At 11:09 AM 8/24/96 +0800, Kylie Matthews wrote:
>>i suppose i would call this a naive attempt to 'define' development, but it
>>establishes two things:
>
>Jason do you think you could possible reply to anyone without insulting
>them. why is Betty naive and you i suppose are right?
>>i've spent a year doing five years of research on this area,
>what do you mean. are you sooooo good that you can do 5 yrs research in
>one yr. come on jason you really do bignote yourself.
you'd be amazed. i apologize if you dont appreciate me attempting to put
some kind of qualification on my word.
>what you said after this i just couldn't be bothered to respond to - more
>of the same - jason is right - listen to me girls!
i cant believe your tactics. my name is jason so you turn me into the
patriarch. when i attempt to pass along knowledge i'm just some male.
when i reply to your attempt to portray me as 'constructing the other' you
say that i 'silence your viewpoint.' no. you spoke it just as well as i
could. i simply answered it. if your concept of 'feminism' means
rejecting the viewpoint or opinion of any male, you're about as
exclusionary as the come. you're crazy. i doubt i've ever met anyone who
is willing to completely degrade one morally and mentally (by saying that
i'm an oppressor, charactarizing me as a typical male, etc...).
>i expect heavy flaming for daring to criticise a male so please go for it.
great preempt to my argument. try again. why dont you actually read what
i say and try to construct some reason why i'm wrong instead of using ad
homenims to calll me oppressive or something of the like. it hurts to be
called patriarchal. i simply used a little sarcasm.
jason
-------
Luke: I'm not afraid.
Yoda: You will be....you...will...be.
siu debate.
