what I meant was that you have written volumes here Mr B. and has curtis, and if taken to task for each and every thing you have said, you would find yourself a very poor comparison to those you easily denigrate. if you will not rigorously call bullshit on yourself, you have no business applying that term to others. hypocrisy is not a virtue.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 > <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > if you and curtis held yourselves to the same standard as you hold > > the Maharishi, Guru Dev and Shakara, you would have nothing to say. > > easy to take pot shots at a word or phrase here and there to make > > your point when you don't stand behind your own thoughts and > > actions as diligently. glass houses. > > I would say that both Curtis and I hold ourselves > to FAR higher standards than either Guru Dev or > Shankara. We, for example, actually talk to women. > We, for example, don't consign a person to a role > simply because of their last name (in India, you > know exactly what caste a person is the moment you > hear their last name). We don't, for example, tell > other men to think of women ONLY as "corpses, bags > of urine and feces." We don't, for example, hold > to a tradition that teaches that the best a woman > can aspire to spiritually is to serve their husband > diligently so that they can be reborn as a man in > their next incarnation. Both of the men you mention > did all these things; we don't. > > If you extend the comparison to Maharishi, neither > Curtis nor I ever extorted huge sums of money from > their followers for projects that were never built. > Neither Curtis nor I ever claimed to be celibate > while sneaking women to our rooms and screwing them. > Neither Curtis nor I ever tried to scare people into > bouncing on their butts by telling them that the > world would end if they didn't. Neither Curtis nor > I ever reacted to someone questioning our pronounce- > ments by throwing them out of our organization, > declaring them persona non grata, and threatening > to do the same to any person who even talked to them. > Maharishi did all of these things, and more. > > You may not agree with the fact that we can both > care about women in general and have loving rela- > tionships with women in specific, and at the same > time have no compunctions about calling bullshit > on individuals who are slinging it about. To us > it doesn't matter whether the person slinging the > bullshit is crazy woman on an Internet forum or > a supposed "holy man." If it's bullshit, we have > both a right and a duty to call it what it is. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > As far as your points on the importance of women's rights, of > > > > course I agree. I'm sure if I was a woman I would be the first > > > > to call people on sexist language for its own sake, not because > > > > it has been linked to violence. In my neighborhood it is > > > > violence that is linked with violence. > > > > > > > > In fact I'll join you by condemning two of the most sexist > > people > > > > in history, the Holy Tradition's own Shankara, and the woman- > > > > phobic Guru Dev. The Crest Jewel of Discrimination is one of the > > > > most sexist scriptures on the planet. > > > > > > > > "A wise man views women as corpses, bags of urine and feces." > > > > Shankara > > > > > > > > What a saint! > > > > > > > > And Guru Dev's refusal to be in the same room with any women > > sent a > > > > terrible message to women and men who looked at him as a > > spiritual > > > > leader. > > > > > > > > I would think any woman who is serious about women's issues > > would > > > > want to join me in condemning these two men. > > > > > > Bingo. > > > > > > That's the real issue, the one that the pseudo- > > > feminists on this forum are skirting. > > > > > > It's "misogynist" to call a person who is acting > > > like a cunt a cunt (see the following post for a > > > definition of that word) > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/194179 > > > but it's just FINE to suggest that one should think > > > of women as corpses to protect one's fragile male > > > sensibilities. > > > > > > Or to suggest, as Maharishi did, that the only valid > > > reason a woman should get a Ph.D. is that it makes > > > her "a better conversationalist for her husband." > > > > > > You see, there is "real" misogyny, and there is that > > > "other stuff," the behavior that all real, "spiritual" > > > women understand and make excuses for because it's > > > part of a noble, high, spiritual tradition that they > > > believe is more correct and in tune with the "laws > > > of nature" than current beliefs. > > > > > > See my next post for what's really going on with the > > > cries of "misogyny." > > > > > >
