🚀 go-pugleaf

"Michael H." <zoltron@netcom.ca> wrote:

>Flipping through this thread, I was surprised to see that nobody noticed
>that Ms. Amero used the word "frigging," rather than the overt
>alternative. Although I disagree with virtually every single thing I
>have ever taken the time to read of her posts, I really do think that
>the Amero-hating male chauvinists ought to step back and ask themselves
>why they never noticed the fact that Amero actually took to heart the
>idea that young people might be reading her posts, and softened up her
>language accordingly. I think she is an extremist, but defining the
>extreme position is a valid contribution to defining the spectrum, in my
>opinion.
>
Sorry Mike...but although I recognize your poppycock is
delivered in a charitable Christmas spirit, I have to 
say that it seems to me that you are projecting. 

First, most of the posters responding to Amero have been severely
provoked, and have been treated far worse by her than they have
treated her.

Second, few of them fall into the category of male chauvinists.
I know I'm certainly not a male chauvinist, and regard any assertion
that I am as simply an uninformed lie.

Third, your post is based on silly speculation. Amero herself would
denigrate anyone who dared speculate on her motivations. For example,
I'm reasonably sure that if I had congratulated her as you suggest,
she would have issued some form of sharp retort, for example,
suggesting I'm an uptight baby and that she'll say "fuck" whenever
and wherever she pleases. [Check Deja News and you'll see what I
mean.]

As for defining a extreme end of the continuum having value, I 
would agree if it were an opinion based on fact. In her case, it is
propaganda based on a completely biased interpretation of available
information, and it is hate propaganda. It is considered hate
propaganda to refer repeatedly to "black violence" and "black
crime." It is equally hate propaganda to refer repeatedly to
"male violence" and "male crime." The vast majority of men
are not criminals, and the vast majority of North American
women are not victims. They are, indeed, one of the most secure,
coddled, well-fed, well cared for, well educated class of
humans who ever lived. Men played a major role in creating
a society that gives North American women this status. Our
reward, over the past decade, is to be subjected to a bewildering
array of hate propaganda, emanating mainly from a few mediocre
academicians who staked out a turf in "Womens' Studies," and are
working through their hostility stemming from the knowledge that
they are, in fact, mediocre, and are the beneficiaries of
reverse discrimination. 

Amero is a product of Women's Studies. Her relentless ability
to view complex facts through the lens of bias and oversimplification,
her profanity, her obvious hatred of men, her relentless
misrepresentation of the words of others, her mean-spirited
attempts to silence those who disagree with her [in direct
contradiction of the fundamental spirit of Usenet] go beyond
"staking out an extreme position."

Try being a bit more analytical before you preach nonsense.