[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Who's on top?

Dec 11, 1996 11:00 PM
by kymsmith

The Triaist wrote:

>I honestly don't know where you are coming from.  You say that you find
>ignorance in my posts, yet you do not point out where the ignorance reveals
>itself.  You also say that I call forth divine wisdom as an ally.

No, John the Triaist, I said - sometimes - people use it to back up their
theories. I quote myself  - "sometimes even calling forth the 'divine
wisdom'."  No, I appreciate the fact you didn't use it.

>Perhaps you thought that my allegory was inadequate?  Or maybe
>inappropriate?  You say that I hold harmful prejudices.

I think you do hold harmful prejudices. You say "society is going from one
extreme to the other" when, indeed, women are actually losing rights they
once had (abortion rights; affirmative action; the passing of the welfare
bill and the ability to receive welfare: the primary economic source many
women have in leaving abusive relationships; funding for Legal Aid has
become almost non-existant: the primary source for poor women involved in
domestic trauma, job discrimination, and sexual harrassment - and I'm NOT
utilizing these for a political debate, they are just good examples of how
women are not as in good a shape as so believed).

You say "for ages" women have been considered the manipulator, the
protector, the power.  Well, if your theory is true, that makes women not
only those, but damn stupid as well.

Do you really believe that women, if they truly held the "power" would allow
themselves to be treated as they have "for ages?"  My god, John the Triaist,
you say we protest "chavinism" because we want to keep men unaware of our
power?  That doesn't make any sense.  We protest because so many women are
suffering. . .look around. . .look at the Islamic countries, look at the
O.J. verdict (delivered by mostly women), look at the laws which have passed
recently, look at some of the interpreted divine wisdom.  Do you really
think all this is because women have the "power?"  It is more true that some
women don't use the power they have, such as voting (never, ever, should one
vote for someone soley because of gender, that's insane), or speaking up
when they have been violated.

You imply in another post that I am sexist (quoted below).  I assure you I
am not, I have never believed men are inferior to women.  What I am saying
is the reasons for sexism are non-existant - both men and women are equal,
not identical.  Why those two words have been confused on this list is
perplexing (and I'm not referring to you here).

Kym says:
>>divine is called pantheism; the philosophical thought that women are
>>inferior to men is called sexism; and on we can go.

The Triaist replys:
>Not exactly true.  The philosophical thought that one sex is inferior to the
>other is called sexism.  Let's not try to confuse everybody now.

Yes, you are right, it means viewing either sex as inferior (although I
don't think very many would have been "confused").

But I am very confused by what you said in two different posts:

You say in post - Re: Sexism: (to me)  "Perhaps before you start accusing
others of being sexist, (even though i must say that the author of the
article to which you replied most difinitely fits the description.), you
should alleviate the problem within yourself."

Then you say in post - Matriarchial Theosophy: (to Tom) "I wish others on
this list would realize this, and rather than attack you, and call you crazy
and sexist, try to understand you, while you try to understand them.  (I'll
point out here that I don't believe I have yet seen you DIRECTLY demean
anyone on this server, but many have done this to you)."

Do you wish me to be less honest, less direct? What's the difference between
me saying he's sexist and you agreeing with me?  And, if Tom demeans women
and Kym is a woman - is he excused because he didn't say Kym specifically
(directly)?  And, if I demean men, and John the Triaist is a man - am I
excused because I didn't say John the Triaist specifically (directly)?

Actually your allegory is interesting and in the spirit of it, I can only
say: Your move, John the Triaist.

pax vobiscum,


[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application