Redux.

Post #142,305 by pwhysall 2/19/04 7:33:32 AM Reply	Redux. blah blah blah I hate queers blah blah I might be one blah blah I'm afeared of that fact blah blah did I mention I hate women too blah blah especially strong women blah blah they should all go back to being brood mothers and housewives blah blah equality is for white men only blah blah the good old days blah blah. And Ashton, you should be ashamed of supporting this ridiculous viewpoint. It's 2004, not 1804. Peter [link\|http://www.debian.org\|Shill For Hire] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home Page - Now with added Zing!]
Post #142,418 by Ashton 2/19/04 7:10:32 PM Reply	Straw queer. C'mon Peter, your brain is more original than that. I didn't PICK 'sides' in this faux-dichotomy - remember? It doesn't matter that (too) often -- your stereotypical analysis of homophobia IS.. quite close enough for government work; I mean.. some of the slavering hordes with pitchforks Are that lawful prey! I don't see Ross's putative -phobia nor steely-suppressed envy. And not hatred in its various telltale forms. If you think you do (see such) . . . I also don't know that the Jung / animus syntax (or other archetypal approach to human fucked-uppedness) -- is without its own recursive flaws: few things involving 'us' are ever reducible to algorithms. That idea is a conceit of not just er programmers. It's an equivalent of The Market Will Correct, for those whose religion is Econ 101A, and who see 'humans' as decimal points on their generated graphs. It compiles: it must be Truth. (A similar flaccid digital-think as in those who can also stomach the Social-Darwinist Neoconmen because: they be so Efficient at clearing out the Undesirables.. which screw up their inane spreadsheets diagramming Authority Rulez.) Clear out these pissy nonconformist outliers and THEN -- we can calculate the velocity of money into our offshore accounts, to the nearest penny. Same class of vicious reduction of humans to 'entries' - by people with stunted emotional age ~11. Lots of these around. Majority?? ie. if you want to refute Ross's model, you have to refute it - not impute troglodyte transparent ugliness of the chain-queers-to-fences sort. Repeat: (Ross says) he doesn't 'Hate Queers'. Or envy same etc. The comments on the form of the sex, now (!) - I deem gratuitous and counterproductive. Don't Do that, Ross! It gets you: methinks the gentleman doth protest too much. WTF - analyze the motions of a decent orgasm (let alone the internal mental acrobatics -- after all, the most Erotic part of the body is ... the Mind) -- and it's all stuff for Monty Python wink/nudge ... WhatsItLike, huh.. WhatsItLike !? (Even Vulcans forget that curl grad V = 0, when the annual green testosterone flood hits the old limbic system..) The fact that this self-selected group, demonstrably possessing 52 cards and even a couple spare Jokers in the deck -- is unclear about the tenuous fabric of "our '04 civilization ??" -- Is a bit unnerving though. To moi, anyway. Chicken Little had a rather dull vocabulary; WTF, she was a fucking chicken. We. Have. Nukes. and are likely about to use them (if a LOT goes wrong between now and November Two Thousand and Four) Screw the Queers AND the Heteros and their internal clockworks: *THE FUCKING SKY IS* FALLING !!** Ashtonradamus Find a Way to get the fucking Neoconmen back into their padded cells, you assholes; screw the dance about Who's Tougher on Crime or Hates Sin Most.
Post #142,421 by deSitter 2/19/04 8:13:20 PM Reply	Re: Straw queer. The basis of my argument is a desire to have and live in a productive culture. A culture that can't properly inhabit the masculine and feminine principles equally will die. A similar thing happens with self/shadow splits - the Nazis, for example, identified their "self" with Aryan perfection, and so projected their "shadow" onto Jews and outcasts. We know the results. Anima/animus problems are not as dire but they do lead to sterility. The creative faculty needs inspiration tempered by judgement to generate ideas (masculine) and then needs feeling tempered by sensation to give them form (feminine). A society with "female issues" coming from a warped anima image will be safety obsessed, unable to create new things,and obsessed with "relating", be it by sex, prison, corporate work, politics... One with "male issues" will be unable to properly structure creative energy, and so obsessed with "newness", be it by nomadic wandering, pillaging and plunder, short-term plans without regard for permanence of effectiveness. Thus - the ultimate reason feminism and HS repel me, is that they are sterile and inherently moribund. It has nothing whatsoever to do with "homophobia" (what a stupid word). It has to do with "ambiphilia" - love of balance. -drl
Post #142,423 by drewk 2/19/04 8:30:31 PM Reply	My 2 pence IMnaaHO[1] what pisses Ross off most is the unjustifiable extreme to which a large part of modern society has carried the goal of "equality of the sexes". Was there a time when it was "normal" to believe that men were "better" than women, or more "deserving" of $foo? Yes. Is it a Good Thing[tm] that it is now generally unacceptable to profess such blanket judgements? Again, yes. But what too many people have forgotten is that just because neither gender is "better" than the other, that doesn't mean they're the same. In general: Men are larger than women Men are more agressive than women Women have better communication skills than men Women have more of a nurturing instinct than men etc. etc. etc. ... Does this mean that only women should raise children? Absolutely not. Does it mean that only men should be police officers? No. But political correctness has gone too damn far when it's unacceptable to observe that the average man is more likely to pass the physical part of the entrance exam to be a firefighter than the average woman. To suggest that maybe some women would actually prefer to stay home and raise their children than to drop them in day care and go to work. Would society be better off if it were widely preferred that someone stay home to raise the kids? Probably. Do the apparent general tendancies of our genders suggest that that would result in more women staying home? Probably. Does that make me a mysoginistic neanderthal who thinks all women should be breed sows? Not even close. From what I've read of Ross' position, he's mostly saying that women and men are different; and that encouraging men to act more like women and women to act more like men is taking "equality" too far.[2] [1] not-at-all [2] Yes, that reads somewhat like a "separate but equal" argument. It's not. === Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.

Welcome to IWETHEY!