Show Posts

Profile Info
- Summary
- Show Stats
- Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - neoteny

Pages: 1 ... 439 440 [441]

6601

Main / Matriarchy

Aug 07, 2003, 09:39 AM

Heart over on MsBB:

----

Jeannie: few women in patriarchy have NOT served as sex workers to men, whether they had the official job title or not

So sadly true. One of the HUGEST regrets of my life is all the *years* I have spent concerned with my overall fuckability. Goddamn, what I'd do to go back and do things over, and what an absolute *revelation* it is to be past that time.

I swear, 50 year old women (and up) ought to rule the world. We'd kick some serious woman hating bootay. Things look so different from this side, honestly.

----

6602

History and Politics / The blame game

Aug 03, 2003, 03:52 AM

A reader's letter in The Globe And Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20030802/SATLETS02-3/TPComment/Letters

Excerpt:
"For example, the article states that, "Of the 84,000 children whose family employment situation had changed because of the child's impairment . . ." Why is the child's impairment the emphasis here, not the lack of services? No parent needs to experience loss of employment, or make any other so-called "sacrifices" just because their child has an impairment. Rather it is the lack of personal attendants, inclusive childcare spaces and respite care that is the problem here."

I find it utterly fascinating that some people sincerely believe that circumstances out of their control (like the presence of a disabled child) shouldn't cramp their style, ie. there should be no difference between parents who have a 'healthy' child as opposed to someone who has to cope w/ a disabled one. I'm not looking down on people who are unfortunate enough of having an offspring w/ disabilities, but this clear expectation of "equal outcomes regardless of inequal situations" baffles me.

6603

Main / Re: Why are men afraid of commitment

Aug 03, 2003, 03:43 AM

Quote from: "Pernicious"

[...] Many women ask, why do men fear commitment? [...]

Well, would you like to be committed?

But seriously, I think what quite few men fear isn't commitment; it is rather the expectation of one-sided commitment, without reciprocation (or the arbitrary withdrawal of commitment to them).

6604

Main / The United States' mixed-up rape laws

Jul 31, 2003, 08:54 AM

Quote from: "Dan Lynch"

Thank god there are some individuals left who will fight this tyranny.

But don't kid yourself. I've seen this happen and I've seen the judge accept the testimony as valid.

Well, Justice Nadelle could say such words 'cause her behaviour was so over the top... but in any other case a male judge would have been afraid to utter anything of the sort, otherwise a gaggle of feminist pressure groups would have logged complaints with all sorts of judicial bodies.

6605

Main / Re: We all get a mention on the Ms. Boards!

Jul 31, 2003, 08:50 AM

Quote from: "Analog Worms"

[...] I mean f--king hell I would have thought those MS bitches would have gone pyscho over it. [...]

Try to advocate for taking away their right to vote (actually, that could be done by convicting 'em as felons for belonging to a hate organization :twisted: ) and that'll get their goat...

6606

Main / The United States' mixed-up rape laws

Jul 31, 2003, 12:58 AM

Quote from: "Dan Lynch"

[...] Women will lie if they know they can get away with it. Its human nature reinforced by the law. This doesn't make women liars anymore than men, but it allows them to use it as a form of violence. [...]

A classic case was Cathy Fordham (one link to her exploits is http://fact.on.ca/news/news0008/oc000808.htm). She wasn't psychotic or anything like that; she just used the twisted laws (and law enforcement and the so-called justice system) of Canada to lord over men and "keep 'em in their place". Had to make many mistakes until the system caught up with her...

"Phil Francois, who eventually helped blow the whistle on Ms. Fordham and the house, testified that living there was a harrowing experience. During his stay, Mr. Francois befriended Alan Kamen, who was trying to kick a drinking problem. By the end of July, neither man could stand it any longer. They moved out and contacted authorities.

Ms. Fordham had confiscated Mr. Francois' and Mr. Kamen's belongings before they left. On Aug., 12, 1997, a nasty dispute erupted when they showed up with a police escort to get their things. According to police notes, Ms. Fordham was menacing and manipulated the situation to thwart the men's efforts. But they eventually got their belongings and left.

A day later, Ms. Fordham told police Mr. Kamen had beaten her at about 1 a.m. that night. But after an investigation, she ended up being charged with public mischief for filing a false complaint.

Under withering cross-examination during her trial last month, Ms. Fordham suddenly accused Mr. Kamen of sexually assaulting her -- the first time she had made that allegation.

Justice Jack Nadelle, who heard the case, didn't believe her. "I didn't find Ms. Fordham to be a believable or credible witness," he said in court. "She changed her testimony when it suited her, she cried at strategic moments, other times she was combative or evasive.""

6607

Main / Lynne-bob got banned at MS

Jul 31, 2003, 12:10 AM

Quote from: "Dan Lynch"

by the way, has anyone been able to guess which poster I am over at Ms? I've been there for over a year subtlly inserting my agenda.

I'm betting on you being Shy_Miss_Kitty...

6608

Main / The United States' mixed-up rape laws

Jul 31, 2003, 12:07 AM

Quote from: "Dan Lynch"

[...] Women will lie if they know they can get away with it. Its human nature reinforced by the law. This doesn't make women liars anymore than men, but it allows them to use it as a form of violence.

Well said.

Quote

I guess we keep coming back to conservative values in the end don't we.

I'm not sure of that; (some/most?) trial lawyers (who fund & run the Democratic Party) wouldn't like that, now would they?

6609

Main / 1st public gay high school set for NY

Jul 29, 2003, 04:55 AM

It is interesting to see the reaction to this news at MsBB; 'Norah' calls for "drastic measures to eliminate homophobia in public schools". I like that word 'drastic', especially when the definition of 'homophobia' is rather fluid in standard RadFem practice...