons.
Your posts come right out of the anti-male hate propaganda
taught in those hate lectures. Now it will take you another
20 years before you're fit for human consumption -- if some
decent human being doesn't eliminate you first.
>i would put myself somewhere between
> radical/post-structuralist/socialist and at times radical.............all
> depends on which problem i am investigating
A radical hate monger is about it. Yep, a graduate of
"women's studies."
"Investigating" Don't waste our time.
> i am a legal scholar as well, so i specifically examine what in law is
> sexist, racist and class based (all of it :) )
You specialize in racist, sexist, and hate propaganda.
That's obvious. You don't need to brag.
Get back to us when you're dry behind the ears.
Bob
Boinkers
"Bob" <bobx...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3BE30D93...@hotmail.com...
Boinkers
John Jones
> whatever
whatever
John Jones
> that all u got out of it? what's yer iq?
ten points higher than yours.
Bob
propaganda.
Bob
Chive Mynde
Women's Studies is Not:
Anti-Male:
It is an intellectual and political means of seeking equality and
justice for all people.
Victim Oriented:
It emphasizes women's potential for achievement and leadership.
Anti-Family:
It validates and examines the many forms family relations take in the
United States and around the world.
A Fad:
It has a 30-year history of scholarship about women and gender that
transforms conventional fields of knowledge
-
Bob
Ohio State Women's Studies has to put these denials on their web site
because everybody knows the truth about women's studies. It doesn't
matter how many times they post these lies, everybody knows the truth
about women's studies.
Bob
goddess
"Artemesia" <artemes...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:c13fbe22.01110...@posting.google.com...
Such a *mature* comment from an individual who wants to sue others.
Marg
> Artemesia
Angilion
I wouldn't have said you were that stupid. Not at all.
You do yourself an injustice.
--
Always remember you're unique.
Just like everyone else. (Anon)
Artemesia
Yes, dear, but not Libelous.
pehaps your partner the professor can explain the difference to you.
>
> Marg
>
> > Artemesia
Chive Mynde
More lies from Artemesia.
There is nothing libelous about asking if you are psychotic or
on anti-psychotic medication.
Additionally, you have demonstrated mental instability on the
group and you have admitted to having serious mental problems.
Finally, your posts demonstrate and substantiate your experience
of "psychotic" events -- events so serious that you almost
committed suicide and endangered the lives of others in the
process.
I've posted the message ids for those claims of yours, and
I'm willing to do it again.
See you in court.
HTH.
- Chive
Unreasonablewomyn
am available for legal consultation, is this a criminal or civil case?
i await further information and instructions, no retainer necessary
John Jones
"Unreasonablewomyn" <loui...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:550d8255.01110...@posting.google.com...
[...]
>
> am available for legal consultation, is this a criminal or civil
case?
No thanks, I prefer literate legal representation.
Parg2000
>Yes, dear, but not Libelous.
>pehaps your partner the professor can explain the difference to you.
{Parg} Ok, I'll bite. What is the "libelous" statement you think was posted,
and what is the case number of your alleged law suit? Or is that something you
have just directed at Chyve?
>>
>> > Artemesia
>
>
>
>
>
>
Artemesia
> > >
> > > Such a *mature* comment from an individual who wants to sue others.
> >
> > Yes, dear, but not Libelous.
> > pehaps your partner the professor can explain the difference to you.
>
> More lies from Artemesia.
Where is the lie in the above comment, Devin?
Call it it one doesn't make it so.
Why don't you try to learn the difference between substance and
bullshit
>
> There is nothing libelous about asking if you are psychotic or
> on anti-psychotic medication.
But that's not quite what you did, is it Chive?
Revisionism......or a pathetic attempt to change events by repeating
your sad little vision again and again.
Unforetunatly, your track record with the rest of the net works
against you.
It's very easy to identify your consistent trend in posting viscious
attacks that slip just over the line into libel. You've done it again
and again with numerous people before and after me.
>
> Additionally, you have demonstrated mental instability on the
> group and you have admitted to having serious mental problems.
>
> Finally, your posts demonstrate and substantiate your experience
> of "psychotic" events -- events so serious that you almost
> committed suicide and endangered the lives of others in the
> process.
There you go with psychotic again. Exactly what are your
qualifications to determine which actions are and or not psychotic?
It happens to be a legal discription of a every specific psycological
condition from which I do not suffer.
BTW: the fact that you put quotations around it does ot diminish the
fact that you've just accused me of this again. The medical community
would not agree with you. And that is where you have made your fatal
flaw.
How are you planning to wiggle out of this one, you little creep?
I've noticed that your loove fest with Parg has definatly heated up
now that you are endenger of financial ruin as a result of this
lawsuit.
And, the beauty of it all is that you seem to be unable to stop
yourself.....not so good at self control, are you, chivito?
And your next victim will have proof positive that they are not your
first victim, merely the latest in a long, long line.
One wonders what is wrong with you that has made you such a bully?
Insecure about something, Chive?
Why do you insist on pursuing this little tirade against me,
a person you discribe as mentally ill, and who is old enough to be
your mother?
Remember, your defense is gong to have to be that I am in fact
nuts.......so how does it make you look to continue to taunt me?
Good think you call yourself a feminist. I don't think decent, red
blooded men would call you one of their own.
Now go lick your wounds, and save your money for your legal fees.
Artemesia
Philip Lewis
> what is a feminist? well, i am one.............
>
> a feminist advocates for womyn's rights and since there are many "camps"
she
> does so using the theoretical preference she is comfortable
with........for
> example, here is a list of the different theories she might
> adopt..........she may also adopt portions of more than one
>
> marxist feminism
> liberal feminism
> socialist feminism
> psychoanalytical feminism
> post-modern feminism
> post-structural feminism
> material feminism
> international feminism
> transformative feminism
> radical feminism
> anti-racist feminism
>
> anyone who tells you a "conservative" feminism exists, is lying - Somers
> falls under this category and so does REAL Womyn
Cathy Young is a liberal feminist so is most of the IWF.
>
>
> i have a degree in womyn studies,
Believe me - that doesn't impress me much! *lol*
i would put myself somewhere between
> radical/post-structuralist/socialist and at times radical.............all
> depends on which problem i am investigating
..or how you are "feeling".! *chuckle*
>
> i am a legal scholar as well, so i specifically examine what in law is
> sexist, racist and class based (all of it :) )
Did you read the article I posted about "feminist law" - quite a hoot eh?
>
> they "claim" to be feminists, but their agenda is anti-feminism
There you are assuming that their is only ONE position on issues and yet all
the "flavours" on your "approved" list have differing views on many issues -
btw did I mention that Warren Farrel is also a Liberal Feminist??
> which is one
> of the reasons the general public gets so confused about what IS feminism
B\S the main reason that the public gets confused about feminism is
precisely because feminism IS UNREASONABLE!
ciao
Phil
>
>
> if u want a short description of any of them, just ask or go get some
> primary sources...............do not assume the Internet gives accurate
> information..........i've been on sites claiming to be feminist that were
> actually dedicated to misogyny..........and sometimes its so subtle, u
need
> a degree in this to decipher it...........i have that degree, i know the
> discourse of feminism versus the rhetoric of misogyny
>
> hope this helps
> :)
>
>
> "Philip Lewis" <phill...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9ru6ed$ufm8f$1...@ID-59530.news.dfncis.de...
> >
> > "Boinkers" <mrsr...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
> > news:18qE7.127552$5h5.51...@news3.rdc2.on.home.com...
> > > if ya wants more references, let me know :)
> > >
> > > btw, somers is NOT a feminist, that's a media bullshit
> >
> > So what IS a "feminist" in your opinion???
> >
> > Phil
> > >
> > > "Michael Snyder" <msn...@cygnus.com> wrote in message
> > > news:3BE1D89C...@cygnus.com...
> > > > Philip Lewis wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Michael Snyder" <msn...@redhat.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:KJ4E7.200$p4.2...@newsrump.sjc.telocity.net...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Philip Lewis wrote in message
> > > <9rq7bc$vh6v9$1...@ID-59530.news.dfncis.de>...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >"Chive Mynde" <chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > >news:ccd55c9c.01103...@posting.google.com...
> > > > > > >> John LaVoy <jla...@pobox.upenn.edu> wrote in message
> > > > > > >news:<3BE04F76...@pobox.upenn.edu>...
> > > > > > >> > Chive Mynde wrote:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > http://womens-studies.ohio-state.edu/general/geninfo.htm
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > Women's Studies is Not:
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > A Fad:
> > > > > > >> > > It has a 30-year history of scholarship about women and
> > gender
> > > that
> > > > > > >> > > transforms conventional fields of knowledge
> > > > > > >> >
Radical Boink
news:550d8255.01110...@posting.google.com...
> am available for legal consultation, is this a criminal or civil case?
>
> i await further information and instructions, no retainer necessary
No qualifications either. LOL.
RB
Artemesia
> > > >
> > > > Such a *mature* comment from an individual who wants to sue others.
> > >
> > > Yes, dear, but not Libelous.
> > > pehaps your partner the professor can explain the difference to you.
> >
> > More lies from Artemesia.
> >
> > There is nothing libelous about asking if you are psychotic or
> > on anti-psychotic medication.
> >
> > Additionally, you have demonstrated mental instability on the
> > group and you have admitted to having serious mental problems.
> >
> > Finally, your posts demonstrate and substantiate your experience
> > of "psychotic" events -- events so serious that you almost
> > committed suicide and endangered the lives of others in the
> > process.
> >
> > I've posted the message ids for those claims of yours, and
> > I'm willing to do it again.
> >
> > See you in court.
> >
> > HTH.
> >
> > - Chive
> >
> > Science is not belief, but the will to find out.
>
> am available for legal consultation, is this a criminal or civil case?
>
> i await further information and instructions, no retainer necessary
Thanks. I have representation, but never turn down a generous offer
like that.
Civil, although the little twit is probably judegement proof.
Now criminal is something I hadn't even considered. Since my primary
aim is to start a legal paper trail on this little shit, that my be
the quickest way.
Would you please e-mail me at the above address, and let me know how I
may contact you.
Thanks again.
Artemesia
Chive Mynde
>
> > > > >
> > > > > Such a *mature* comment from an individual who wants to sue others.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, dear, but not Libelous.
> > > > pehaps your partner the professor can explain the difference to you.
> > >
> > > More lies from Artemesia.
> > >
> > > There is nothing libelous about asking if you are psychotic or
> > > on anti-psychotic medication.
> > >
> > > Additionally, you have demonstrated mental instability on the
> > > group and you have admitted to having serious mental problems.
> > >
> > > Finally, your posts demonstrate and substantiate your experience
> > > of "psychotic" events -- events so serious that you almost
> > > committed suicide and endangered the lives of others in the
> > > process.
> > >
> > > I've posted the message ids for those claims of yours, and
> > > I'm willing to do it again.
> > >
> > > See you in court.
> > >
> > > HTH.
> > >
> > > - Chive
> > >
> > > Science is not belief, but the will to find out.
> >
> > am available for legal consultation, is this a criminal or civil case?
> >
> > i await further information and instructions, no retainer necessary
>
>
> Thanks. I have representation, but never turn down a generous offer
> like that.
> Civil, although the little twit is probably judegement proof.
Louise was talking to me, not you Artemesia.
Louise, there is no case. Artemesia is merely yet-another
anti-feminist who threatens feminists with SLAPP suits.
Do you know anything about harrassment, Louise? Because
that's what Artemesia does -- she harrasses people.
What's the matter, Art? Are you experiencing a psychotic
event again? Do you need anti-psychotic meds?
Louise, Artemesia has serious mental problems.
Pay her no mind.
We usually let her rant on and on about imaginary lawsuits.
It's kinda funny, actually...
Unreasonablewomyn
"Bob" <bobx...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3BE44412...@hotmail.com...
jet
> i wont even ask what "your" truth is..........i think me knows!
>
>
> "Bob" <bobx...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3BE44412...@hotmail.com...
> >
> > Ohio State Women's Studies has to put these denials on their web site
> > because everybody knows the truth about women's studies. It doesn't
> > matter how many times they post these lies, everybody knows the truth
> > about women's studies.
> > Bob
What I could never understand about [Fill in the blank] Studies is why
anyone would take them, when for the same amount of time and money, they
could learn something useful.
J
Bob
Good point. Majoring in hate propaganda is hardly a useful
career. It is counterproductive for the majority of college
women who still look for that Mrs. degree.
Maybe Unreasonable can fill you in. She has a degree with a
hate minor.
Bob
Artemesia
>
> What's the matter, Art? Are you experiencing a psychotic
> event again? Do you need anti-psychotic meds?
>
> Louise, Artemesia has serious mental problems.
>
> Pay her no mind.
>
> We usually let her rant on and on about imaginary lawsuits.
>
> It's kinda funny, actually...
>
> - Chive
>
> Science is not belief, but the will to find out.
Louise.......you'll want to reseach this before you take on the
case,if you are in fact lisenced to practice law in Calfornia and are
familiar with California statutes against liebel.
You will, no doubt want to review the files in which Andrew Langer, of
CIE, In Washington DC. and his attorney reached an out of court
settlement in a lible case proposed agaiant chive. On or about
8/30/2001 Chive posted a statement that had been written by Langer's
attorney stating that his comments that mr. langer and his firm were
murderers, and targeters of women were totally untrue and without
merit. This apology can be found ons sci.environment in the 1st
week of Sept. 2001 in a post by David Grossman.
You'll enjoy Los Angeles in with winter. It's warm here, but rather
expensive.
Artemesia
Chive Mynde
> news:3BE44412...@hotmail.com...
> >
> > Ohio State Women's Studies has to put these denials on their web site
> > because everybody knows the truth about women's studies. It doesn't
> > matter how many times they post these lies, everybody knows the truth
> > about women's studies.
> > Bob
>
> i wont even ask what "your" truth is..........i think me knows!
Louise, "Bob" is convinced that the mean, nasty-old feminists
are stalking him, following him, and conspiring to take over the
world. In fact, just the other day, he and his anti-feminist
friends claimed that the feminists have taken over the government.
This sounds just like the anti-semite argument, which is no
coincidence really, since we have "Brandon Orr" aka "Alex Vange"
posting racist, skinhead, anti-feminism right alongside these
fruitloops.
Then, to top it all off, we've got fundamentalist Christians
like Stephen Morgan, who claim that all feminists are already
"dead" and are condemned to an eternity in Hell.
I don't think you can find a crazier, more ignorant, uneducated
group of morons anywhere on Usenet. Yes, alt.feminism and
soc.men sure do attract the fools. It's like moths to a flame...
- Chive
Unreasonablewomyn
awaiting further instructions on appropriate torture for u, by my commander
chive
suggest u rethink your position vis-a-vis feminism and make a sincerely
effort to recognize your deficiencies
"Radical Boink" <ocad...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3ZjF7.730$rx1....@newscontent-01.sprint.ca...
Parg2000
You'll enjoy Los Angeles in with winter. It's warm here, but rather
expensive.
{Parg} So then, you must have a case number we ALL can observe?
Parg2000
>From: artemes...@aol.com (Artemesia)
>Date: 11/4/01 6:17 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <c13fbe22.01110...@posting.google.com>
>
>parg...@cs.com (Parg2000) wrote in message
>news:<20011104111323...@mb-cl.news.cs.com>...
>> ><cut>
>>
>> >Yes, dear, but not Libelous.
>> >pehaps your partner the professor can explain the difference to you.
>>
>posted,>> and what is the case number of your alleged law suit? Or is that
something
>you>> have just directed at Chyve?
>>
>
>>
>> >>
>> >> > Artemesia
>
>
{Parg} Why am I not surprised. <G>
My attorney thinks we can probably get one
>of the large mental health nonprofits to come on this, also----and of>course,
then there's the matter of locating the little shit to serve him.
{Parg} Are you going to be creative and find a cartoonist to illustrate your
_story_?
>Where do you think we'll find him? Surely not in your bed, Parg.
{Parg} Are you trying to create an impression that promotes a lie regarding my
person and sexual promiscuity?
>
>Artemesia
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
Radical Boink
>
> >
> > What's the matter, Art? Are you experiencing a psychotic
> > event again? Do you need anti-psychotic meds?
> >
> > Louise, Artemesia has serious mental problems.
> >
> > Pay her no mind.
> >
> > We usually let her rant on and on about imaginary lawsuits.
> >
> > It's kinda funny, actually...
> >
> > - Chive
> >
> > Science is not belief, but the will to find out.
>
>
> Louise.......you'll want to reseach this before you take on the
> case,if you are in fact lisenced to practice law in Calfornia and are
> familiar with California statutes against liebel.
Louise is not in fact licensed to practice law anywhere at all.
RB
Artemesia
TBA, Parg
Stand by for further instructions
Arte
Artemesia
Oh, heavens, no Parg? But it's nice to see tht you know the language
of the california Defamation laws.
I'm sure that you are a woman of quiet moral dignity.
Artemesia
>
Parg2000
>Message-id: <c13fbe22.01110...@posting.google.com>
>
>parg...@cs.com (Parg2000) wrote in message
>news:<20011105102021...@mb-fe.news.cs.com>...
>> >Subject: Re: Feminism types
>> >From: artemes...@aol.com (Artemesia)
>> >Date: 11/4/01 6:17 PM Pacific Standard Time
>> >Message-id: <c13fbe22.01110...@posting.google.com>
>> >
>> >parg...@cs.com (Parg2000) wrote in message
>> >news:<20011104111323...@mb-cl.news.cs.com>...
>> >> ><cut>
>>
>> >> >Yes, dear, but not Libelous.
>> >> >pehaps your partner the professor can explain the difference to you.
>> >>
>> >> {Parg} Ok, I'll bite. What is the "libelous" statement you think was
>> >posted,>> and what is the case number of your alleged law suit? Or is
>that
>> something
>> >you>> have just directed at Chyve?
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Artemesia
>> >
>> >
>> >Not quite filed yet, parg.
>>
>> {Parg} Why am I not surprised. <G>
>>
>>
nonprofits to come on this, also----and>of>course,
>> then there's the matter of locating the little shit to serve him.
>>
>> {Parg} Are you going to be creative and find a cartoonist to illustrate
>your
>> _story_?
>>
>> >Where do you think we'll find him? Surely not in your bed, Parg.
>>
>> {Parg} Are you trying to create an impression that promotes a lie
>regarding my
>> person and sexual promiscuity?
>
>Oh, heavens, no Parg? But it's nice to see tht you know the language
>of the california Defamation laws.
{Parg} I also _know_ a con job when I see one, and I fail to see what language
YOU FIND dematory in what Chive expressed.
>
>I'm sure that you are a woman of quiet moral dignity.
{Parg} Your assurance that I am a woman is touching, if speculatory. <G>
BTW, I've notice that you have ommitted the source of Chyve's alleged
defamation toward you. Have you reassessed the situation?
>
>Artemesia
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Parg2000
>From: artemes...@aol.com (Artemesia)
>Date: 11/5/01 12:43 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <c13fbe22.01110...@posting.google.com>
>
{Parg} "Instructions"? Arte must thin a law suit is like an erector set. <G>
>
>Arte
>
>
>
>
>
>
GodHimself
There speaks someone who believes feminism is about equality.
>
> RB
>
>
--
-------------------------------------
Quotes from more interesting posters to alt.feminism
From: "Boinkers" <mrsr...@yahoo.ca>
Newsgroups: ott.general
Subject: Re: Good grief :-(
as IF i am concerned, as a feminist, about men's poverty
rates............you take up that mission, i have enough of mine and
dealing
with pricks like you
Chive Mynde
> {Parg} I also _know_ a con job when I see one, and I fail to see what
> language YOU FIND dematory in what Chive expressed.
Parg, not like it matters, but the original comment asked
her if she was psychotic and if she was taking anti-psychotic
medication.
And, the posts where Artemesia described her depression as
"psychotic" as opposed to the more moderate type, have been
posted.
Finally, did you read the suicide posts that I reposted?
Artemesia almost killed herself and others on the freeway.
If that's not psychotic, I don't know what is...
Parg2000
>From: chyve...@my-deja.com (Chive Mynde)
>Date: 11/5/01 8:20 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <ccd55c9c.01110...@posting.google.com>
>
>parg...@cs.com (Parg2000) wrote in message
>news:<20011105181719...@mb-fd.news.cs.com>...
>
>> {Parg} I also _know_ a con job when I see one, and I fail to see what
>
>Parg, not like it matters, but the original comment asked>her if she was
psychotic and if she was taking anti-psychotic
>medication.
>
>And, the posts where Artemesia described her depression as >"psychotic" as
opposed to the more moderate type, have been
>posted.
>
>Finally, did you read the suicide posts that I reposted? >Artemesia almost
killed herself and others on the freeway.>If that's not psychotic, I don't know
what is...
{Parg} Well, the truth is a perfect defense to defamation, Chyve.
goddess
Man or woman, Parg has more moral dignity that you do.
Marg
> Artemesia
> >
Deborah Terreson
----------
In article <9s7v7g$1pj$1...@quark.scn.rain.com>, "goddess" <god...@peak.org>
wrote:
...and of course she'd _never_ make slanderous statements about other women
and red lights! Oooop! ;-)
Deb.
>
> Marg
>
>> Artemesia
>> >
>
>
Artemesia
Parg,
To say that you are really starting to bore me wouldn't quiet
capture it.
Let's just say that you have the ability to be even more boring when
one has already written you off as more boring than shit.
Well, at least you have one strong point.
Arte
Artemesia
>
> > {Parg} I also _know_ a con job when I see one, and I fail to see what
> > language YOU FIND dematory in what Chive expressed.
>
> Parg, not like it matters, but the original comment asked
> her if she was psychotic and if she was taking anti-psychotic
> medication.
>
> And, the posts where Artemesia described her depression as
> "psychotic" as opposed to the more moderate type, have been
> posted.
If either of these are correct, or exist, post them now.
And your calling me psychotic is not limited to the original post.
Put up or shut up
Arte
Artemesia
And exactly what was your purpose for reposting messages that I had
posted to other n/g, self help n/g where they were appropriate, to
this n/g. soc.men?
Did it occur to you that this might be embarassing to me?
Artemesia
Parg2000
>Message-id: <c13fbe22.01110...@posting.google.com>
>
>was
>> >> >posted,>> and what is the case number of your alleged law suit
>> >>
>
>> >
>> >of the california Defamation laws.
>>
>language
>> YOU FIND dematory in what Chive expressed.
>>
>> >
>>
>
>> BTW, I've notice that you have ommitted the source of Chyve's alleged
>> defamation toward you. Have you reassessed the situation?
>
>Apparently you have some familiarity with the law.
{Parg} Me? I'm just a humble pizza house owner and delivery driver. <G>
>
>Chive has repeatedly called me psychotic and stated that i am, or suggested
that I am dependent on anti-pasychotic.
{Parg} Is this something you have designated as true? Or IS IT "true"?
>
>I'm not.
{Parg} Whe started the alleged "lie"?
>>He's also gone onto a depression self help group and postedextensively from
things I've written there. Apparently that is not
>actionalbe.
>
{Parg} A man who lives in a glass house is usually smart enough not to throw
stones. What happened?
>But it does show that he knows I have bipolar 2, manic depression. >That's
not the same as psychotic.
{Parg} Indeed. Who started the alleged "lie" that you had psychotic episodes
or behavior?
he has also reposted something I>wrote on a self help n/g describing what it
feels like to be suicidal.
>
{Parg} Well, being suicidal is certianly one tell tale sign of a mental
problem. On a personal note, I hope you were able to talk to someone about
those feelings. Back to the issue, the alleged court may allegedly find that
a significant contribution toward his alleged understanding of the "truth".
>So, he knows that i'm in fragil mental health, with all that that implies,
(one wonders if he's trying to push me over the edge.) There
>is nothing in any of his posts to or about me that is kind or compassionate to
my condition.
{Parg} Well, there is no legal duty on his part to BE "kind" to you, Arte.
I'm certainly not going to offer you any legal advice here, but it appears to
me, a humble pizza person, that you're barking up the wrong tree. Perhaps if
you're looking for some kind of compassion about your stated situation, it
might be more effective to talk to him on that level instead of including a
social issue.
Quite to the contrary. it's obvious>that his attitude to me is malicious, and
that he is attatcking me, and trying to make me look very negative.
{Parg} There was once a large, and happy alligator living in a local swamp,
and the fox knew that the gator was there. Everyone saw he thrived. One day,
the fox wanted a ride to the other side of the swamp and he asked the old gator
if he would eat him if he hopped on his back for a ride. The gator said, "Hop
on my back; I'll give you a ride". The fox wasn't satisfied so he watched the
gator give a rabbit a ride, and then a squirrel. Finally the fox hopped on the
gator's back and in midstream the gator grabbed the fox between his jowls.
"Why?" said the fox? The gator simply said, "Rabbits and squirrels are not to
my taste".
>
>the fact that other people have chimed in with questions about my mental
health shows that his comments have aroused negative interest
>in a pre existing condition, and even caused others to wonder if I
am>psychotic.
>
{Parg} I've been told that <G> defamation has very specific parameters. AND,
the courts frown on a plaintiff having dirty hands, stirring the pot. Might I
suggest that you appear to be barking up the wrong tree?
<G>
>I'm not.
{Parg} Speaking as a non-lawyer, while the truth may be a great DEFENSE to
libel, it doesn't usually help the offense when specific points need to be
offered by a person having very clean hands.
>
>I think that's pretty much the legal dyscription of libel/defamation>in
california.
>
{Parg} What is? I havn't seen you offer a clear definition of defamation in
CA.
>What is your legal analysis?
{Parg} I can't offer one, Arte. I'm not a lawyer.
>
>PS. the situation that he had with Andrew Langer has been verified>and is not
in dispute. He has a pattern of this type of behavior.
>
{Parg} A "pattern of behavior" probably cannot be established by offering
hearsay in one situation alone. We all learned about that in the William
Kennedy Smith Case, on television. <G>
>Why do you think that this is not actionalbe?
{Parg} What makes you think I see no "action"? <G> It is my non-legal
opinion that you're barking up the wrong tree. <G>
>I would appreciate your considered opinion on the merits of the case,>not just
more insults, okay.
{Parg} Now, Arte....you already KNOW that a pizza delivery person can't offer
a legal opinion. It would be ...unethical.... Some here claim my mere
opinions, as mentioned above, are just from watching lawyers on tv. <G> If
you want a REAL legal opinion, you'd have to ask a lawyer.
this maybe a chance for you to demonstrate any special knowledge you have of
the law.
{Parg} Aw heck! <toothless grin> My special knowledge is more about
pepperoni, Arte. However, it is my pizza-opinion, that should you order one,
that you shouldn't restrict your list of condiments. <G>
>
>thanks and regards.
>Artemesia
{Parg} Arte, I am NOT your friend, hon. I disagree with almost everything I've
ever heard you say. I AM, however, sorry for your stated mental situation, and
I hope you have received help for such. Almost everyone goes thru tough times
in life, and IMO, having a mental problem, alone, does not, in today's world,
place a person in low regard. Today, people use mental health professionals
for much...so much so...that they are even included as staples of prime time
television.
Even Ally McBeal and the gals on Sex and the City, have therapists.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Nope......but i'm afraid this stupid thing with Chyve is starting to
>really upset me. did't think I was, but I'm feeling more and more
>debilitated by it.
>
>It really is quite painful when it sinks in.
>
>Artemesia
>
>
>
>
>
>
Dennis
wrote:
>parg...@cs.com (Parg2000) wrote in message news:<20011105181719...@mb-fd.news.cs.com>...
>
>> >> >> {Parg} Ok, I'll bite. What is the "libelous" statement you think was
>> >> >posted,>> and what is the case number of your alleged law suit
>> >>
>
>> >
>> >Oh, heavens, no Parg? But it's nice to see tht you know the language
>> >of the california Defamation laws.
>>
>> {Parg} I also _know_ a con job when I see one, and I fail to see what language
>> YOU FIND dematory in what Chive expressed.
>>
>> >
>> >I'm sure that you are a woman of quiet moral dignity.
>>
>
>. <G>
>> BTW, I've notice that you have ommitted the source of Chyve's alleged
>> defamation toward you. Have you reassessed the situation?
>
>Okay, I'll play, Parg.
>Apparently you have some familiarity with the law.
>
>Chive has repeatedly called me psychotic and stated that i am, or
>suggested that I am dependent on anti-pasychotic.
>
>I'm not.
>
>He's also gone onto a depression self help group and posted
>extensively from things I've written there. Apparently that is not
>actionalbe.
>
>But it does show that he knows I have bipolar 2, manic depression.
>That's not the same as psychotic. he has also reposted something I
>wrote on a self help n/g describing what it feels like to be suicidal.
>
>So, he knows that i'm in fragil mental health, with all that that
>implies, (one wonders if he's trying to push me over the edge.) There
>is nothing in any of his posts to or about me that is kind or
>compassionate to my condition. Quite to the contrary. it's obvious
>that his attitude to me is malicious, and that he is attatcking me,
>and trying to make me look very negative.
>
>the fact that other people have chimed in with questions about my
>mental health shows that his comments have aroused negative interest
>in a pre existing condition, and even caused others to wonder if I am
>psychotic.
>
>I'm not.
>
>I think that's pretty much the legal dyscription of libel/defamation
>in california.
>
>What is your legal analysis?
>
>PS. the situation that he had with Andrew Langer has been verified
>and is not in dispute. He has a pattern of this type of behavior.
>
>Why do you think that this is not actionalbe?
>
>I would appreciate your considered opinion on the merits of the case,
>not just more insults, okay. this maybe a chance for you to
>demonstrate any special knowledge you have of the law.
Arte, please don't make the mistake that Parq knows anything about the
law. She has tried in the past to give that impression. It is wrong.
She knows little, if anything, about the legal profession and law,
other than what she has gleaned most likely, from watching TV. There
are lawyers on this ng who shown Porks utter lack of ignorance on the
subject.
>thanks and regards.
Wasted on Porq.
>Artemesia
goddess
>
> > >> >> {Parg} Ok, I'll bite. What is the "libelous" statement you think
was
> > >> >posted,>> and what is the case number of your alleged law suit
> > >>
>
> > >
> > >of the california Defamation laws.
> >
> > {Parg} I also _know_ a con job when I see one, and I fail to see what
language
> > YOU FIND dematory in what Chive expressed.
> >
> > >
> > >I'm sure that you are a woman of quiet moral dignity.
> >
>
> > BTW, I've notice that you have ommitted the source of Chyve's alleged
> > defamation toward you. Have you reassessed the situation?
>
> Apparently you have some familiarity with the law.
>
> Chive has repeatedly called me psychotic and stated that i am, or
> suggested that I am dependent on anti-pasychotic.
>
> I'm not.
>
> He's also gone onto a depression self help group and posted
> extensively from things I've written there. Apparently that is not
> actionalbe.
Now you want people to be punished for responding to your posts? Hint:
don't postem if you don't want them to e seen/responded to.
> But it does show that he knows I have bipolar 2, manic depression.
> That's not the same as psychotic. he has also reposted something I
> wrote on a self help n/g describing what it feels like to be suicidal.
Yep, and? You wrote it, no?
> So, he knows that i'm in fragil mental health, with all that that
> implies, (one wonders if he's trying to push me over the edge.)
If you're that fragile, you shouldn't be posting anywhere, eh?
There
> is nothing in any of his posts to or about me that is kind or
> compassionate to my condition.
What did you want, a pity party? Sorry.
Quite to the contrary. it's obvious
> that his attitude to me is malicious, and that he is attatcking me,
> and trying to make me look very negative.
You do that all on your own. And I hardly find it malicious to note an
individual's illness that they themselves have admitted to and posted about.
If you didn't want anyone to know about it, you might have kept it to
yourself.
> the fact that other people have chimed in with questions about my
> mental health shows that his comments have aroused negative interest
> in a pre existing condition, and even caused others to wonder if I am
> psychotic.
In other words, you wanted a pity party and you didn't get one.
Marg
> I'm not.
>
> I think that's pretty much the legal dyscription of libel/defamation
> in california.
>
> What is your legal analysis?
>
> PS. the situation that he had with Andrew Langer has been verified
> and is not in dispute. He has a pattern of this type of behavior.
>
> Why do you think that this is not actionalbe?
>
> I would appreciate your considered opinion on the merits of the case,
> not just more insults, okay. this maybe a chance for you to
> demonstrate any special knowledge you have of the law.
>
> thanks and regards.
Artemesia
> >
> > And, the posts where Artemesia described her depression as
> > "psychotic" as opposed to the more moderate type, have been
> > posted.
> > - Chive
>
Okay chive,
In a fit of boredom, and somewhat steaming over Parg's comments about
the necessity of clean hands in a libel suit, I went through the
achieves and found the post i wrote that you are referring
to,,,,,,,the one wyou referenced as having been with Robert.
You blew it big time.
If you see the thread, you will notice that the original post refers
to mania.
I don't have and have never had mania.
Reread the posts, you mean little creature. Robert says that he
understands that mania can have elements of pshycosis-----but again,
I've never had mania, which is why I only have bipolar 2.
Robert referred to moderate depression, and I stated that my
depression is not moderate, (my implication being that it was severe
depression). there is absolutely nothing anywhere in which I even
hint at being psychotic, having psychosis or being on anti psychotic
medications.
I've got you!
Again, If you can find anything that says I've ever been psychotic,
post or repost it now.
that defense Just went down the drain.
And BTW: fun a filter: Chive artemesia phychotic and you and the
world will se that you have called me that and inferred it again and
again n the last 2 months, always in a way that is demeaning and
insulting.
A. your coment is not true
B your comments are malicious
c. You are going to lose the suit.
That's defamation.
Artemesia
Artemesia
> "Artemesia" <artemes...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:c13fbe22.01110...@posting.google.com...
> > parg...@cs.com (Parg2000) wrote in message
> news:<20011105181719...@mb-fd.news.cs.com>...
> > > {Parg} I also _know_ a con job when I see one, and I fail to see what
> language
> > > YOU FIND dematory in what Chive expressed.
Oh, you can express an opinion on the legality of tis when I ask for
one, but you have no problem sexpressing to Chive that he has done
nothing wrong or actionable.
>
> > So, he knows that i'm in fragil mental health, with all that that
> > implies, (one wonders if he's trying to push me over the edge.)
>
> If you're that fragile, you shouldn't be posting anywhere, eh?
Oh, so now there's a reqirement to post here? Well, then, lets apply
it equally shall we, or aren't you in favor of equal access? Again,
Animal Farm, some are more equal than others.
>
> There
> > is nothing in any of his posts to or about me that is kind or
> > compassionate to my condition.
>
> What did you want, a pity party? Sorry.
Nope, but a malicious intent is part of the legal definition of libel.
>
> Quite to the contrary. it's obvious
> > that his attitude to me is malicious, and that he is attatcking me,
> > and trying to make me look very negative.
>
> You do that all on your own. And I hardly find it malicious to note an
> individual's illness that they themselves have admitted to and posted about.
> If you didn't want anyone to know about it, you might have kept it to
> yourself.
>
If i'd wanted to post it on soc. men I would have done so, but, it's
really not relevant to this forum. I posted it where it was relevant,
in an appropriate self help forum. Chive tracked it down and posted it
here for reasons that seem to be only negative.
So you think that is just fine?
> > the fact that other people have chimed in with questions about my
> > mental health shows that his comments have aroused negative interest
> > in a pre existing condition, and even caused others to wonder if I am
> > psychotic.
>
> In other words, you wanted a pity party and you didn't get one.
No, this fulfills another requirement of the defamation law: that his
action has caused others to wonder wheter or not his comments are
true. Several posters here have obviously responded to this in a way
that shows the were inflouenced by his malicious comments.
>
> >
> > I think that's pretty much the legal dyscription of libel/defamation
> > in california.
> >
> > What is your legal analysis?
> >
> > PS. the situation that he had with Andrew Langer has been verified
> > and is not in dispute. He has a pattern of this type of behavior.
BTW: Parg referred to this as heresay. it's not. First, I have
reposted chives apology to langer here for all the world to see. In
that letter chive admitted that he had defamed Langer and was
apologising because they had negotiated a deal that langer would not
pursue a civil suit if chive apologiesd.
And langer and his attorney are prepared to offer depositions on my
behalf about chives similar treatment of Mr. langer.
> >
So, as others have asked of chive.........do you have anything of
substance to say about this, or the way that you, Marg, and Parg have
eagerly jumped on the bandwagon and tauted me with this further, while
championing the really tacky behavior of Chive.
"Do you want a pity party sounds like something from the elementary
school yard:
"I have nothing to say, but I'm going to call you self pitying and
that trumps any thing you have to say, or it's validity."
I could throw in a number of coments here about you ability to address
this issue in a dignified manner, but i won't.
what is your point in condoning this type of behavior on chive's part?
Why do you insist on cheering him on?
Artemesia
Parg2000
>Man or woman, Parg has more moral dignity that you do.
{Parg} Thank you. I'll try harder now...to live up to that.
>
>Marg
Philip Lewis
"Radical Boink" <ocad...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3ZjF7.730$rx1....@newscontent-01.sprint.ca...
> "Unreasonablewomyn" <loui...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:550d8255.01110...@posting.google.com...
>
> > am available for legal consultation, is this a criminal or civil case?
> >
> > i await further information and instructions, no retainer necessary
>
> No qualifications either. LOL.
Astutely put! ;-o)
Phil
>
> RB
>
Philip Lewis
> chyve...@my-deja.com (Chive Mynde) wrote in message
news:<ccd55c9c.01110...@posting.google.com>...
>
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes, dear, but not Libelous.
> > > pehaps your partner the professor can explain the difference to you.
> >
>
>
> Where is the lie in the above comment, Devin?
> Call it it one doesn't make it so.
> Why don't you try to learn the difference between substance and
> bullshit
>
> >
> > There is nothing libelous about asking if you are psychotic or
> > on anti-psychotic medication.
>
> But that's not quite what you did, is it Chive?
> Revisionism......or a pathetic attempt to change events by repeating
> your sad little vision again and again.
>
> Unforetunatly, your track record with the rest of the net works
> against you.
> It's very easy to identify your consistent trend in posting viscious
> attacks that slip just over the line into libel. You've done it again
> and again with numerous people before and after me.
>
> >
> > Additionally, you have demonstrated mental instability on the
> > group and you have admitted to having serious mental problems.
> >
> > Finally, your posts demonstrate and substantiate your experience
> > of "psychotic" events -- events so serious that you almost
> > committed suicide and endangered the lives of others in the
> > process.
>
>
> There you go with psychotic again. Exactly what are your
> qualifications to determine which actions are and or not psychotic?
> It happens to be a legal discription of a every specific psycological
> condition from which I do not suffer.
>
> BTW: the fact that you put quotations around it does ot diminish the
> fact that you've just accused me of this again. The medical community
> would not agree with you. And that is where you have made your fatal
> flaw.
>
> How are you planning to wiggle out of this one, you little creep?
> I've noticed that your loove fest with Parg has definatly heated up
> now that you are endenger of financial ruin as a result of this
> lawsuit.
>
> And, the beauty of it all is that you seem to be unable to stop
> yourself.....not so good at self control, are you, chivito?
>
> And your next victim will have proof positive that they are not your
> first victim, merely the latest in a long, long line.
>
> One wonders what is wrong with you that has made you such a bully?
> Insecure about something, Chive?
> Why do you insist on pursuing this little tirade against me,
> a person you discribe as mentally ill, and who is old enough to be
> your mother?
>
> Remember, your defense is gong to have to be that I am in fact
> nuts.......so how does it make you look to continue to taunt me?
>
> Good think you call yourself a feminist. I don't think decent, red
> blooded men would call you one of their own.
That is putting it mildly!!! Consider that this hypocrite was waxing
pompously yesterday about his "work with prostitutes" and his evidently FAKE
concern over their welfare - yet all along he has been clearly illustrating
to all that read these NG's that Chive doesn't posses an ounce of decency or
compassion for the suffering of others - I HAVE worked with people
undergoing various mental malady's and illness's including those with
depression in it's various forms (e.g. manic depressives) - this is nothing
to joke about as I have had to come on duty only to be told that a patient
that I and other colleagues were joking and laughing WITH (note - not AT!!)
a day or so before had committed suicide during the night (one did so by
secreting a polythene bag which he later used to suffocate himself to death
with!). If Chive had a single ounce of compassion he would not be baiting
you in the vicous way that he is - the words COWARD,BULLY and SCUM isn't
even strong enough to describe his character - I sincerely hope you take his
filthy attempts to besmirch your character as the actions of one who is
beneath contempt. Now to change the subject entirely - when was the last
time you saw the classic cartoon "Lady And The Tramp"? - I came across the
video of it about a year ago as I had first seen it as a little boy and it
was a truly magical experience for me when I saw it that filled me with
wonder and delight - I showed it to my nephew (and my sister and brother
in-law) and by the time it had finished us "adults" were doing our best to
hide the tears in our eyes.!!
Phil
>
> Now go lick your wounds, and save your money for your legal fees.
>
> Artemesia
>
>
> >
> > I've posted the message ids for those claims of yours, and
> > I'm willing to do it again.
> >
> > See you in court.
> >
> > HTH.
Philip Lewis
"Chive Mynde" <chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:ccd55c9c.01110...@posting.google.com...
> "Boinkers" <mrsr...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:<ZKxE7.128086$5h5.51...@news3.rdc2.on.home.com>...
> > what is a feminist? well, i am one.............
> >
> > a feminist advocates for womyn's rights and since there are many "camps"
she
> > does so using the theoretical preference she is comfortable
with........for
> > example, here is a list of the different theories she might
> > adopt..........she may also adopt portions of more than one
> >
> > marxist feminism
> > liberal feminism
> > socialist feminism
> > psychoanalytical feminism
> > post-modern feminism
> > post-structural feminism
> > material feminism
> > international feminism
> > transformative feminism
> > radical feminism
> > anti-racist feminism
> >
> > anyone who tells you a "conservative" feminism exists, is lying - Somers
> > falls under this category and so does REAL Womyn
> >
> >
> > i have a degree in womyn studies, i would put myself somewhere between
> > radical/post-structuralist/socialist and at times
radical.............all
> > depends on which problem i am investigating
> >
> > i am a legal scholar as well, so i specifically examine what in law is
> > sexist, racist and class based (all of it :) )
> >
> > they "claim" to be feminists, but their agenda is anti-feminism which is
one
> > of the reasons the general public gets so confused about what IS
feminism
> >
> >
> > if u want a short description of any of them, just ask or go get some
> > primary sources...............do not assume the Internet gives accurate
> > information..........i've been on sites claiming to be feminist that
were
> > actually dedicated to misogyny..........and sometimes its so subtle, u
need
> > a degree in this to decipher it...........i have that degree, i know the
> > discourse of feminism versus the rhetoric of misogyny
> >
> > hope this helps
> > :)
>
> Thanks for your honesty.
The endorsement of a known slanderer and LIAR such as yourself is no
compliment.
Phil
Philip Lewis
> whatever
...mood you're in - a real subjectivist through and through - classic
feminist IOW.
Phil
>
> "Bob" <bobx...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3BE32DD3...@hotmail.com...
> >
> >
> > Boinkers wrote:
> > > i have a degree in womyn studies,
> >
> > Hate, hate, hate. I guess if you call organized hate
> > propaganda a "study." Pathetic morons.
> >
> > Your posts come right out of the anti-male hate propaganda
> > taught in those hate lectures. Now it will take you another
> > 20 years before you're fit for human consumption -- if some
> > decent human being doesn't eliminate you first.
> >
> >
> > >i would put myself somewhere between
> > > radical/post-structuralist/socialist and at times
> radical.............all
> > > depends on which problem i am investigating
> >
> > A radical hate monger is about it. Yep, a graduate of
> > "women's studies."
> >
> > "Investigating" Don't waste our time.
> >
> >
> > > i am a legal scholar as well, so i specifically examine what in law is
> > > sexist, racist and class based (all of it :) )
> >
> > You specialize in racist, sexist, and hate propaganda.
> > That's obvious. You don't need to brag.
> >
> > Get back to us when you're dry behind the ears.
> >
> > Bob
>
>
Philip Lewis
news:<9rq7bc$vh6v9$1...@ID-59530.news.dfncis.de>...> > news:ccd55c9c.01103...@posting.google.com...
> > > John LaVoy <jla...@pobox.upenn.edu> wrote in message
> > news:<3BE04F76...@pobox.upenn.edu>...
> > > > Chive Mynde wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > http://womens-studies.ohio-state.edu/general/geninfo.htm
> > > > >
> > > > > Women's Studies is Not:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > A Fad:
> > > > > It has a 30-year history of scholarship about women and gender
that
> > > > > transforms conventional fields of knowledge
> > > >
> > > > It has a 30 year history of arguing that such principles as logic
and
> > > > evidence are not necessary in the field because there are
alternative
> > > > ways of "knowing" things.
> > >
> > > Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
> > >
> > > > It has a 30 year history of arguing that such
> > > > male concepts as peer review are unnecessary and oppressive.
> > >
> > > Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
> > >
> > > > And, apparently, it has a 30 year history of fooling you.
> > >
> > > Please substantiate your claim with evidence.
> >
> >
> > John Lavoy is not the only person to criticise the doctrinaire nature of
> > womens studies it has also been heavilly criticised by Australias first
> > FEMALE proffessor of politics -
>
> Where's the evidence for his claims?
>
> Where's the evidence for your claims?
>
Already POSTED before you asked that question (posted 31st October 2001)!
Here is a copy - read and WEEP fool:-
http://www.news.com.au/education/
Gender off professor's syllabus
By DIANA THORP
5jun99
JOAN Rydon is proud to have been Australia's first woman professor of
politics - but she would not be so proud to be a professor of women's
studies.
Emeritus Professor Rydon, 74, who received an honorary doctorate of letters
from the University of Sydney, said the pursuit of knowledge and its
transmission could not be divided into male and female components.
She believed the development of women's studies was objectionable, not only
because of the risk of divisiveness, but because its origins were not
objective.
"It has been founded upon some notion that women have been exploited or
frustrated in a world dominated by men and has sought to change this
situation rather than to emphasise a disinterested pursuit of knowledge,"
she told graduating arts students at the University of Sydney yesterday.
"Thus courses in women's studies often attempt to indoctrinate - to
persuade women that they are, in some sense, victims and must strive to
change their relations with men."
Professor Rydon graduated with honours in 1946 from the University of
Sydney.
Deputy vice-chancellor Ken Eltis said Professor Rydon became the first
woman to be appointed to a chair in politics in Australia at Melbourne's La
Trobe University in 1975, where she taught Australian and comparative
democratic politics.
She had taught at the University of Sydney, the Australian National
University, the University of Cape Town and the University of Melbourne and
was a founding member of the Australasian Political Studies Association.
Professor Rydon said it was more important to be a professor - to have
reached the top in a community of schoolars - than to be specifically a
woman professor.
Gender should be irrelevant in academia, she said.
She said that given the long struggle of women to be admitted to the
universities and to the professions it appeared ironic women were now
endeavouring to monopolise some fields of study and to bar men from them.
> Oh, that's right -- anti-feminists don't require evidence since
> their claims are based on FAITH and religious BELIEFS.
>
> Thanks for clearing that up.
My pleasure - now go and wipe that egg of your face! ;-o)
Phil
>
> > See mypost entitled "Australia's Australia's
> > first woman professor of politics finds womens studies "objectionable"!
"
> >
> > Phil
>
> Why, so you can waste some more of my time?
>
> No thanks.
>
> Either start producing evidence or admit that anti-feminism
> is a RELIGION subscribed by a religious congregation of
> bitter, lonely boys.
>
> HTH.
Philip Lewis
> > >
> > > Ohio State Women's Studies has to put these denials on their web site
> > > because everybody knows the truth about women's studies. It doesn't
> > > matter how many times they post these lies, everybody knows the truth
> > > about women's studies.
> > > Bob
> >
> > i wont even ask what "your" truth is..........i think me knows!
>
> Louise, "Bob" is convinced that the mean, nasty-old feminists
> are stalking him, following him, and conspiring to take over the
> world. In fact, just the other day, he and his anti-feminist
> friends claimed that the feminists have taken over the government.
> This sounds just like the anti-semite argument, which is no
> coincidence really, since we have "Brandon Orr" aka "Alex Vange"
> posting racist, skinhead, anti-feminism right alongside these
> fruitloops.
Welcome to the REAL WORLD of PEOPLE - what makes YOUR "ism" free from
criticism when you feel compelled to slander, lie(about those you disagree
with) and attempt to censor debate about YOUR "ism".?
>
> Then, to top it all off, we've got fundamentalist Christians
> like Stephen Morgan, who claim that all feminists are already
> "dead" and are condemned to an eternity in Hell.
>
> I don't think you can find a crazier, more ignorant, uneducated
> group of morons anywhere on Usenet. Yes, alt.feminism and
> soc.men sure do attract the fools.
Well it did attract YOU.
> It's like moths to a flame...
You should know Chive! ;-o)
Phil
Lisa Tse
hi. i never heard that before. its funnyy.
Artemesia
heightened level of esp to isults on other posters of soc. men.......
but, he has not yet come up with anything that has ever been posted
Where i ever said that I am or have have been psychotic, or on
antipsychotic meds.
I renew the challange: Where is the article that you say absolves you
of guilt for libeling me?
post or repost it now:
Put up or shut up.
And I hope you are out earning money because this ain't a slapp suit
and you ain't gonna win.
HA
Dig yourself in a little deeper chive.
Or have you found another victim whom you perceive to be more
vulnerable.
Arte
artem
esiah...@aol.com (Artemesia) wrote in message news:<c13fbe22.01110...@posting.google.com>...
> artemes...@aol.com (Artemesia) wrote in message news:<c13fbe22.01110...@posting.google.com>...
> > chyve...@my-deja.com (Chive Mynde) wrote in message news:<ccd55c9c.01110...@posting.google.com>...
>
>
> > >
> > > And, the posts where Artemesia described her depression as
> > > "psychotic" as opposed to the more moderate type, have been
> > > posted.
>
> > > - Chive
> >
>
> Okay chive,
Artemesia
>
> hi. i never heard that before. its funnyy.
>
> lisa
> lis...@herwire.com
Lisa,
For a girl who studied Civil Engineering at Berkley, you don't seem to
get out much. This is funny, Chive is an ideal man? You really
should try to broaden your horizons, dear.
Artemesia
Artemesia
Well, yet another day draws to an end and still no response from
chive.
Has he actually sought legal counsil and learned that I've got him by
the balls?
Euwwwww, the two just don't seem to go togehter, do they?
> but, he has not yet come up with anything that has ever been posted
> Where i ever said that I am or have have been psychotic, or on
> antipsychotic meds.
>
>
> I renew the challange: Where is the article that you say absolves you
> of guilt for libeling me?
>
> post or repost it now:
>
> Put up or shut up.
>
> Dig yourself in a little deeper chive.
> Arte
So my suspiscions are confirmed. chive, is an ignoprant bully who
runs away with his tail between his legs if anyone, even a girl with
problems stands up to him.
Comander of the Universe?
Ha!
Artemesia
Well, yet another day draws to an end and still no response from
chive.
Has he actually sought legal counsil and learned that I've got him by
the balls?
Euwwwww, the two just don't seem to go togehter, do they?
> but, he has not yet come up with anything that has ever been posted
> Where i ever said that I am or have have been psychotic, or on
> antipsychotic meds.
>
>
> I renew the challange: Where is the article that you say absolves you
> of guilt for libeling me?
>
> post or repost it now:
>
> Put up or shut up.
>
> Dig yourself in a little deeper chive.
> Arte
So my suspiscions are confirmed. chive, is an ignoprant bully who
runs away with his tail between his legs if anyone, even a girl with
problems stands up to him.
Comander of the Universe?
Ha!
>
>
>
>
>
>