From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Working with Women vs. Working with Men
Date: 26 Dec 92 17:22:04 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park

In article <ZEN.92Dec24110834@death.corp.sun.com> zen@death.corp.sun.com (d) writes:
>  Just one thing of note out of all of this, which sums up yamanari's
>ideals -- make sure you get this, if nothing else:


	It's good of you to share withthe rest.  I'm sure they're incapable
	of drawing their own conclusions.


>In article <1992Dec24.010749.21597@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>>  In article <ZEN.92Dec23161814@death.corp.sun.com> zen@death.corp.sun.com (d) writes:


	Same old brainless, pointless drivel deleted.


>to me.  Another really interesting thing, after he says that capitalism
>and democracy are so great:
>
>> 	 Buy American as if your job depended on it. 
>
>  A true capitalist, I see.  Buy inferior products so that you'll hang
>on to your way of life.  


	Too bad you show such blatant ignorance.  The Japanese do not
	practice capitalism, and by buying Japanese products, you
	are subverting the capitalist system.

	<If you disagree with the above statements, you better
	have a source--I've got plenty>


>That's fairly consistant with your other
>quote/statement, that "equality is an illusion" -- the mark of a true
>democrat.  I can see how well you practice what you preach...


	Some people are born rich, some are born stupid, some are
	born poor, some are born with a glorious talent for music,
	some are good at languages, some are good at math, some are
	born defective, etc.  There can *be no equality* because part
	of "equality" is EQUAL TREATMENT, and people who espouse 
	equalist ideals tend to forget that last part.


>>    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.
>>    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.
>
>  Well, I'm sorry to break it to you... but my blowing you away would
>indeed be a darwinistic behavior on my part (and yours too, perhaps in a
>more passive sense.)  Destroying people like you would be a boon to our
>species and a boost to feminist survival.  Not that I think that the way
>that most people view darwinism is a very good model of how to base
>individual behavior, mind you.


	And you talk about *me* being warped.


>> >*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?  
>
>  *laugh*  A failure of society?  Perhaps I am... our society is very
>interested in grinding people down, cranking out clones that will
>maintain the status quo -- I'm uninterested in that.  


	In other words, yes, you've been unable to compete and...


>I don't think I've
>lost anything of import.  Blaming our male dominated power structure for
>many of the problems that women face seems rational to me.  


	like the loser you are blame "society" for your own pathetic
	faults.  Tell me, is *anything* a persons own responsibility?


>It's obvious
>that those in power disagree.


	How did they get that power?


>  And why the "Mr." before, and then "s/he" now?  If you're uncertain of
>my gender, the latter is fine... 


	Because I'm almost certain you're one of the many brainwashed
	men who think quoting feminist bullshit makes them cool.


>I know it's hard for you to keep your
>thoughts consistent from paragraph to paragraph though.


	Your flames are so weak that I'm not even bothering.  I heard better
	stuff in grade school, eons ago.


>>    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.  
>
>  As far as I know, most of the rest of the world has never held much
>stock in treating people equality, regardless of gender.  


	Neither do feminists.  They believe in helping women but
	not men.  Is that, "treating people equally"?


>You seem to
>feel it necessary to try and crush people that attempt to disagree with
>you... 


	Blah blah blah.  Are you done blathering?  Funny how if you
	can;t *answer* an argument you resort to insults (poor ones)
	and stuffing words in other peoples mouths.


>it's sad; that's why I won't bother trying to discourse further
>with you 


	And then running away.


>-- you're so intent on being *right*, you don't listen to those
>who disagree, or see the answers or any changes, even when they stroll
>right past you.


	That's because they don't post answers or responses.  Look at 
	the hysterical nonsense I got from Jean--"YOU'RE COMPARING WOMEN
	TO CHILDREN!!" when I did nothing of the sort.  

	Not to mention your own posts.


>> >  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.  
>
>  Who said anything about democracy?  You think that capitalism fulfils
>the needs of the people... well, I suppose it's what you define as
>"need".  If you mean material possessions, I agree, it's a fine way of
>amassing wealth for the people in power.  


	For everyone.  Should the workers work to provide the lazy with
	all of the benefits?


>It may even be a fairly
>natural way to operate, but it's makes for a sad world -- full of greed,
>power inbalances, and immense suffering.



	Somehow, I find hope of success a lotmore palatable than equality
	of suffering.


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

>  If you accept that that is the way the world works.  It seems that, as
>you said in your post about communism, it works well for insects, as
>well as (non-human) animals.  As culture progresses, though, I think it
>ceases to function as a good model for our behavior.  Relying on it to
>model your daily behavior is a sad thing.


	That's nice, now try and provide an alternative.  What, can't?

	Or are you one of those pathetic intellectual wanna-be's that
	posts something like "socialism doesn't work, communism doesn't 
	work, capitalism doesn't work" and can't imagine something
	better, but says that it exists?  If so, take heart that you're
	not alone, you can find plenty of that sort among the 
	voodoo scholastics--socy, wmst, etc.

	(the same people with low incomes, massive ignorance, etc..)


>>    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.
>
>  Indeed -- as I said, believing in the what you do for the ultimate
>answers is akin to believing in her.  


	You can philosophize all you want, but it wont put bread on
	the table.  Those who sit around and think themselves so deep
	for pondering ad infinitum are merely failures who are unable
	to commit and try and make something work.


>It's almost heartening to see that
>you have some grasp on some things, even if you miss most of what others
>try to communicate with you.


	Are you trying to pretend that you or Jean have tried to communicate
	something at all--or even something original?



-- 
       "If you can't eat sand, why the hell are you living in a desert?"

     Equality is a delusion, suffering is a fairy tale and God is a fantasy.
       Blaming society for inequality is like blaming the sky for rain.
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,sci.skeptic,soc.women,soc.men