Clouded as my point may have been, I was trying to clarify an inequality. I think that my channels analogy was effective, because it proved that by bitching enough about how they are unfairly treated, women can undermine attempts at true equality. Furthermore, I wasn't just talking about women. For example the BET: this is a network designed specifically for blacks, and it's unchallenged by any censorship. But if there was *WET design specifically for whites, there would be controversy. The WET network would be considered racist. My point about the tv channels is that a White Male channel would be unacceptable, but a black or women's is fine. Also, what the quote itself specifically refers to is irrelevant. My point in using it was to show how motives for equality can change.
*Jesse created WET
Juola you are way off the mark with your channel bull shit and then your other point about how women don't want power over men. The only reason women want equality is because they are envious of the power that men currently hold, but with "equality" women would not have the power that men have now they would still have less than the power men currently hold. Thus, women will never stop until they can control politics and buisnesses, and the world will once again be inequal and I for will not stand for that. I will not stand for any society where one person dominates another due to factors that they were born with. And secondly what the fuck was with your channel bullshit, if you are alluding to spheres and just don't want to use the word then I somewhat understand, but why channels, seriosly. And to conclude my current rave why don't you quote a book that conveys the knowledge of someone over 5 should be able to contemplate and not Animal Farm by Orwell a very crude and inconsistent remake of the Bolshevik revolution.
In agreement with Gross, there are flaws in most equality issues. Granted I do think that women deserve equality to some degree, I disagree with how they think that they deserve better. It's not just equality, women want to have benefits while being still equal(example: there are at least 3 channels specifically for women, but if any channel were be specifically for men, the womanist would be all over it). This it reminds me of a quote from a good book, "all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others". In reality, men and women aren't equal. They're different, and therefore shouldn't be treated exactly the same. Unfortunately, women don't realize this. I don't think women should be treated equally; they should be treated fairly. If a man is better at something, he should do it, and vice versa. And honestly, I really have no problem with the feminist channels as long a channel more men isn't shunned
-I just want to say that I agree with you on your article "Loosing Faith" I would still say you could call your self a republican though. Every topic does need to be assesed on its own and not just what your party has to say. I tend to agree alot with the republicans, and as you some with the liberatarians. I still can call my self a republican because I am not so liberal as to be a complete ass, or in other words democrat.
The feminist movement only wants equality in the good parts of life. Do women want to suffer from obsety more or do they want to get murdered more often, of course not. But then why do they say that they want equality. How about baldness, or snoring, diabetes or anything else that is attributed to men. "No of course we don't want your diseases your problems or anything else we just want to be completely equal to you in every way" says the mindless femisist. Once a women says to me that firstly she is equal to me physically (and is still a women) and then also wants all the crap that is associated with being a man - then I will respect feminism and their outreach to try and gain equality, but until then go suck your nipples.
As I declared in the first I am a republican, but this I can say happily is no longer correct. I declare myself as a yes, Independent. The Independent just another code word for ambigous people who don't really care and don't want to make there republican or democratic friends look less upon them, but as I put my head about the topic of Independs I realize that parties are just a haven for those conformists who themselves are amibigous and can't figure out an arguement for themsleves and need their white house lackey to find the answer for them. And I completely disagree, I can't agree with any party and make a complete blanket statement saying that "I Agree with the Democrats" or "I Agree with the Republicans" or "I Agree with Seth" for that matter, each indivual topic must be assessed using one's own head not the one supplemented by the party. I tend to agree with a mixture of Liberatarian platform and some of the Republican and then some of the Democratic platform. Don't blindly ally yourself with a party because when they party decides to make a horrible policy that you disagree, you have already agreed with it and approved of it. So think of that someone asks your politcal affilation - Conformist.
The American flag has long been a symbol of democracy and freedom, but it also carries another meaning - Pride for America. As Sempteber 11 came crashing hard the American flags came up from the old shelters where they had been liing on the ground with dust accumulating and small bugs eating away at the so called sacred fiber. And then the hypocrits dust off the traces of the lazy and ill practices and hang the flag as it had been in a case of glory. Then the same laziness and unresolute Americans don't take their flags down as the rain begains to endlessly fall upon the symbol of pride and democracy, and as the sun fades out of the day the flag still sits as the lazy American boasts to his friends his patriotism. Then as the hooks that hold the flag onto the pole start rusting and falling off, that American won't replace them and let the flag swing only attached by one little inch of the flag. This same American is the same American that throws the stone at the flag burners, but isn't the lazy American worse for he boasted about his hypocricy as the flag burner told nothing but the truth.
It is my belief (as is everything that I say) that Walt Disney was paid off by the federal government to change Fairy Tales and recreate them to be more manipulative than they already were and to lead to a submissive population. When you are reading your favorite fairy tale when is there ever a black person, not animal, but person - or a flag burner and it always seems that the hero get money in the end. Well firstly the federal goverment, through Walt, is trying to get little children to hate black people and other minorities so that they won't rise up and and have a major influence in the important politics. As well the government is telling us that only law complacent maniacs who do not question the federal government will succed. But this is completely hyprocritical to the idea that the more peoples opinions we have in our society. And lastly it says that money is the only was to happiness, which is benefitial for the government so that they can .?.?.? beat people (yeah that is it). So basically mothers and fathers that read this - getting a fucking job you bums and second don't allow your children to be manipulated by Walt in his tower mocking us little fucks with the government backing him 100% of the way!!! (Death to all EMOTICONS :) = EVIL)
Why when I walk down the school do I hear feebs discussing how one has the larger reproductive organ (penis, wanker, johnson, willy, so on...). Why??? It doesn't make any sense to me because it seems that men are so uncomftorable around one another that they have to prove that they have a large cock, but does this trully matter to the female sex. This opinion is divided between whores and everyone else. I think you people can figure out who is who in this situation. So men then are expressing to other men how big there penis is to other men to please whores! Yeah go men. The other part of my penis crisis (not my crisis of my penis, but the crisis I am going through because of people's illogical use of penis's (yes that sound weird (and yes I know I am using parenthesis inside other parenthesis))) is that men tell other men to suck their penis - which this (while contemplating on the hole I figured out) is about power. But in a very gay sense as I figured out because to suck one's penis would cause pleasure but discomfort to the sucker so . . . the sucked is being commanding and gaining power over someone by forcing the displeasure and causing them pleasure. But as I say the whole pleasure caused by other men is really homosexual obviously, so maybe all men that say that crap have some sort of homosexual tendencies that are riding their ass (oh man - good pun). So basically men who talk about their penis are A - very angsty B - Gay C - Slightly Gay D - Trying to get whores to dig them, YOU CHOOSE CAUSE I DON"T FUCKING GET IT.
-I've known this for a while but no ones been writing or "righting" as I like to say, so I'm going to talk about somthing I find to be very hatefull and waistfull. GM, one of the largest Amercian car companies has been doing somthing awful for the last few years. Their cars headlights are on when ever the car is on. Most people would say, "oh it doesnt waist much energy" but the truth of the matter is that it makes for worse gas mileage, how much do you ask? Its estimated about 1 less miles to every 60 miles or so compared to what you would normaly be getting. Doesnt seem like much but imagine all the people driving these evil machines, it adds up. Well this has been bugging me for a while so I needed to get it off my chest.
