"united we stand"
Mon, 8 Apr 2002 11:05:59 -0700
Don't you think this 'smells right' logic would have been fully tested in
the late 60's to early 70's when the women's movement was strong? Or hell,
even better, in the WW2 era, where women were really acquring the sweat of
men -- as in the factories.
I dont' think its pheremones. I do happen to think that -some- guys have a
real goddamn problem relinqushing power to assertive, strong willed women.
I can poitn out two very clear examples:
The Taliban, who were so scared of women possibly getting somewhere, that
they kept them back through fear, intimidation and a warped version of the
Koran. This wasn't waiting for the right scent, but utter fear of the
possibility that women (who were actually functioning in society) might
tarnish or destroy their traditions.
The Christian Coalition, et al: Again, another solid use of selective
religiousness. What better a guise to hide from the possibility of women in
power (in the church, in the workforce, of their own bodies ) than behind
arcane and sectionalized scripture. They've used this selectivity for more
than just bitching about women -- slavery and bigotry come to mind, and they
have no compunction in even giving women (who often make up majorities of
the church, and have over history) any of the roles of power.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Lawrence Murphy" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "carey" <email@example.com>
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 10:38 AM
Subject: Re: "united we stand"
> >>>>> "c" == carey <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> c> I'd argue that as long as status quo perpetuators ... continue
> c> to exist, such evolution isn't even fathomable.
> But maybe even that misses the point: It has nothing to do with anyone
> _maintaining_ the status quo any more than the right mix of pherimones
> cause an arousal. Maybe, fantatic attention grabbers aside, the
> traditional "old boys clubs" would really honestly /like/ to grant
> equal status and access, but they are waiting (in vain) for a woman
> who 'smells' right; until the pre-cambrian brain is patched with a new
> action-pattern, this situation will always 'feel' somehow wrong to
> them, even though rationally they see it as profitable and just (in
> that order).
> Hmmm ... social change through mass DNA manipulations? Maybe, like
> William Burroughs proposed back in the early 50's, the problem is
> viral: Implementing Affirmative Action might require genetically
> engineered virii to spread modified RNA and, whoo boy, that's a-gonna
> open one great big kettle of fish.
> Gary Lawrence Murphy <email@example.com> TeleDynamics Communications Inc
> Business Innovations Through Open Source Systems: http://www.teledyn.com
> "Computers are useless. They can only give you answers."(Pablo Picasso)