🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <cjmount.783541047@extro>,
Christopher Mountford <cjmount@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU> wrote:
>Philip@wwright.demon.co.uk (Philip Wainwright) writes:
>
>[we wont repeat it all again]
sniperoo

>
>
>You are missing the point about structural patriarchal control and how
>women are not given ground to challenge it without being branded as a
>raving nutcase.

Structural patriarchal control on the net?
Sounds far fetched to me.
Here on the net you get all types, 
with a heck or a lot of radicals from all sorts of odd angles.
Trying to organize all those folk from all those diverse points of view 
in some twisted plot to discourage women from the net is.... well...
can we sell the story to the National Enquirer?

>There is a very important near-miss here:
>
>You have listed a personal criticism as a [bad thing]. This is probably
>true, and it certainly is such withing the values of rational 
>debate (which we may or may not be into) but there is also a personal 
>perspectival blindness which goes into personal opinions. Rosie's 
>personal opinion is feminine 

Pray tell what is the 'feminie' type of personal opinion?
A tender rose that wilts under criticism? Withers under the heat of debate?
Sterotyping again?

>and I think she believes this makes a difference.

HER opinion makes a difference.... 
and not because of some obscure 'feminine' essence she brings with it, 
but rather because it is hers. (although others may disagree)

> Much of the time men assume that it does not. THis is 
>structural phallocentricity because it is a blindness.

Translation: they are being weenies.
But I bet they would disregard other opinions (from men) they disagree 
with as well.   Equal oppertunity closemindedness is just found in some.

> Avoiding 
>bigoted memes requires a recognition just beyond the 'person'al 
>which you have intimated, because in this case the 'person' is 
>just a renamed 'Man'. This is how political correctness gets it's
>boringness. If you are just going to call a 'man's world' a person's
>world all the while without an overhaul, it will still remain a man's
>world. 
>
>But the tragedy will be the loss of the recognition that women is other.

Other what? Other species? 
We are the same more than we are different.

>Woman should *not* be other, but let's face facts, it still is a man's 
>world and this needs to change. It should be recognised that renaming
>every 'man' with 'person' can actually fool us into thinking we have
>female representation. What we get is really sex-blindness. 
>
>WOmen are *different* in more ways than many men know, that loss is 
>what I'm trying to get at.

Yes women are different.
Women are also different from each other. Gender is more a spectrum than 
a binary thing. You can have women women who are 'masculine' and men 
who are 'feminine'. 

>Women really are not 'impossible to 
>understand' they just need to be given the T-space (Theoretical
>space) to construct feminine memes

AH! As if all women agreed with each other and thought alike.

> which, if we are open to them,
>will choose to inhabit us, to our enrichment. And with real benefits
>in meat-level human interaction as well as cyberspatial 
>co-existence. 
>
>I don't know Rosie. I hope I haven't misrepresented her. I hope I have
>left her free to explicate her femininity online without being flamed
>(however mildly) on all sides for challenging the status quo which 
>contains some so wholly that they think their small space is the 
>universe.
>
snipo
>
>hmmmmmm Ive said enough. 
>
>>Philip Wainwright.
>

Jaguar