From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: Working with Women vs. Working with Men
Summary: stupid people forge posts  
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 01:07:49 GMT

In article <ZEN.92Dec23161814@death.corp.sun.com> zen@death.corp.sun.com (d) writes:


	And now the real loser flames start to come into the newsgroup.
	

>In article <1992Dec23.203358.7692@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>   In article <1992Dec23.190432.29510@cs.cornell.edu> jean@cs.cornell.edu (Jean M. Petrosino) writes:
>> >When in doubt, quote the superiority of capitalism and Darwin's
>> >survival of the fittest theory.  
>> It works.  That's a lot more than I can say for alternative
>> theories.
>
>  So you're saying that if I come up to you and blow you away with a
>shotgun, then you were just unfit to live (survival of the fittest and
>all, ya know)?  

	
	Something that so many of the toddlers who run around
	thinking they're bright tend to miss: human beings can 
	reason.

	The interesting thing about this is that one of the first
	thing those with any kind of guts learn is that 
	_there is always someone bigger_.  The real cowards on
	the playground, who grow up to be cowardly adults, never manage
	to learn this and therefor are unable to reason beyond their
	immediate circumstances.

	To illustrate:  I can understand that it it not *in my own
	best interest* to actively eliminate those who irritate me.
	How can this be?  Obviously, I get many direct benefits from
	their elimination.  This is as far as simpletons, like the
	poster who forged at sun.com, manage to go.

	Not that it's bad--hey, there's nothing *bad* about being
	average or below average--somebody has to be--but I digress.

	What Mr. Zen fails to understand is that engaging in such behavior
	is *not* _really_ darwinistic because it opens the playing 
	field --for that kind of behavior--to all of my competitors.  
	Which is virtually committing suicide.

	Alas, you can't help the stupid.


>*You* may call that working, but not me (well, if it
>happened to you, I might make an exception), 

	Ho-ho, and s/he tries to be funny.  What's the matter, 
	I hit a little cord with the darwinism?  What, are you one
	of the failures of society?  A loser who seeks externals
	to blame?  

	Ah well, probably just one of thos pathetic socialism-groupies
	that feels downtrodden since the rest of the world is rapidly 
	discarding the ideals they held so highly.  

	
>at least, not as a viable
>ethical and/or human solution.  


	It doesn't work because it violates the very principles
	that are at the core of human beings.  The biggest one is
	self-preservation.  Human beings (well, except defectives)
	can *reason*, and reason will tell them that such behavior
	poses infinately more risks than benefits.


>Of course, if morals/ethics don't matter
>to you, alt.feminism might not be where you belong... 


	Morals and ethics have no place here--feminists are primarily
	concerned with blame.


>of course, this
>planet might not be either...


	<sigh>  I heard flames of this quality back in the 4th grade. 
	Just confirmin' my estimation of your faculties.


>  But I'd say that pure capitalism and darwinism work about as well in
>practice as pure communism and dworkinism.


	They work quite well, thank you.  Nothing mankind has ever come up with 
	has worked anywhere near as well at fufilling the needs of the people
	than capitalism and democracy.  

	Darwinism, well, that provided us with our bodies, our intellects,
	and our culture.  

	As for communism, it does work--it works amazingly well.  For 
	insects.

	Dworkinism?  Andrea Dworkin is insane.  I don't think any rational
	person considers her anything but insane or demented.  It's interesting
	that you bring her up.

-- 
	"If you can't eat sand, why the hell are you living in a desert?"
			Equality is a delusion.
	     Rule 1:  "Don't have more children than you can feed."
	      Buy American as if your job depended on it. 
Newsgroups: alt.feminism