And we never did get to talk "shop" about baseball at camp - next year - I promise!
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
Moderator: Available
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
Len, I can picture you with that grin on your face as you typed that.
And we never did get to talk "shop" about baseball at camp - next year - I promise!
And we never did get to talk "shop" about baseball at camp - next year - I promise!
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
Panther-sama -
I probably shouldn't do this either, but here goes.
150 years ago women were legally beaten by their husbands so long as the rod used was no thicker than the diameter of his thumb - which is where the term "rule of thumb" came from.
100 years ago, women could go to jail for smoking in public. 75 years ago, women were jailed for demonstrating peacefully for the Right to vote. 50 years ago it took an Act of God to get into medical school, 100 years ago there was only ONE American lady doctor (to the best of my knowledege). 80 years ago women were jailed for wearing slacks in public OR private.
100 years ago, women could be publicly FLOGGED for speaking to a man without his speaking to to her first.
35 years ago, it was still illegal for women to have an abortion that was medically necessary. 20 years ago, it was still legal for a husband to shoot his unfaithful wife in several states - with NO punishment whatsoever! The reciprical was NOT legal, however.
Shall I go on?
Respectfully,
Lee Darrow, C.Ht.
I probably shouldn't do this either, but here goes.
150 years ago women were legally beaten by their husbands so long as the rod used was no thicker than the diameter of his thumb - which is where the term "rule of thumb" came from.
100 years ago, women could go to jail for smoking in public. 75 years ago, women were jailed for demonstrating peacefully for the Right to vote. 50 years ago it took an Act of God to get into medical school, 100 years ago there was only ONE American lady doctor (to the best of my knowledege). 80 years ago women were jailed for wearing slacks in public OR private.
100 years ago, women could be publicly FLOGGED for speaking to a man without his speaking to to her first.
35 years ago, it was still illegal for women to have an abortion that was medically necessary. 20 years ago, it was still legal for a husband to shoot his unfaithful wife in several states - with NO punishment whatsoever! The reciprical was NOT legal, however.
Shall I go on?
Respectfully,
Lee Darrow, C.Ht.
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
Panther-sama,
Please note my last post was somewhat in jest. I hope you understand that I hit the wrong icon at the top.
My bad. Proving that men are STILL good as bad examples!
Respectfully,
Lee Darrow, C.Ht.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeeDarrow:
Panther-sama -
I probably shouldn't do this either, but here goes.
150 years ago women were legally beaten by their husbands so long as the rod used was no thicker than the diameter of his thumb - which is where the term "rule of thumb" came from.
100 years ago, women could go to jail for smoking in public. 75 years ago, women were jailed for demonstrating peacefully for the Right to vote. 50 years ago it took an Act of God to get into medical school, 100 years ago there was only ONE American lady doctor (to the best of my knowledege). 80 years ago women were jailed for wearing slacks in public OR private.
100 years ago, women could be publicly FLOGGED for speaking to a man without his speaking to to her first.
35 years ago, it was still illegal for women to have an abortion that was medically necessary. 20 years ago, it was still legal for a husband to shoot his unfaithful wife in several states - with NO punishment whatsoever! The reciprical was NOT legal, however.
Shall I go on?
Respectfully,
Lee Darrow, C.Ht.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Please note my last post was somewhat in jest. I hope you understand that I hit the wrong icon at the top.
My bad. Proving that men are STILL good as bad examples!
Respectfully,
Lee Darrow, C.Ht.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeeDarrow:
Panther-sama -
I probably shouldn't do this either, but here goes.
150 years ago women were legally beaten by their husbands so long as the rod used was no thicker than the diameter of his thumb - which is where the term "rule of thumb" came from.
100 years ago, women could go to jail for smoking in public. 75 years ago, women were jailed for demonstrating peacefully for the Right to vote. 50 years ago it took an Act of God to get into medical school, 100 years ago there was only ONE American lady doctor (to the best of my knowledege). 80 years ago women were jailed for wearing slacks in public OR private.
100 years ago, women could be publicly FLOGGED for speaking to a man without his speaking to to her first.
35 years ago, it was still illegal for women to have an abortion that was medically necessary. 20 years ago, it was still legal for a husband to shoot his unfaithful wife in several states - with NO punishment whatsoever! The reciprical was NOT legal, however.
Shall I go on?
Respectfully,
Lee Darrow, C.Ht.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
-
Allen M.
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
How's this for today's inequality news:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
------------------
Allen Moulton from Uechi-ryu Etcetera
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
Not exactly inequality between the sexes, rather one of the sexes was unequal to the other....The couple, 19-year-old Vishal and Sonu, who was 18, were hanged one after another from the roof of a house in their home village ... Their crime - to fall in love and come from different castes.
------------------
Allen Moulton from Uechi-ryu Etcetera
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
Allen,
I was genuinely concerned I had offended you and others for that matter. Because of that it didn't cross my mind that your comment may have been light hearted. So I will put my soap box back in the closet.
Lee,
Thank you for the elaboration on my broad statements. That is the angle from which I am coming.
Len,
Thank you for clarifying things more. You are absolutely correct about expressing feelings and thoughts in written word. I'm working on it.
Panther,
It was interesting how you compare reality of yesteryear to a scripted television show. I pose this, "Don't you think Clara Barton would have been a doctor if she could have been?"
Just so you may understand a bit better why I will always get on my soapbox when it comes to the woman's movement I will give you some personal history.
My grandmother, God rest her soul, would have been 101 in 2 weeks if she hadn't passed away 2 years ago. I spent many summers with her growing up. She was a very independent women who worked for the welfare dept out of Brockton MA. She took her career as far as it could go. She was ridiculed, put down, harrassed in her career and life for wanting all she could get and be.
She told me many stories and gave me much insight. She told me as a woman it was my responsibility to see that all that women have fought for in the past never be taken from us. To appreciate what we have and not forget where we came from.
But, one thing that has stuck with me for over 25 years is this, she told me to never consider a man's opinion of how the world is for a woman because they don't know of what they speak.
This is my world and where I come from. My grandmother was there, she lived through it. So it is her knowledge that I will let guide me.
Oh by the way, my grandmother was not allowed to marry the man she loved because her father forbid it. She instead had to marry the man her father wanted for her. She lived and suffered through a loveless marriage for over 60 years until my grandfahter passed.
Rant *off. I have no ill feelings for anyone because of their opinions. I enjoy discussions like this. It allows both parties the opportunity to see things differently or learn something new.
Good training, Peace Out...
Laura
I was genuinely concerned I had offended you and others for that matter. Because of that it didn't cross my mind that your comment may have been light hearted. So I will put my soap box back in the closet.
Lee,
Thank you for the elaboration on my broad statements. That is the angle from which I am coming.
Len,
Thank you for clarifying things more. You are absolutely correct about expressing feelings and thoughts in written word. I'm working on it.
Panther,
It was interesting how you compare reality of yesteryear to a scripted television show. I pose this, "Don't you think Clara Barton would have been a doctor if she could have been?"
Just so you may understand a bit better why I will always get on my soapbox when it comes to the woman's movement I will give you some personal history.
My grandmother, God rest her soul, would have been 101 in 2 weeks if she hadn't passed away 2 years ago. I spent many summers with her growing up. She was a very independent women who worked for the welfare dept out of Brockton MA. She took her career as far as it could go. She was ridiculed, put down, harrassed in her career and life for wanting all she could get and be.
She told me many stories and gave me much insight. She told me as a woman it was my responsibility to see that all that women have fought for in the past never be taken from us. To appreciate what we have and not forget where we came from.
But, one thing that has stuck with me for over 25 years is this, she told me to never consider a man's opinion of how the world is for a woman because they don't know of what they speak.
This is my world and where I come from. My grandmother was there, she lived through it. So it is her knowledge that I will let guide me.
Oh by the way, my grandmother was not allowed to marry the man she loved because her father forbid it. She instead had to marry the man her father wanted for her. She lived and suffered through a loveless marriage for over 60 years until my grandfahter passed.
Rant *off. I have no ill feelings for anyone because of their opinions. I enjoy discussions like this. It allows both parties the opportunity to see things differently or learn something new.
Good training, Peace Out...
Laura
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
Originally posted by Panther:
don't discount an ally simply because of anatomy.
*********************************************
Thank you for reciprocating Panther. Your dinner table discussions growing up must have been very interesting. Thank you also for opening my eyes a bit. I tend to be too suspect of people at times and don't hear everything they are saying. I can now better see who you are and where you are coming from. I will put more thought into what you are saying in your posts. Not that I didn't before but I was definitely a bit judgemental and I apologize.
I do respect your opinions and thanks for helping me grow.
I like what you have to say about what freedoms people should have. I am just concerned about the weirdos who would hurt others because these freedoms would make it easier for them to have access to the guns and drugs. I am just thinking of some sicko who has drugs and kidnaps a woman at gunpoint. Keeps her a prisoner all doped up and rapes her until she dies or he kills her.
How would this be overcome? I think regulation does keep a small control over situations like this.
Originally posted by Lee:
However, I must take issue with something you said in your post - that you should never listen to a man's opinion of what a woman's world is like because we know not of what we speak.
Perhaps it was this internal experience that your late grandmother was referring to?
********************************************
Lee, I can only aspire to be as well a writer and thinker as you. You not only seem to know what I am thinking and trying to say, you express it so eloquently.
I always took what my grandmother said as the internal experience. There are just some things men can't know because they are not a woman. The opposite holds true. There are just some things I can't know because I am not a man. And I feel it is because of that internal experience that you speak of.
Thank you also for taking issue with my comments. I know that the way I feel about something may be off base and that is why I take these opportunities to try and discuss them. It helps me to learn about myself, others, and how to better express my opinions.
Gentlemen, this has been an enlighting discussion. I have much respect for both of you and thank you for taking the time to share with me. It is not often that I have the opportunity to discuss being a woman with inteligent open minded men.
I hope that you will continue to express your thoughts on what I post.
Good training, Peace out....
Laura
don't discount an ally simply because of anatomy.
*********************************************
Thank you for reciprocating Panther. Your dinner table discussions growing up must have been very interesting. Thank you also for opening my eyes a bit. I tend to be too suspect of people at times and don't hear everything they are saying. I can now better see who you are and where you are coming from. I will put more thought into what you are saying in your posts. Not that I didn't before but I was definitely a bit judgemental and I apologize.
I do respect your opinions and thanks for helping me grow.
I like what you have to say about what freedoms people should have. I am just concerned about the weirdos who would hurt others because these freedoms would make it easier for them to have access to the guns and drugs. I am just thinking of some sicko who has drugs and kidnaps a woman at gunpoint. Keeps her a prisoner all doped up and rapes her until she dies or he kills her.
How would this be overcome? I think regulation does keep a small control over situations like this.
Originally posted by Lee:
However, I must take issue with something you said in your post - that you should never listen to a man's opinion of what a woman's world is like because we know not of what we speak.
Perhaps it was this internal experience that your late grandmother was referring to?
********************************************
Lee, I can only aspire to be as well a writer and thinker as you. You not only seem to know what I am thinking and trying to say, you express it so eloquently.
I always took what my grandmother said as the internal experience. There are just some things men can't know because they are not a woman. The opposite holds true. There are just some things I can't know because I am not a man. And I feel it is because of that internal experience that you speak of.
Thank you also for taking issue with my comments. I know that the way I feel about something may be off base and that is why I take these opportunities to try and discuss them. It helps me to learn about myself, others, and how to better express my opinions.
Gentlemen, this has been an enlighting discussion. I have much respect for both of you and thank you for taking the time to share with me. It is not often that I have the opportunity to discuss being a woman with inteligent open minded men.
I hope that you will continue to express your thoughts on what I post.
Good training, Peace out....
Laura
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
Lee Darrow-San, read on and you'll see not only where I'm coming from, but also where I'm heading with this.
Dukie, thank you for sharing your background, position and grandmother's history. Let me do a little reciprocation.
I was born in the country. Nearest neighbor was over 3 miles away. My family consisted of my Daddy, my Momma, an older sister, myself (only son), and two younger sisters. I was taught from the beginning that ALL people are created equal and should be treated that way. I was taught that ALL women deserve and must be treated with the utmost respect (unless they do something to prove that they don't deserve respect). My Daddy and I were the only "men" around... period. We couldn't even get an old tom-cat to hang around our house. All of us kids were instilled with the belief that we could do anything we wanted to... all of us. My sisters were assertive and active for their rights from early ages. Being their brother, I fought side-by-side with them on their issues. Having learned these valuable lessons, I've often stood up against authority figures who sought to deny women (and minorities) their rightful place and even their fundamental equality of rights. All three of my sisters are professional women and all three are knowledgeable about their freedoms, liberties, and rights. The four of us seek each other's counsel often... especially on gender issues, which can be quite difficult, because I don't have the same attitudes that they often need to ask about. I can certainly understand the belief in not considering a man's opinion of a woman's world, but I must point out that 1) the reverse could be said, 2) don't discount an ally simply because of anatomy, 3) consider the vote... men had it and women did not, sooooo... I guess that proves that at least 1/2 of the men at the time were on the women's side of the issue, understood their position and supported them.
Regardless, I'm a firm believer in taking the phrase "... that all men(kind) are created equal (in the eyes of the law and their Creator), endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights..." very literally.
With that in mind... let me continue with my previously posted premise:
IMNSHO, a woman today (actually anyone) should be able to go to the local store and purchase...
1) an M-16 (yes, full-auto) with an M-203 grenade launcher, a sawed-off shotgun and a silenced semi-automatic pistol along with as much ammo for them as she wants. Cash, no background check, no paperwork, no license, no questions asked.
proceed to then purchase
2) A bag of cocaine, a bag of heroin, a bag of marijuana, and any other drug that she wants. Cash, no prescription, no doctor's paperwork, no questions asked.
then proceed to purchase
3) rolling papers, tobacco products and alcohol without being taxed and without an age limit associated with them. Cash, no questions asked, no age limit.
and further purchase
4) any other products she wants to buy or barter for and then
5) load all of those things in her car, van, SUV, semi-truck, sports-car, motorcycle (though for this example that's problematic), without needing a registration, without needing a license to operate, without any required safety inspection, and she should be able to travel about freely without fear of being pulled over to "show her papers" or any other harassement.
and also
6) put her kids in that vehicle to head home... kids which shouldn't need to be "registered" at birth with government approval and shouldn't have a government required identification and tracking number (SSN). Head home to her husband, who she can chose to be married to in the eyes of their G-D, but such relationship shouldn't be required to have a government license...
AND
7) if her husband has to be away from home or if she doesn't have a husband for whatever reason and that woman is attacked by some low-life piece of scum (whether a stranger or someone known to her), then she should know how to and use the previously mentioned M-16 (or silenced semi-automatic pistol or sawed-off shotgun) to dispatch said low-life into the depths of Hades where he belongs... and that woman should be congratulated and then consoled... congratulated for protecting her family and property... and consoled for having to bury the afore mentioned piece of scum.
and finally that woman should be able to do all of those things at the ripe old age of 14.
(Let's see how that goes over... )
Dukie, thank you for sharing your background, position and grandmother's history. Let me do a little reciprocation.
I was born in the country. Nearest neighbor was over 3 miles away. My family consisted of my Daddy, my Momma, an older sister, myself (only son), and two younger sisters. I was taught from the beginning that ALL people are created equal and should be treated that way. I was taught that ALL women deserve and must be treated with the utmost respect (unless they do something to prove that they don't deserve respect). My Daddy and I were the only "men" around... period. We couldn't even get an old tom-cat to hang around our house.
All of us kids were instilled with the belief that we could do anything we wanted to... all of us. My sisters were assertive and active for their rights from early ages. Being their brother, I fought side-by-side with them on their issues. Having learned these valuable lessons, I've often stood up against authority figures who sought to deny women (and minorities) their rightful place and even their fundamental equality of rights. All three of my sisters are professional women and all three are knowledgeable about their freedoms, liberties, and rights. The four of us seek each other's counsel often... especially on gender issues, which can be quite difficult, because I don't have the same attitudes that they often need to ask about. I can certainly understand the belief in not considering a man's opinion of a woman's world, but I must point out that 1) the reverse could be said, 2) don't discount an ally simply because of anatomy, 3) consider the vote... men had it and women did not, sooooo... I guess that proves that at least 1/2 of the men at the time were on the women's side of the issue, understood their position and supported them. Regardless, I'm a firm believer in taking the phrase "... that all men(kind) are created equal (in the eyes of the law and their Creator), endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights..." very literally.
With that in mind... let me continue with my previously posted premise:
IMNSHO, a woman today (actually anyone) should be able to go to the local store and purchase...
1) an M-16 (yes, full-auto) with an M-203 grenade launcher, a sawed-off shotgun and a silenced semi-automatic pistol along with as much ammo for them as she wants. Cash, no background check, no paperwork, no license, no questions asked.
proceed to then purchase
2) A bag of cocaine, a bag of heroin, a bag of marijuana, and any other drug that she wants. Cash, no prescription, no doctor's paperwork, no questions asked.
then proceed to purchase
3) rolling papers, tobacco products and alcohol without being taxed and without an age limit associated with them. Cash, no questions asked, no age limit.
and further purchase
4) any other products she wants to buy or barter for and then
5) load all of those things in her car, van, SUV, semi-truck, sports-car, motorcycle (though for this example that's problematic), without needing a registration, without needing a license to operate, without any required safety inspection, and she should be able to travel about freely without fear of being pulled over to "show her papers" or any other harassement.
and also
6) put her kids in that vehicle to head home... kids which shouldn't need to be "registered" at birth with government approval and shouldn't have a government required identification and tracking number (SSN). Head home to her husband, who she can chose to be married to in the eyes of their G-D, but such relationship shouldn't be required to have a government license...
AND
7) if her husband has to be away from home or if she doesn't have a husband for whatever reason and that woman is attacked by some low-life piece of scum (whether a stranger or someone known to her), then she should know how to and use the previously mentioned M-16 (or silenced semi-automatic pistol or sawed-off shotgun) to dispatch said low-life into the depths of Hades where he belongs... and that woman should be congratulated and then consoled... congratulated for protecting her family and property... and consoled for having to bury the afore mentioned piece of scum.
and finally that woman should be able to do all of those things at the ripe old age of 14.
(Let's see how that goes over...
)I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
Laura-sama,
My sincerest condolences on your recent loss. She sounds like she was one incredible person.
Thanks for the kind words. Women's issues are and always have been something close to my heart.
However, I must take issue with something you said in your post - that you should never listen to a man's opinion of what a woman's world is like because we know not of what we speak.
To be frank, that discounts historical research and the ability of one person to understand another, completely.
While I may not have the "through the eyes" experience of being a woman, I do believe that I have enough native intelligence, empathy and observational skills to be able to create an informed opinion, based on what I have seen , heard, read and experienced.
Just because I do not have the inner perspective, does not mean I cannot observe, correlate and relate experiences and information and draw valid conclusions from them.
It's sort of like saying, "you're not Scots, so you can't know what it is to be Scots." It's like saying that, because I am not a panda, I cannot understand their lives, motivations, wants and needs.
I think we both know that is simply not true.
Conversely, I do NOT have the through the eyes experience of being a woman and, thus, can only report and base my conclusions and opinions on what I observe in behavior and is reported to be BY women with regards to their INTERNAL experience.
Perhaps it was this internal experience that your late grandmother was referring to?
While I believe I can understand, from a third person perspective, much of the female experience in today's culture, it is just that - a third person viewpoint. I do not have the benefit of the internal experience. But that does not mean that I cannot grasp the concepts, project myself into the situation and come to a better understanding?
Please understand, this is not as flame, but a clarification of my own opinions.
Minority discrimination has been the way of the world for a long time - wrong as it is, IMNSHO. Whether the minority is racially delineated, based on gender lines, place of birth, religion or hair color, it exists. Wrong as it is, it exists. And it is something that I have resisted and fought against my entire life.
Respectfully,
Lee Darrow, C.Ht.
My sincerest condolences on your recent loss. She sounds like she was one incredible person.
Thanks for the kind words. Women's issues are and always have been something close to my heart.
However, I must take issue with something you said in your post - that you should never listen to a man's opinion of what a woman's world is like because we know not of what we speak.
To be frank, that discounts historical research and the ability of one person to understand another, completely.
While I may not have the "through the eyes" experience of being a woman, I do believe that I have enough native intelligence, empathy and observational skills to be able to create an informed opinion, based on what I have seen , heard, read and experienced.
Just because I do not have the inner perspective, does not mean I cannot observe, correlate and relate experiences and information and draw valid conclusions from them.
It's sort of like saying, "you're not Scots, so you can't know what it is to be Scots." It's like saying that, because I am not a panda, I cannot understand their lives, motivations, wants and needs.
I think we both know that is simply not true.
Conversely, I do NOT have the through the eyes experience of being a woman and, thus, can only report and base my conclusions and opinions on what I observe in behavior and is reported to be BY women with regards to their INTERNAL experience.
Perhaps it was this internal experience that your late grandmother was referring to?
While I believe I can understand, from a third person perspective, much of the female experience in today's culture, it is just that - a third person viewpoint. I do not have the benefit of the internal experience. But that does not mean that I cannot grasp the concepts, project myself into the situation and come to a better understanding?
Please understand, this is not as flame, but a clarification of my own opinions.
Minority discrimination has been the way of the world for a long time - wrong as it is, IMNSHO. Whether the minority is racially delineated, based on gender lines, place of birth, religion or hair color, it exists. Wrong as it is, it exists. And it is something that I have resisted and fought against my entire life.
Respectfully,
Lee Darrow, C.Ht.
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
Aww, shucks, ma'am! (couldn't resist)
Laura, I don't know when I have felt so complimented for taking issue with anyone - especially with the person on the other end of the discussion. You are a rare person, indeed to have such a wide view and open mind. It's something I strive for and rarely achieve.
I'm glad you twigged to the internal experience issue. It IS a difference, but one that I believe can be bridged, to a certain extent, with intellect, observation, analysis and empathy.
Now, I did say "to a certain extent," because no one can really "see through the eyes of another" and thus know their internal experience. But I firmly believe that, through communication, such as this conversation among new friends, such a bridge can be built.
Again, thank you for the kind words. To be honest, I just write what I think and feel. If that is useful to anyone, then I am happy. If not, I'll try harder next time.
Respectfully (and blushing all the way),
Lee Darrow, C.Ht.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dukie:
Lee, I can only aspire to be as well a writer and thinker as you. You not only seem to know what I am thinking and trying to say, you express it so eloquently.
I always took what my grandmother said as the internal experience. There are just some things men can't know because they are not a woman. The opposite holds true. There are just some things I can't know because I am not a man. And I feel it is because of that internal experience that you speak of.
Thank you also for taking issue with my comments. I know that the way I feel about something may be off base and that is why I take these opportunities to try and discuss them. It helps me to learn about myself, others, and how to better express my opinions.
Gentlemen, this has been an enlighting discussion. I have much respect for both of you and thank you for taking the time to share with me. It is not often that I have the opportunity to discuss being a woman with inteligent open minded men.
I hope that you will continue to express your thoughts on what I post.
Good training, Peace out....
Laura<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Laura, I don't know when I have felt so complimented for taking issue with anyone - especially with the person on the other end of the discussion. You are a rare person, indeed to have such a wide view and open mind. It's something I strive for and rarely achieve.
I'm glad you twigged to the internal experience issue. It IS a difference, but one that I believe can be bridged, to a certain extent, with intellect, observation, analysis and empathy.
Now, I did say "to a certain extent," because no one can really "see through the eyes of another" and thus know their internal experience. But I firmly believe that, through communication, such as this conversation among new friends, such a bridge can be built.
Again, thank you for the kind words. To be honest, I just write what I think and feel. If that is useful to anyone, then I am happy. If not, I'll try harder next time.
Respectfully (and blushing all the way),
Lee Darrow, C.Ht.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dukie:
Lee, I can only aspire to be as well a writer and thinker as you. You not only seem to know what I am thinking and trying to say, you express it so eloquently.
I always took what my grandmother said as the internal experience. There are just some things men can't know because they are not a woman. The opposite holds true. There are just some things I can't know because I am not a man. And I feel it is because of that internal experience that you speak of.
Thank you also for taking issue with my comments. I know that the way I feel about something may be off base and that is why I take these opportunities to try and discuss them. It helps me to learn about myself, others, and how to better express my opinions.
Gentlemen, this has been an enlighting discussion. I have much respect for both of you and thank you for taking the time to share with me. It is not often that I have the opportunity to discuss being a woman with inteligent open minded men.
I hope that you will continue to express your thoughts on what I post.
Good training, Peace out....
Laura<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dukie:
Your dinner table discussions growing up must have been very interesting.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ummmm... Yep! BTW, I consider myself "Heinz 57", meaning that I've got a little bit of a number of things inside. IE: Scottish, Cherokee, Anglo-Irish-French, ummmm... mutt! The reason I say that is to let you know that my paternal grandmother was Cherokee and my Daddy refused to ever mention it. Why? Because it would have prevented his relationship and marriage to my Momma... A marriage that lasted through thick and thin for 45 years until he passed away ~4-1/2 years ago. So, I know a little bit about the ole "racial" issues.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I am just thinking of some sicko who has drugs and kidnaps a woman at gunpoint. Keeps her a prisoner all doped up and rapes her until she dies or he kills her.
How would this be overcome?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well... bad things happen. I don't mean that to sound cold or cruel, it's just the truth. There are bad people out there and they do bad things and sometimes (often) they aren't stopped before the damage is done. And that's now. With all the regulations and laws that we live under! So how would I overcome this? I would teach women to live in Condition Yellow. I would teach them basic VSD and dirty-tricks self-defense techniques (you know the ones that aren't allowed in any tournament). AND I'd help them become proficient (and comfortable carrying) 1) a good tactical folding knife, 2) pepper-spray, and 3) a handgun. NO registration, NO licensing, NO restrictions. Since the bad guys are going to ignore the law, obtain the drugs/guns and commit the kidnapping, rapes and murders anyway, it only stands to reason that those who need to defend themselves be given the best opportunity and tools for that self-defense. I'm sorry, but that still isn't any guarantee. However, I will point out that over 2/3 of felons polled responded that they would or have avoided a potential victim for fear that (s)he was armed. I *like* that. Think of it this way... Which would you rather have in your possession when confronted with that kidnapper... a cellphone to call 911 or a handgun that you are proficient with? (Before you answer here's a fact: In one recent year from an average State that we were able to obtain records for there were 186,861 calls to 911 that took over an hour to for a response! AND in over 70,000 of those calls the police never responded! Now think of your answer... ) Personally, (even though the phrase comes from John Lennon and he meant it differently) I'm a firm believer in "Instant Kharma"... Attack someone and they have the Right to give you the last bit of education you'll recieve on this planet... "Instant Kharma". People (women) need to understand that they are personally responsible for their own well-being. (including self-defense) Courts have continuously held that the police have no duty to protect private citizens only "society at large" (and I'm still trying to figure out what the #%@$ that means)!
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
Just more food for thought....
Your dinner table discussions growing up must have been very interesting.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ummmm... Yep!
BTW, I consider myself "Heinz 57", meaning that I've got a little bit of a number of things inside. IE: Scottish, Cherokee, Anglo-Irish-French, ummmm... mutt! The reason I say that is to let you know that my paternal grandmother was Cherokee and my Daddy refused to ever mention it. Why? Because it would have prevented his relationship and marriage to my Momma... A marriage that lasted through thick and thin for 45 years until he passed away ~4-1/2 years ago. So, I know a little bit about the ole "racial" issues.<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
You have totally made my day. My goal is always to provoke thought.I will put more thought into what you are saying in your posts.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
Not accepted. Because it's not needed. I posted the way I did to set-up the thought process that was continued. I'm guilty.Not that I didn't before but I was definitely a bit judgemental and I apologize.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
The access was there for everyone before and the "laws" don't stop criminals from getting access. That's why they're called criminals and since they already ignore those laws and get the items they desire (often using them irresponsibly), then why have the laws that only prevent those who are "law-abiding" and who can and do act responsibly from getting the same items? (On a side note: As a society I'm certain we could all agree that no one has the need for carrying around nuclear pinatas or for breading ebola infected pidgeons. But these are definitely a class of item of dubious distinction.)I like what you have to say about what freedoms people should have. I am just concerned about the weirdos who would hurt others because these freedoms would make it easier for them to have access to the guns and drugs.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I am just thinking of some sicko who has drugs and kidnaps a woman at gunpoint. Keeps her a prisoner all doped up and rapes her until she dies or he kills her.
How would this be overcome?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well... bad things happen. I don't mean that to sound cold or cruel, it's just the truth. There are bad people out there and they do bad things and sometimes (often) they aren't stopped before the damage is done. And that's now. With all the regulations and laws that we live under! So how would I overcome this? I would teach women to live in Condition Yellow. I would teach them basic VSD and dirty-tricks self-defense techniques (you know the ones that aren't allowed in any tournament). AND I'd help them become proficient (and comfortable carrying) 1) a good tactical folding knife, 2) pepper-spray, and 3) a handgun. NO registration, NO licensing, NO restrictions. Since the bad guys are going to ignore the law, obtain the drugs/guns and commit the kidnapping, rapes and murders anyway, it only stands to reason that those who need to defend themselves be given the best opportunity and tools for that self-defense. I'm sorry, but that still isn't any guarantee. However, I will point out that over 2/3 of felons polled responded that they would or have avoided a potential victim for fear that (s)he was armed. I *like* that. Think of it this way... Which would you rather have in your possession when confronted with that kidnapper... a cellphone to call 911 or a handgun that you are proficient with? (Before you answer here's a fact: In one recent year from an average State that we were able to obtain records for there were 186,861 calls to 911 that took over an hour to for a response! AND in over 70,000 of those calls the police never responded! Now think of your answer... ) Personally, (even though the phrase comes from John Lennon and he meant it differently) I'm a firm believer in "Instant Kharma"... Attack someone and they have the Right to give you the last bit of education you'll recieve on this planet... "Instant Kharma".
People (women) need to understand that they are personally responsible for their own well-being. (including self-defense) Courts have continuously held that the police have no duty to protect private citizens only "society at large" (and I'm still trying to figure out what the #%@$ that means)!<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
A well-known study by Professor John Lott has shown that, at least in regards to gun-control laws, the opposite is true. That those laws only effect "law-abiding" citizens and that those places which have the most restrictions also have the highest rates of violent crime. It seems that criminals prefer unarmed victims.I think regulation does keep a small control over situations like this.
Just more food for thought....
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
People (women) need to understand that they are personally responsible for their own well-being. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Own well-being for the most part, yes, but on their own safety I would say no. If police/911 aren't doing anything, then that's a problem with the system, not with the concept. Every definition of society/government I've heard of includes the notion that people gather for mutual defense.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
...places which have the most restrictions also have the highest rates of violent crime. It seems that criminals prefer unarmed victims.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
A> This has to be coorelational study which means it does not show cause and effect.
B> If there were cause and effect, it seems reasonable to me to conclude that when there is high crime in an area, the places enact restrictions on the tools of crime I.E. guns. Is there any actual evidence that safe places make strict restrictions on guns, and then lots of criminals move in?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
[This message has been edited by Valkenar (edited August 12, 2001).]
They don't stop all criminals, no, but they do stop spur of the moment decisions to go out and shoot somebody. Not everybody knows a place where at a moment's notice they can go get a gun illegally. Obviously the laws don't stop everything, but they stop something.The access was there for everyone before and the "laws" don't stop criminals from getting access.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
People (women) need to understand that they are personally responsible for their own well-being. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Own well-being for the most part, yes, but on their own safety I would say no. If police/911 aren't doing anything, then that's a problem with the system, not with the concept. Every definition of society/government I've heard of includes the notion that people gather for mutual defense.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
...places which have the most restrictions also have the highest rates of violent crime. It seems that criminals prefer unarmed victims.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
A> This has to be coorelational study which means it does not show cause and effect.
B> If there were cause and effect, it seems reasonable to me to conclude that when there is high crime in an area, the places enact restrictions on the tools of crime I.E. guns. Is there any actual evidence that safe places make strict restrictions on guns, and then lots of criminals move in?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
Are you trying to say that women gaining the vote is directly responsible for, or even related to the loss of all those Freedoms, Liberties and Rights?So... you have to wonder if gaining the vote (and the other things that seem to be important on the list) was really worth the loss of all of these Freedoms, Liberties, and Rights.
[This message has been edited by Valkenar (edited August 12, 2001).]
-
Allen M.
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
Spermless Embryos? Omigosh! The end is in sight... The end is in sight! Look at that little swimmer with tears in his eyes, a dying breed....The start of the asexual revolution. The final victory for the woeman's liberation movement is near at hand, their last frontier.
Men, this will be the end of life as we know it.
------------------
Allen Moulton from Uechi-ryu Etcetera
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Allen M.:
Men, this will be the end of life as we know it.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Bah, it means no such thing A> people aren't about to give up the old fashioned methods. B> It doesn't affect already liiving males C> what would it matter if no men were ever born again anyway, if that's what people wanted?
Men, this will be the end of life as we know it.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Bah, it means no such thing A> people aren't about to give up the old fashioned methods. B> It doesn't affect already liiving males C> what would it matter if no men were ever born again anyway, if that's what people wanted?
-
Allen M.
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
My children don’t believe them when I tell them about things that will happen in the near futures of the world, but they find that what I tell them comes to pass: Wars, economies, cause and effects on nature, etc. If stem-cell research continues unchecked, weird unexpected things are going to happen. Man continuously dicks with mother nature, and is always causing changes; some good and some not-so-good, but some profound. A lot of what will happen in the near future will depend on the laws, how they are created, and how they are observed. This issue is a polarized one and there are already clamors to who will be the first and who can do what. [the next sentence is kind of a joke into my seriousness, but kind of not, and is too far-fetched to envision, but…] You may even see livers and kidney and eyeballs growing in clusters like ornaments on Christmas trees.
Already there are labs in the US, which are secretly doing research into cloning humans. One was discovered in the hills of West Virginia yesterday. “an old classroom in a squalid former high school tucked away in the hills of rural West Virginia.” “secretly trying to clone a human being. They were attempting to bring back to life Andrew, a 10-month old baby boy who died after heart surgery in September 1999.” Doctor Frankenstein, I presume…
A lot of things are surfacing, right now as I write.
“A federal grand jury is investigating biochemist Brigitte Boisselier for possibly defrauding investors with phony claims of human cloning science!”
“Boisselier became science director of Rael's company, Clonaid, whose aim is to charge $200,000 to clone any person who can pay.”
“Hunt says he hasn't given up his belief in raising the dead through cloning.”
I take all the above with a grain of salt, but more labs will be discovered, and someday soon, someone will make a breakthrough.
Valk, don’t be afraid of “Men, this will be the end of life as we know it.” Because when that happens you will be to old to care. That also was kind-of a joke, and yet, kind-of not. Woemen simply do not have that kind of power to do away with men although many would like to [watch out when they do get into power, though]. When we finally kill most all of each other off due to whatever the future will hold in store for us, be it disease, destruction of nature, or a simple but comprehensive nuclear holocaust, cloning may look reasonable. But not right now.
------------------
Allen Moulton from Uechi-ryu Etcetera
Already there are labs in the US, which are secretly doing research into cloning humans. One was discovered in the hills of West Virginia yesterday. “an old classroom in a squalid former high school tucked away in the hills of rural West Virginia.” “secretly trying to clone a human being. They were attempting to bring back to life Andrew, a 10-month old baby boy who died after heart surgery in September 1999.” Doctor Frankenstein, I presume…
A lot of things are surfacing, right now as I write.
“A federal grand jury is investigating biochemist Brigitte Boisselier for possibly defrauding investors with phony claims of human cloning science!”
“Boisselier became science director of Rael's company, Clonaid, whose aim is to charge $200,000 to clone any person who can pay.”
“Hunt says he hasn't given up his belief in raising the dead through cloning.”
I take all the above with a grain of salt, but more labs will be discovered, and someday soon, someone will make a breakthrough.
Valk, don’t be afraid of “Men, this will be the end of life as we know it.” Because when that happens you will be to old to care. That also was kind-of a joke, and yet, kind-of not. Woemen simply do not have that kind of power to do away with men although many would like to [watch out when they do get into power, though]. When we finally kill most all of each other off due to whatever the future will hold in store for us, be it disease, destruction of nature, or a simple but comprehensive nuclear holocaust, cloning may look reasonable. But not right now.
------------------
Allen Moulton from Uechi-ryu Etcetera
I hear us men aren't needed anymore?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Valkenar:
They don't stop all criminals, no, but they do stop spur of the moment decisions to go out and shoot somebody. Not everybody knows a place where at a moment's notice they can go get a gun illegally. Obviously the laws don't stop everything, but they stop something.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The facts just don't back up these assertions. The incidence of "spur of the moment" shootings is rare and statistically insignificant as a percentage of lawful gun owners. (In fact, many of those very rare cases have been committed by law enforcement personnel! ) Most "spur of the moment" killings occur with knives, blunt objects, fists and "shod" feet.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
To demonstrate this (and this isn't something I recommend doing, but it was appropriate at the time), I once set up a scenerio with a family. Here's how it worked: Husband took the car and cellphone and went about 5-10 blocks away and waited. When he got the "emergency" call on his cellphone, all he had to do to "stop the attack" was get sight of the perp (me) and say "stop". That's it. The wife was in the house and for purposes of demonstration, the doors were left unlocked so I wouldn't have to "break" in. However, to give the same "warning" as a break (most are pretty quiet, but this was just "make believe"), when I "broke in" I made some loud noises. (Yelled actually.) All the wife had to do was make it to a phone and keep me from "killing her" (wetting her down with a squirt bottle and marking her up with a washable marker - red) before "the police" (hubby) came to the rescue. I didn't even bother chasing her when she ran upstairs... and since it is obvious that I could go through an interior door like a hot knife through butter, she just closed it and didn't lock it... I counted to 20 before entering. To make the long story short, when hubby arrived and found us sitting on the master bedroom floor, she was covered with red marker ink and her clothes were completely wet (I even "reloaded" my squirt bottle ). She was "dead" and I had already finished having a snack and a glass of water from their fridge, oh and I'd gone to the bathroom to clean up. She couldn't... she was "dead". BTW, they're both not only gun-owners now, but certified instructors. Ummmm... Oh yeah, almost forgot, they're both black belts.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
No. That wasn't my point at all... My point was to not put all the emphasis on what has been gained and lose sight of what's been lost. Who has/had more Freedoms, Liberties, and uninfringed Rights, the frontier woman who couldn't vote (and her husband probably didn't have or take time to vote either) or the modern woman who can vote, but can't do many of the things I've written about? I wasn't trying to trivialize a woman's right to vote or to a career or to do/be any damn thing she wants to be. I was just pointing out some of the things that have been lost to all of us.
They don't stop all criminals, no, but they do stop spur of the moment decisions to go out and shoot somebody. Not everybody knows a place where at a moment's notice they can go get a gun illegally. Obviously the laws don't stop everything, but they stop something.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The facts just don't back up these assertions. The incidence of "spur of the moment" shootings is rare and statistically insignificant as a percentage of lawful gun owners. (In fact, many of those very rare cases have been committed by law enforcement personnel!
) Most "spur of the moment" killings occur with knives, blunt objects, fists and "shod" feet. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
The courts have consistently held the opposite to be true. There is no problem with the 911 system. It is physically impossible for a 911 emergency call to come in, get dispatched to an officer, and have the officer respond in time to prevent a violent assault. There are some laws that no one can break... the laws of physics.Own well-being for the most part, yes, but on their own safety I would say no. If police/911 aren't doing anything, then that's a problem with the system, not with the concept.
To demonstrate this (and this isn't something I recommend doing, but it was appropriate at the time), I once set up a scenerio with a family. Here's how it worked: Husband took the car and cellphone and went about 5-10 blocks away and waited. When he got the "emergency" call on his cellphone, all he had to do to "stop the attack" was get sight of the perp (me) and say "stop". That's it. The wife was in the house and for purposes of demonstration, the doors were left unlocked so I wouldn't have to "break" in. However, to give the same "warning" as a break (most are pretty quiet, but this was just "make believe"), when I "broke in" I made some loud noises. (Yelled actually.) All the wife had to do was make it to a phone and keep me from "killing her" (wetting her down with a squirt bottle and marking her up with a washable marker - red) before "the police" (hubby) came to the rescue. I didn't even bother chasing her when she ran upstairs... and since it is obvious that I could go through an interior door like a hot knife through butter, she just closed it and didn't lock it... I counted to 20 before entering. To make the long story short, when hubby arrived and found us sitting on the master bedroom floor, she was covered with red marker ink and her clothes were completely wet (I even "reloaded" my squirt bottle
). She was "dead" and I had already finished having a snack and a glass of water from their fridge, oh and I'd gone to the bathroom to clean up. She couldn't... she was "dead". BTW, they're both not only gun-owners now, but certified instructors. Ummmm... Oh yeah, almost forgot, they're both black belts. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
The people gather for mutual defense. If the people are disarmed sheep, they can't very well assist in the defense of their fellow citizens. And both the facts and the courts have proven that the police aren't capable of being there to defend you. The only way that could work is if there was an officer assigned to each individual and that, by definition, is a "police state". IOW, a place where I don't want to live.Every definition of society/government I've heard of includes the notion that people gather for mutual defense.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
Read the studies. The answer is yes. In fact, just read More Guns, Less Crime by Professor John Lott. You'll find the most comprehensive data and analysis ever done. BTW, Professor Lott wasn't a "pro-gun" person by any stretch. In fact, he actually leaned the other way (like a number of other intellectually honest researchers) until he actually looked at the data he was collecting.Is there any actual evidence that safe places make strict restrictions on guns, and then lots of criminals move in?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
I take this as a serious question, so I'll answer...Are you trying to say that women gaining the vote is directly responsible for, or even related to the loss of all those Freedoms, Liberties and Rights?
No. That wasn't my point at all... My point was to not put all the emphasis on what has been gained and lose sight of what's been lost. Who has/had more Freedoms, Liberties, and uninfringed Rights, the frontier woman who couldn't vote (and her husband probably didn't have or take time to vote either) or the modern woman who can vote, but can't do many of the things I've written about? I wasn't trying to trivialize a woman's right to vote or to a career or to do/be any damn thing she wants to be. I was just pointing out some of the things that have been lost to all of us.
