🚀 go-pugleaf

Christopher Mountford (cjmount@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU) wrote:
: hiscdcj@lux.latrobe.edu.au (Dwayne Jones-Evans) writes:

: >What would it take to convince you of this?  I have, ooh, about 6 or so
: >private email messages saying exactly this. But that's all just hearsay.

: >Apparently rosie was subjected to sexist behaviour.

: >But that's just hearsay.

: >Not biased, are you?

: Look mate, let's get this crystal clear.

I'm not your mate, I have absolutely no interest in having sex with you.

: I do not care if Rosie is a bitch or not. 

Give it time.

: What I have witnessed here (these crosspostings) is a beat up and my defence
: of a person's right to object to sexist attitudes. I have seen the way people
: treat Rosie and think that's fucked, they write her off as a loonie because

No, they do that because, according to what they have seen of her
actions, they consider her one.

: she disagrees with their conclusion that they are (in the words of Neal
: Stephenson, in _Snow Crash_) "too smart to be sexist". I believe someone
: has a right to discuss the matter using an alternate assumption, namely that
: you and many others cannot actually determine without discussion whether it
: is a FACT or not that Rosie is treated sexistly. I have seen this situation
: and I believe it clouds the issue to be talking about the above things I
: have mentioned that I don't care about.

So, are you saying that what I wrote was sexist or not? 
If so, prove it. Show me where I was being sexist.

: Will not accept that Rosie is not treated sexistly just because you or
: anyone else says so. I have been talking about only what I have seen in 
: these newsgroups and this includes little FROM Rosie, but enough here to
: illicit many people to write her off. 

What does this say to you?

: And yes I am biased. I am biased by what I have seen myself, mostly in 
: other cases about the EXISTENCE of what Rosie alleges. 
: I KNOW that what
: Rosie has said HAPPENED is POSSIBLE. If it didn't happen, then perhaps

World War II does not make every german a nazi.

: It may be the case that Rosie is making it 
: all up and that you are caught in the crossfire, but I don't want to know.

Of course not, you pillock, you want to whine on adn on and on about
stuff which we KNOW exists, but without reference to ANY concrete facts
at all, because you like to hear yourself,a s far as I can tell. You use
rosie to support your case,a nd when we tell you to give up on her, as
she's crapping on, you say "I'm not referring to rosie"

: All I want to achieve is for people to hear Rosie's complaint and 
: acknowledge by their own openmindedness that she has a point, a 
: theoretical point. 

So, theoretically, I wrote a sexist message. Ah-hah.
How so?

: She has repeatedly been denied (in her relative absence)

BECAUSE SHE HAS SHUT UP, BECAUSE SHE KNOWS SHE IS WRONG	

What, some nasty brutish male has gone around and blown up her modem?

: that creedence by what I term a LYNCH MOB who neither likes her or sees
: the irrelevance of this with the legitimacy of such claims as hers.

Umm. Ahem. She tried to sick a lynch mob onto me, bucko. Poetic justice,
if you ask me.

: I have seen such situations as this before and I don't want to be part of
: a thoughtless rejection of unpopular views. 

Nope, you'd rather be part of a thoughtless proposal of unpopular views.

: Unpopular views have the tedious tendency to be extremely lengthy in their
: description, it is right that this be so, because if I say it is a lynch
: mob, I should explain. 

Feel free, you haven't done so, so far.

: So I apologise to everyone for the verbose debate
: should it clog their hard drives, but I stand by my opinion which has had
: surprisisingly little opposition, apart from the stupid little abusive
: bouts of namecalling, and outright unjustified rejection of my arguments
: without reasons. 

We have provided reasons. you have not.

: I am constantly told it is simply a FACT that Rosie has
: nothing to complain about. It is not my experience that such facts are
: as absolute as they are assumed to be. 

This is because you refuse to listen to them.

If you're so bloody correct, where are the reams of people supporting
your views? Is usenet so cold and heartless?

: Dwayne, stop trying to prolong an expose' of your s and Rosie's fight,
: I am not Rosie and I am not a substitute for her. I represent only
: myself, and I don't think that my ideas are above anyone's ability to
: think "straight" (my bias) but if someone want's to show faults in 
: my reasoning I welcome it. You yourself have not had a problem with 
: my REASONING, just my relevance to what you perceive transpired.  

Precisely, because you try to use rosie as an example, and when we tell
you your example is flawed, you tell us you'r not using rosie as an
example.

: You should be well pleased with the articulation of your assertion
: that your comments and everyone's to Rosie were not sexist, but Rosie
: disagrees and you must bear it. 

No I sure as hell must not.

: You cannot just call her a loony and 
: say that she won't and I won't accept the "reality" that you are not
: sexist. I hope you are not, that would be all the better, but Rosie
: has as much right as you to make a statement on that without being
: jumped on by the boys.

Okay, in which case we have as much right to say she is a loony and
should be ignored.
And, funnily enough, there are plenty of people who say this based on
OTHER things she has written.

: >Because you yourself have no personal knowledge of it. good on you.  But
: >what of us who *do* have personal knowledge? Why do you dismiss us
: >completely, yet accept rosie at face value?

: I don't dismiss you, I take you at face value too, but I will not
: just accept your views as the only possible contenders for actuality.

you dismiss them completely, rather.

: >Yippee. Start with the root cause of this thread, false allegations made
: >about my behaviour.

: NO. This is the cause of your fight with her. This THREAD is about why
: Rosie is angry. 

No it isn't.  It's all about
a: why rosie is angry (one post)
b: why she's talking complete crap (bunches from me and other people)
c: why she is talking crap, and the looniness thereof (as above)
d: why she actually has some justification, coz the net is a nasty place
     (you and only you, pretty much)
e: why you're an idiot who hasn't learned when to shut up (lots)
f: why this thread is innapropriate for [insert newsgroup] a few.
g: sundry other waffle.

I think c and e are the highest bandwidth chewers.

Ponder on that.

: Her PERCEPTION of her treatment is what I say is a
: legitimate complaint that you cannot fight with arbitrary "FACT",

Aha. So, her perception of reality, or lack thereof, overrides reality?

: you can debate it if you wish, but I don't think you want to talk to her
: at all. If she is as bad as you say, then I don't blame you for not wanting
: to, but you simply cannot tell ME that she has no case categorically.

Of course I can. I have. I will do so in future. What are you going to
do, shoot me?
Who died and made you god, anyways?
I didn't vote for you to become Pope.

: I do not judge you or her. You must be getting this by now.

You haven't a leg to stand on, you must be getting this by now.

: >Funny that. A call for a jihad against me seems to have turned against
: >the person calling for it. Damn those pesky net people, they seem to be
: >able to think for themselves!

: You cannot state as fact that she MAY NOT
: feel oppressed in a sexist way. 

I can state as fact what my intentions were, and how it appears to me. I
have just as much right to say that I did *not* act in a sexist manner,
as she ahs to say I *did*.  Somethign you refuse to see.

: This has to be talked about. This has
: happened. I am satisfied, but please don't tell me anything more about
: Rosie or what wrong she has done you, I don't speak about the wrong 
: Rosie thinks you have done her, despite what you think, I talk of her
: right to say it, something that has been under fire.

She can't go around willy-nilly accusing people of an act which in  this
society is recognised as bad. It's not on. It's bad. You either decide
that it happened, or you decide that it didn't happen. This is what
courts are for. Courts don't discuss the right of the Joe Bloggs to feel
that Mr Floppy is a rampant pedophile who rapes sheep, the decide
whether Mr Floppy has the right to sue the shit out of Joe Bloggs for
slander.

: End.

do so.

Dwayne.


          -------> hiscdcj@lux.latrobe.edu.au <--------
looking for * permaculture * resources on the net. Mail me with URLs 
*  http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/Permaculture/permaculture.html  * 
NEXUS:.settling.the.electronic.frontier..     mail listserv@netcom.com
http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/              "subscribe nexus-gaia" 
      ...our.aim.is.wakefulness.our.enemy.is.dreamless.sleep...