Re: Eldon (reply to Kym)
Aug 19, 1997 10:03 PM
>Again, I agree that gender-based prejudice and unfair treatment
>of people based upon their sex should be left behind as
>humanity evolves, moving forward to better things. I just
>wouldn't objectify the term "sexism" and make of it any more
>that what it is: a mental construct. The Christians do the
>same thing with their idea of "God", and won't even consider
>something as a religion unless it has people "believe in God".
This is, to me, a confusing paragraph. It seems that you first admit that
unfair treatment and gender-based prejudice - aka sexism - does exist and
should be "left behind" as humanity evolves; however, you then go on to say
you wouldn't "objectify" it. To say something exists OUTSIDE the mind of
someone is objectifying it - so if someone ACTS out their prejudice,
wouldn't prejudice then be objective - it would no longer just be a "mental
construct?" Kind of the "thought form" theory - yet, one not even need act
on a thought to create a thought form.
More empirically, your comparison between "God" and sexism seems also a bit
confusing. One can prove that sexism exists, but one cannot prove God exists.
>It's possible to attribute different motives to Tom. The
>simplest thing to do would be to ask him, "what do you mean
>by this?" and give him a change to explain if he intended
>something brutal and cruel or was just being humorous.
Tom has explained in abundance how he thinks - one need rarely guess what
little creatures are running around in his brain. To ask him to further
explain what he means is simply to bring upon oneself a night of howling at
>Kym, I'm not attacking you nor any work to better people.
I never thought you were attacking me. And I do agree with your valuable
assertion that rigid dogmas cause great harm. But you chose a topic which,
to me, doesn't seem to quite fit with what you are saying here. . .different
dendrite connections, I presume.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application