Linux-Advocacy Digest #908, Volume #33 Wed, 25 Apr 01 12:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Jan Vorbrueggen)
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Jerry Coffin)
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Jan Vorbrueggen)
Re: Intel versus Sparc ("Eddie Dubourg")
Re: Importance, or lack, of Marketshare? (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Intel versus Sparc (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Why can't the Browser be the GUI for Linux PC? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males ("Scott D. Erb")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jan Vorbrueggen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: 25 Apr 2001 17:36:36 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeffrey Boulier) writes:
> >- at least two of them still exist today,
> Which two? I'm guessing that SNA is one, but what would be the other
> popular proprietary network protocol?
DECnet up to Phase IV (Phase V is OSI, basically).
Jan
------------------------------
From: Jerry Coffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 09:33:05 -0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
[ ... ]
> > MULTICS predates UNIX. Though AT&T was one of the contributors to
> > MULTICS, they didn't originate it. IBM had a number of multi-
> > platform OSes prior to MULTICS anyway.
>
> No. IBM's OS's were always compiled against an unvarying assembly-language
> architecture. The CPU *hardware* might change, but the microprogramming
> in the CPU presented the assemblers with an unchanging platform.
Not so -- they did a reasonably portable OS as part of the 7090
Stretch project. When the Stretch project was cancelled, so was the
OS project even though it wasn't really tied to that particular
hardware.
[ ... ]
> IBM was giving code away in the 1950's?
>
> Surely, you're joking, Mr. Coffin.
Surely I'm not. Early on, OSes and such were not viewed as having
any value in and of themselves -- IBM (and the Seven Dwarves) viewed
themselves as hardware vendors. Software was simply something they
were obliged to throw in to keep their hardware competitive. Most of
it was written in assembly language, so it wasn't portable to any
other hardware, so as far as the vendors cared, if you improved their
software and distributed the improved version, you were doing them a
favor -- it made their hardware even more attractive without costing
them anything like it did when they made the improvements themselves.
This changed primarily for two reasons: 1) eventually software
started to be seen as a source of revenue itself, and 2)Amdahl and
such came along and built machines that could run the same software,
so the lack of portability no longer ensured that improvements were
only useful to the original vendor anyway. OTOH, if you look at the
software and the laws of the time, you'll find that most early
mainframe OSes included source code. The copyright law (at least in
the US) at the time said that things were NOT copyrighted unless you
specifically claimed copyright on them. Since the source code often
lacked a copyright notice, it was placed in the public domain.
Therefore, IBM (as well as many of their competitors) had no legal
grounds for stopping you from doing as you wished with the source
code in any case.
[ ... ]
> > > US DARPA (Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency) TCP/IP
> >
> > DARPA itself mostly provided funding. The people they funded are the
> > ones to blame for this particular mess.
>
> BLAME?
Yes, absolutely. TCP/IP is solidly inferior to most of its
competitors -- it has high overhead, poor scalability, lousy security
and quite a few hard limits built in (such as 32-bit addressing).
> spending too much time indulging in columbian exports, I see.
Are you actually capable of discussing things for even two
consecutive messages without using (blatantly false) personal
attacks? If you want to extoll the virtues of TCP/IP and claim it's
superior to the alternatives, you're a fool, but the sort of personal
attack above brands you as both a fool and a criminal.
--
Later,
Jerry.
The Universe is a figment of its own imagination.
------------------------------
From: Jan Vorbrueggen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: 25 Apr 2001 17:37:47 +0200
Roy Omond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Not sure about SNA, but DECnet certainly was one (and it was not
> "proprietary" for any reasonable meaning of that word).
I was thinking of DECnet, yes, and it certainly was _perceived_ as
proprietary. For instance, there was no publicly available reference
implementation to play with.
jan
------------------------------
From: "Eddie Dubourg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Intel versus Sparc
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 16:41:15 +0100
> > Please, do you have any more valuable opinions you would like to share
> > about Linux or UNIX? We'd all love to hear more deep thoughts from the
> > "Enterprise Engineer" who doesn't know what a core dump is.
>
> I'm quite sure James Doohan and LeVar Burton know nothing about core dumps
> either.
Unless its the warp core (dumped by 1701-D on many an occasion)
E
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Importance, or lack, of Marketshare?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 16:07:20 +0200
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> It's more than just number of users. There has to be a viable market as
> well. Many software developers don't see the Linux market as viable
> even though it probably has enough users to otherwise make it so (if it
> were a closed source platform, like the Mac).
>
> The reason is that Linux users are always screaming about price, and how
> things are free. ISV's see this as "Nobody wants to pay for software,
> and I'm not going to write it for charity".
>
BS to the extreme.
In the last 12 month I *bought* linux-software for more than 1500$,
compared to just about 300$ for wintendo (for the kids).
Give me the progs (and not this shit like office), and I will gladly pay
for them if they are good.
Do you have *any* idea at all what tools like Kylix or JBuilder actually
cost, Erik?
Certainly not, otherwise you just would be trolling like our beloved
SSH-guru Chad or our "mainframe expert" Jon Johanson.
Peter
--
The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably
the day they start making vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Intel versus Sparc
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 15:47:14 +0000 (UTC)
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Eddie Dubourg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> > Please, do you have any more valuable opinions you would like to share
:> > about Linux or UNIX? We'd all love to hear more deep thoughts from the
:> > "Enterprise Engineer" who doesn't know what a core dump is.
:>
:> I'm quite sure James Doohan and LeVar Burton know nothing about core dumps
:> either.
: Unless its the warp core (dumped by 1701-D on many an occasion)
There was always *something* to keep that stupid thing from ejecting
when they needed it to. Otherwise, it couldn't blow up the ship,
nobody would be in any danger and the story would be a whole lot less
dramatic.
(but now we're getting even further off-topic :)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: 25 Apr 2001 15:47:20 GMT
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 02:21:27 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 03:26:31 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> > Brent R wrote:
>>
>> >> Be careful Aaron, not all women are like that, I wouldn't even say the
>> >
>> > I wasn't referring to "all women" is was referring to that body
>> > known as "feminism"
>>
>> Your version of "feminism" is a straw-women.
>
> No...my version of feminism is women who seek an unfair advantage over men.
Again, you're uising a contrived and incorrect definition. It's sort of like
the definition of a "capitalist" in Orwell's 1984.
Your version is not a correct usage of the term. (See below.
I hadn't seen (2) before!) Note the word "equality". I'd say
that under this definition, most women would be feminists, even
though they would not agree with absurdities (sucjh as "all sex is rape")
how can I help you? >dict feminism
Concise Oxford Dictionary, 8th Ed., Copyright 1991 Oxford Univ. Press
se>
/feminism/ <<"femI%nIz(@)m>> n.
1. the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the
sexes.
2. [Med.] the development of female characteristics in a male person.
/feminist/ n. (in sense 1).
L femina woman (in sense 1 after F f&eacu.minisme)
>> > I can name only a handful of American women who openly oppose
>> > the Dworkinites....not surprisingly, somewhere around 50% of
>> > them are foreign-born and raised.
>>
>> What a load of cr*p. How many people "openly oppose" the KKK ?
>
> MILLIONS.
>
> Hope that helps.
Here's another question -- what sorts of rights do these anti-feminist women in
anti-feminist countries enjoy ? You yourself said that Russian women like
American men, because Russian men mistreat them (they're supposed to be abusive
alcholics, remember?)
We've already established that women in Saudi-Arabia don't have rights.
>> The vast majority of women disagree with the "Dworkinites". For
>> example, what percentage of American women believe that "all sex is
>> rape" ???
>
> "date rape" laws are founded on the same idiotic premise
>
> hope that helps.
No, it doesn't "help". Date rape laws don't require the assumption that
"all sex is rape".
>> (How many whites "refused the gains of slavery" before it was abolished?
>> Hint: none. All of them benefited directly or otherwise)
>
> Oh really. As I recall, over 350,000 whites DIED in a civil war in which
> slavery was one of the primary causes.
Yes, but before that war, all of them benefited directly or otherwise.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why can't the Browser be the GUI for Linux PC?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 17:49:00 +0100
> Here is the $64M question: Why on one is making the Browser the unifying
> desktop GUI for the Linux PCs?
>
> Ask youself this question: Is there any thing KDE/GNOME can do that the
> Browser can not do? Remember, the old Mac's desktop GUI is called the
> Finder (get it?). Windows/Mac desktop GUI is not much more than a high
> level "disk browser"! For graphics, have the Browser support W3C's
> SVG/X3D. What else do you need? The Browser can interact with everything
> on the net and it can interact with anything on your local disks.
I speak for myself here.
Under UNIX, the GUI doesn't serve the purpose of a high level disk
browser. KDE and GNOME might, but I'm not too fond of either of them.
For me, the GUI is a convinient way of having many, many shells open and
accessible[1]. The file system borwsing is done by the shell. In this
context, the GUI erved a different purpose to a browser.
To me, the idea of having a browser a the GUI is horrible, which may
explain why I don't like the windows GUI either (there are other reasons
too).
Also, what does the window management?
-Ed
> --CW (thank me if Linux PC takes off with the Browser as its desktop
> GUI)
[1] I use Linux VTs but my new graphics card is not supported by
SVGATextMode, so I have abandoned them until it does.
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:51:36 -0400
"You've got MALE.. sex organs!" wrote:
>
> I understand the wimmen really go for those unix programmer geeks
> nowadays. But just for SEX, they want to screw the little geeky brains
> out - certainly not for dating!
>
> They particularly like that gynophobic disposition, developed over a
> lifetime of not getting laid, or even a smell.
>
> Right, you pathetic little right wing turd unix programmer geek?
>
I'm also
A soldier
and an artist.
Of course, most foreign women appreciate intelligence more than their
American counterparts...so... they get the rewards.
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > Roberto Alsina wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 22 Apr 2001 18:44:43 GMT, MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> > Any man who supports Feminism is a self-flagellating idiot.
> > > >>
> > > >> Any man who thinks a woman should be paid the same for equal work is a
> > > >self
> > > >> flagellating idiot?
> > > >
> > > >No, just any man who marries one.
> > >
> > > You prefer to marry women that get paid less? Why?
> >
> > Because women *DO* less.
> >
> > Hope that helps.
> >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Roberto Alsina (maybe marrying a rich woman, so I can
> > > become a househusband and code free
> > > software is not such a bad idea)
> >
> > --
> > Aaron R. Kulkis
> > Unix Systems Engineer
> > DNRC Minister of all I survey, virgin, and gynophobe.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 17:34:41 +0200
"Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Everett wrote:
>
> > Bingo buddy! Exactly correct. Windows 2K Pro is crappy.
>
> If only I could afford the damned thing to find out. I imagine there's
> some illegal iso's of Win 2K out there on the web, though.
There is a perfectly legal trial version.
If you can't afford it (I think it's 5$), then you've other problems.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:53:23 -0400
Bud Frawley wrote:
>
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 18:37:47 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis said...
> > Bud Frawley wrote:
> > >
> > > On 23 Apr 2001 14:47:38 -0500, Chad Everett said...
> > > > On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:39:49 -0500, Bud Frawley
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:22:44 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis said...
> > > > >> jet wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Bud Frawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >> > > On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 09:44:01 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis said...
> > > > >> > > > Bud Frawley wrote:
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:13:02 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis said...
> > > > >> > > > > > MH wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > "jet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > >> > > > > > > news:9c06um$1o3m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > >> > > > > > > > news:vEFE6.1319$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Any man who supports Feminism is a self-flagellating
> > > > >> > idiot.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Any man who thinks a woman should be paid the same for
>equal
> > > > >> > work is a
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > self
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > flagellating idiot?
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > No, just any man who marries one.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Any man who marries a woman who thinks she should get paid the
> > > > >> > same as a
> > > > >> > > > > > > man
> > > > >> > > > > > > > for the same work is a self flagellating idiot?
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > LOL.
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > J
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > Pay is not the issue. I've no problem with women getting equal
> > > > >> > pay.
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > But try to find a woman who TRULY does equal work...like coming in
> > > > >> > early,
> > > > >> > > > > > or staying late, as needed. Or going out of town on a business
>trip
> > > > >> > > > > > on short notice....or transferring half way across the country (or
> > > > >> > > > > > even to an office 20 miles farther from her house).
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > Quite frankly...there are reasons why the STATISTICAL AVERAGE for
> > > > >> > > > > > women's pay is so much lower than men...they refuse to go to the
> > > > >> > > > > > same lengths that men will to *EARN* it'
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > LOL!!!!! I guess you just proved your not a manager! when my cousin
> > > > >> > got
> > > > >> > > > > promotyed to manager in his company he showed me the pay list!
>there
> > > > >> > was
> > > > >> > > > > 2 different pays 1 for men 1 for women! men got paid $13.00 an hour
> > > > >> > when
> > > > >> > > > > women got paid $9.00 an hour for the same shift! I told him it's not
> > > > >> > fair
> > > > >> > > > > and they should pay the same so he filed an greavence. they said no
> > > > >> > way.
> > > > >> > > > > he quit that job in a hurry! I bet they stop laughing when I call
>feds
> > > > >> > on
> > > > >> > > > > this one! they offered him mney to keep quiet but I said no way I'm
> > > > >> > > > > keepiung quiet! this is gonna hit the papers when I start talking!
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > Men show up for work more reliably.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > LOL!!!! ya right! I left out the part when he showed me there time cards
> > > > >> > > because I knew you'd bite! the women get there every day ON TIME! when
> > > > >> > > somebody's show's up late it's always a man! those are statistics my
>boy!
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > Do you know how much a production work stoppage costs a factory?
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > A hell of more than $4.00/hour.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > LOL! like they lower there prices when it stops! you do'nt pay for when
> > > > >> > > it stops because the owner is right there! I guess you think he has to
> > > > >> > > pay himself when it stops! LOL!!!!!
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > As long as women insist on group rights, then they will suffer
> > > > >> > > > group penalties as well.
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > By the way, who put a gun to these women's heads and FORCED them
> > > > >> > > > to accept $9.00.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > thank's for proving your a complete moron! they either take $9.00 or
>they
> > > > >> > > get fired! that's as bad a holding a gun to there heads if you want to
> > > > >> > > support a family!
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > It appears that management offered $9.00/hour, and they accepted.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > I'm gonna say this one more time so take the beans outa your ears THAT"S
> > > > >> > > ALL THE JOB PAYS FOR WOMEN! maybe you should go back to the dumass farm!
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > When did he leave?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > J
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Oooooooooow, ppppppppppoooor pooooooooor strong victims.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> If women are every bit as capable as men, then how come they can't
> > > > >> negotiate their pay?
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >gawd you gotta be deaf from you ca'nt hear so well! when a woman asks for
> > > > >a raise alls they say is no way the company does'nt allow it! then what's
> > > > >she gonna do? she's luckey if they do'nt fire her on the spot! when my
> > > > >cousin owned a car dealer he tried to give his secretery a raise because
> > > > >she made more money for the company then the salesmen but he could'nt
> > > > >because company policy! his boss reamed him out for that little stunt! he
> > > > >would of fired him for sure if he did'nt just land a deal for 40 cars at
> > > > >full sticker!
> > > >
> > > > If your cousin owned the company, then who told him it was against company
> > > > policy?
> > >
> > > I guess you never heard of union! you ca'nt pay somebody more then the
> > > contract and somebody less!
> >
> >
> > Ah, so it wasn't *company* policy, it was UNION policy.
> >
> >
> > Big difference, idiot.
>
> another moron which does'nt know the union and a company has the same
> policy's!
You just said the your cousin OWNED the company...therefore whatever
he says *IS* company policy.
The fact that the union disagreed is a definite sign that
"company policy" =/= "unioin policy
> that's why they call it an agreement! if the company want's to
> give the secretery a raise why did they sign the contract? there the
> one's that are the morons! now whose the idiot? it's not me I can tell
> you that much!
You write like a pussy-whipped moron.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > How did the secretaty make more money for the company than the all the
> > > > salesmen?
> > > >
> > >
> > > what a moron! I guess you do'nt know who spend's the most on dinner when
> > > there doin a big deal! it's not the secretery that's for sure!
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Scott D. Erb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
soc.men,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:22:58 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lynette Warren wrote:
>what a scam American feminism truly is
How do you define feminism? In feminist theory they are many kinds. A
minority of radical feminists veer towards biological determinism and a
view that men are the main problem. I find them as misguided as radical
male chauvinists. American feminism is dominated by a view that says
women should not be paid less for their work because of their gender,
that women and men should be equal in relationships, forming a
partnership where they choose freely the roles they want to play and make
decisions together. American feminism would say women can lead as well
as men, that it is just as proper for women to protect themselves, carry
firearms, and engage in risky activities as men. I find it hard to
believe that any woman or man would deny that women should be accepted as
equal partners to men both in relationships and in society.
Don't you feel that way?
I actually find constructivist feminists, a minority, to have some
convincing arguments as well. They believe that society has privileged
so-called masculine traits (strength, power, objectivity, lack of
emotion, domination, etc.) while seeing so-called feminine traits as
things to be ridiculed (empathy, love, concern, caring, subjectivity,
cooperation). They tend to argue that either extreme is bad (leading to
co-dependency problems for women and a willingess to let the man walk
over her without her standing up for her interests; and leading to a cold
focus on power for men, and difficulties to show honest emotion and
develop empathy and caring for others. They argue the impact of this
polarization (lack of balance) shows itself in international politics,
domestic politics, and individual relationships. However, the kind of
"liberal feminism" I describe above tends to be the dominant one in the
US.
cheers, scott
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
