Barry engages in extended self-defense of his sexism, but his agitation, as is so frequently the case, keeps him from making any sense:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard M" <compost1uk@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> > > wrote: > > > > > [snip] > > > Lawson, Politicians define themselves ideologically > > > by their words and deeds on a political spectrum > > > ranging from left to right. Left is the big Mommy > > > government, "I'll share mine with you." Right is > > > the small Daddy government, "I've got mine, too > > > bad about you." > > > > What a contentious way to set the scene! > > > > Surely not right=daddy=male=selfish=bad? > > > > And if you're gonna think of it as Mommy v Daddy values, > > don't we probably need BOTH? We could do with the > > strengths of each without the weaknesses of each (value)? > > It's why most of us ignore Raunchy and Judy > when they get like this. They're both "old > school" feminists, in that their schtick is > all about BLAME. Of course, what Raunchy was saying in the quote has to do with left vs. right, Democrats vs. Republicans, not male vs. female. The Daddy vs. Mommy party distinction isn't something she dreamed up, as Barry would know if he had any knowledge of U.S. politics. In fact, it's a cliche by now; it was first used back in 1994 by a political economist and has been embraced by both Democrats and Republicans. > Me, I've worked with and been friends with > for several decades now *real* feminists. > None of them would waste any time or energy > whining about sexism or pointing fingers at > the people they BLAME for it. They're too > busy doing something with their lives, and > proving that sexism is no barrier to anyone > except those who allow it to be. Of course, with regard to Hillary, neither of us is saying sexism was why she lost. That doesn't mean the appalling sexism with which she and her supporters were treated during the campaign somehow doesn't matter. But Barry doesn't want it mentioned or discussed, because he was part of it, and he knows how bad it made him look. <snip> > If either of them *really* wanted to "change > things," they'd have developed by this time > some awareness of how they are *perceived* > when they get like this, and that it has the > effect of turning people OFF to the issue, > not increasing their awareness of it. Well, it certainly turns *Barry* off. But as usual, he assumes that whatever emotions he's feeling must be what everyone else is feeling as well. Unfortunately for him, the sexism of the primary campaign made strong feminists of many *men*--men who, unlike Barry, aren't threatened by powerful women. Barry thinks his distaste for feminism means feminists should just shut up. The only "feminists" who are acceptable to him are those who obligingly remain silent about sexism, because that lets him off the hook and leaves him free to indulge in it whenever he feels like it. Now he goes off into *another* ridiculous non sequitur that is not only wildly inaccurate on its own terms but has zero to do with what Raunchy and I have been talking about: <snip> > I see the pragmatic elimination of sexism in > the workplace every time I see women in confer- > ence rooms being "just one of the guys." NOT > meaning that they're acting like guys, just > meaning that they're not trying to either > stand out or be submissive. These successful > women do not perceive themselves as being *any > different* than the guys, and as a result the > guys don't treat them any differently. Some- > times I think that the women who still cling > to BLAME and the tenets of radical feminism > just don't get out much, and haven't worked > in offices for years. If they had, they would > have seen how real women have found a way to > deal with sexism without it being a big issue > for them. It's only the "shut-ins" who only > think *about* succeeding instead of doing it, > and who seem to still be stuck in this mindset > of "men are keeping us down." Um, trouble is, Barry has never seen either Raunchy or me say "Men are keeping us down." Raunchy can speak for herself, but I certainly consider myself successful, having supported myself by running my own business since 1976. Sexism is *not* a big issue for me personally. In fact, the only place I've encountered it directed at me in decades has been on this forum, in connection with my support for Hillary, the bulk of it from Barry. > They are keeping themselves down. Nope, neither of us is "down," sorry. > By desperately clinging to "wrongs done" in the > past and dwelling on them, they keep themselves > locked firmly in the "victim" mindset. By spend- > ing all their time assigning BLAME and seeking > some kind of revenge, they piss all that time > and all that energy away on being angry instead > of being successful. Er, no. I don't consider myself a victim, nor do I seek "revenge," even on Hillary's behalf. Barry is so frantic in his self-defense that he's become *very* confused as to what the issues are. > The bottom line as I see it is that both Raunchy > and Judy are the most sexist posters on this > forum. Both have admitted that they would prefer > a woman candidate for president, simply because > she's a woman. I and other men they have char- > acterized as sexist would never do that. First, I've never "admitted" or even *asserted* that. Barry made it up out of whole cloth. Given two equally qualified candidates, one male and one female, yes, I'd prefer the woman (just as I'd prefer an equally qualified black person, male or female, over a white person, male or female). But only if they're equally qualified. And I supported Hillary because I thought she was *more* qualified than Obama, as I've made quite clear here many times. Second, I wonder how Barry would explain the many *men* who think it would be great to have a woman as president. Barry isn't sexist because he didn't support Hillary; rather, he didn't support Hillary because he's sexist. He's deathly afraid of strong, smart, outspoken women, as is all too evident from his behavior on FFL. He has reason to be; he's utterly unable to compete with them. This is obvious from his dependence on ad hominem and misrepresentation and his avoidance of reasoned discussion. He can't even write a coherent self-contained essay.
