"Women's Issues" are "Side Issues?"

2004 posts / 0 new
Last post

Comments

nimblecivet
nimblecivet's picture
http://info.babymilkaction.or

http://info.babymilkaction.org/nestlefree          http://www.ibfan.org/issue-international_code-code.html

The second link discusses voluntary measures established by the World Health Organization. Nestle is accused of ignoring those standards. In the past corporations like Nestle have used their clout to gain dominance in the market by getting their host countries (U.S., France, etc.) to subsidize their operations and establish protectionist measures to drive out the international competition, mostly to the detriment of developing countries (for the story about instant coffee, you can consult The Open Veins of Latin America, by Eduardo Galeano; Obama was given this book by Hugo Chavez at about the same time Obama was given The World Is Flat by Thomas Friedman: Obama made a point to be seen reading the latter while ignoring the former). Now that these transnational corporations have gained dominance on the international market, they continue with their effort to process food for the minimum nutritional value they can possibly get away with. This must be a combination of pure sadism and perhaps the idea that malnutrition causes hunger and therefore spurs the consumer to consume more of the product. Most obesity in the US is caused by overconsumption of "food" lacking in nutrients, causing the consumer to consume larger and larger quantities in an attempt to remedy nutritional deficiencies. Porn largely works the same way, of course; stimulate the desire without actually satisfying the need and you create an obsessive-compulsive customer looking for a quick fix which leaves the consumer depressed and deflated after the experience, a hapless victim conditioned to repeat the cycle the next time inexorable need makes its demands.

Zenzoe
I’d like to add to what Drc2

I’d like to add to what Drc2 said about Phyllis Schlafly. The thing is, does Alberto know what a radical right-winger she is?  Besides her anti-women-having-careers stance, she’s anti-abortion, anti-birth-control, anti-gay rights, and pro-Israel, among other wrongheaded stances. In fact, she’s a general in the Republican war on women.  (You should read that Alternet article, A.  It gives a good overview of her career as an anti-women's equality zealot. Maybe then you'll think twice about believing her lies.)

Isn’t Alberto even slightly embarrassed to side with such a reactionary authoritarian? Probably not. He’s so misinformed about feminists, he’ll buy into any erroneous opinion, as long as it’s anti-feminist.

Isn’t he even slightly embarrassed to miss the obvious corporate and industrial causes of, for example, the trend of bottle-feeding, as Nimblecivet points out so well? Is he so blinded by his anti-feminist fervor that he’s cannot see the real culprits? Has he been so blinded by his hatred of feminism that he became vulnerable to propaganda by the right, propaganda that blames feminists for violent pornography, on top of everything else?

Um, yes...

I mean, if this were 1986, A. and I might agree. It was back then that The Progressive magazine printed a letter to the editor of mine, a letter where I disagreed with a feminist author there who advocated that children should be raised collectively, apart from their parents. But, you see, since then, the movement has evolved; and besides, that was just one feminist, not the entire movement. Alberto's mistake now is in not realizing that, first, the movement is not homogeneous; second, the movement changed after that and came to support and acknowledge the value of "women's work" in the home, pushing, for example, for laws that enable women to improve their lives and those of their families, including abortion and birth control, both of which enable women to be better parents to the children they do choose to have. But Phyllis Schlafly is against that.

Ulysses
Ulysses's picture
Zenzoe]</p> <p>[quote=Ulysses

Zenzoe]</p> <p>[quote=Ulysses wrote:

Can't agree that the protests turned the middle class against the war; it was their desire to stop funding an unwinnable conflict and their desire to stop feeding their sons into it as cannon fodder that turned them against the war.  The protests were indicators of massive discontent, not agents of change in and of themselves.  I remember.  I was in lots of them.

I've thought this one over a little.

Quote:
So, you disagree with Zinn's, "It was a rare presidential admission of the power of public protest." Nixon himself acknowledged it, yes?  And don't you think it's possible, U., that "massive discontent" became the "agent of change" for all intents and purposes?

First, I don't have to agree with everything Zinn says in order to still believe that the People's History... is a great book.  I don't disagree with Zinn's factual statement that Nixon acknowledged it.  But that doesn't make it the agent of change.  The discontent was indeed the agent of change, but not the protests themselves. 

Quote:
After all, the "desire to stop feeding their sons" is an aspect of the impulse toward peace; and, whether you were a middle class worker bee, or a mother changing diapers, like me, or a student out on the streets, you shared in that desire for peace.

But the important question to ask is "Why?"  The desire for peace did not stem, in most cases, from any abhorrence of war or concern for others.  It stemmed from not wanting to make the individual, personal sacrifices that would be mandatory for all if the war were allowed to continue, whether those sacrifices would've entailed death, taxes, anxiety, and myriad other negatives endured by any population at war with another.

Quote:
I don't think you can separate those segments of the population by activity: they all shared the same mood. And it counted!

Undeniably.

Quote:
I think you should take pride in your participation. Take a little credit, Man!

I do, on both counts. 

Quote:
My position is that most of humanity prefers peace to war. That's humanity. Just because those few in power utilize violence first to gain more power, and those actions take up a lot of space in history books, doesn't mean that humanity itself is violent by nature. It simply means that violent, ruthless and aggressive people sometimes rise to positions of power; but they do not represent the species as a whole.

Can't fully agree.  What if they gave a war and nobody came?  What if all actual combat had to be fought by soldiers of the rank of 1st Lieutenant on up?  Before the tail (the violent ones) can wag the dog (the rest), the dog must acquiesce, and it usually does.

Quote:
On the other hand, U., I agree that many of us will, when faced with hunger & thirst or threats to our survival, resort to violence. Or we might break the law. Is that what we prefer, or how we prefer to live? I don't think so.

I can't argue against that general premise.  Alas, its regrettable corollary is that the effect of violence is the same on all recipients of it, no matter the motivation of the perpetrators, thus making it all but impossible for civilized people to stop being wary.

Quote:
Our species is a very complex piece of work. We're also capable of self-sacrifice, care, cooperation, sharing, and a desire for peace and justice.

Humanity is undeniably capable of all of the attributes you list, but all too often deliberately chooses not to practice them because it's easier and more profitable to choose their opposites.

Quote:
Isn't that what you were engaged in, when you protested against the Vietnam war?

Only as secondary concerns.  Lots of us just didn't want to get our asses shot off for the greater glory of a corrupt Establishment and the greater profitability of Dow Chemical and Dupont, et. al.  The whole war was bogus and we knew it.  And, like Mohammed Ali, we had nothing personal against the people of North Vietnam and no particular desire to go and kill them or have them kill us.  Had we thought that they, or any other foreign power, presented any REAL danger to the U.S., as in WWII, we wouldn't have opposed the war, but as it was, we knew years before it ended that it was all for nothing and that in the end it would prove to be all for nothing.  And it has.   

tayl44
tayl44's picture
Zenzoe,thanks ,this link came

Zenzoe,thanks ,this link came thru,what they say," a picture has a thousand words"? I wonder how R.O. would rationalize the value of art? Here i go with the i% again,you think the academics/1% make the art rules so they can control the value? That how crazy the system has become,"controlling art"! Powerful wounds is true,how to avoid them? Money is the main reason most relationships go bad,if all things being more a less equal,there would be less cheating and wanting to leave. It won`t be a 100% gone but down to natural levels.I always thought that man-made laws, not intune with natural laws,they`re made to be broken.Zenzoe,you don`t think creating a illusion of need,isn`t giving them what they want? No i having seen 'Journey' (2012),but if your son can get you to sell-out on some good video games,he would probably do the same to me.(joke)  I wish Alberto would focus on the 1% they way he do on feminism,he might make contact with world.

Zenzoe
Ulysses wrote: But the

Ulysses wrote:

But the important question to ask is "Why?"  The desire for peace did not stem, in most cases, from any abhorrence of war or concern for others.  It stemmed from not wanting to make the individual, personal sacrifices that would be mandatory for all if the war were allowed to continue, whether those sacrifices would've entailed death, taxes, anxiety, and myriad other negatives endured by any population at war with another.

I see your point. It's valid.

The thing is, isn't it possible the American people not only felt all those self-centered reasons for opposing the war, but also realized the damage of the war, which also included concern for the Vietnamese and a horror over what we were doing to them?  I had small children at the time, and I remember how I felt both: not only wasn't I raising my boys to be canon fodder for the American military, I also despised what we were doing to the Vietnamese. Was I the only one?

Ulysses wrote:

Humanity is undeniably capable of all of the attributes you list, but all too often deliberately chooses not to practice them because it's easier and more profitable to choose their opposites.

True, but it's a minority of the leadership and those in power who choose their opposites, rather than the whole of a population.

Ulysses wrote:

Only as secondary concerns.  Lots of us just didn't want to get our asses shot off for the greater glory of a corrupt Establishment and the greater profitability of Dow Chemical and Dupont, et. al.  The whole war was bogus and we knew it.  And, like Mohammed Ali, we had nothing personal against the people of North Vietnam and no particular desire to go and kill them or have them kill us.  Had we thought that they, or any other foreign power, presented any REAL danger to the U.S., as in WWII, we wouldn't have opposed the war, but as it was, we knew years before it ended that it was all for nothing and that in the end it would prove to be all for nothing.  And it has.  

Well put, U.  I think you prove my point, though, that the desire for peace is a whole mix of things, some rational, some empathetic, just like we are as human beings. Yes, we can be aroused to be aggressive and moved to violence; we have the capacity, if circumstance and will demand it. But the same thing can be said of our capacity for peace. I mean, really, violence is so upsetting. Most of us just want to be left alone in peace. That's what my neighbors do, and that's how I treat them. It would take quite a threat for me to respond violently to a neighbor.  Once I get in my car, though, watch out...  just kidding, though I do notice a lot more aggression out there on the freeways than there should be. Driving seems to bring out the worst in us.  Do I digress?

Anyway, I find no comfort in defining humans as violent above all other characteristics. It doesn't flatter me. And I don't want to hold on to that notion, as if to give up on us. It leaves me with no hope for my children and grandchildren's futures.

tayl44 wrote:

Zenzoe,thanks ,this link came thru,what they say," a picture has a thousand words"? I wonder how R.O. would rationalize the value of art? Here i go with the i% again,you think the academics/1% make the art rules so they can control the value? That how crazy the system has become,"controlling art"!

The art world is a disaster, as far as I can see, Tayl.  It's a place as contaminated by all the crappy values that contaminate the rest of the society—greed, phony BS, kitsch, value based on money and fashion, not quality, and the rich own it all. But, once in awhile you find a real artist in there, like R.O.  He deserves the recognition, but I don't know how he rationalizes selling his soul to people who ought to be donating that cash to some homeless person (which he probably would be, if not for them.) Ah, it's a crazy, mixed up world.

tayl44 wrote:

Powerful wounds is true,how to avoid them? Money is the main reason most relationships go bad,if all things being more a less equal,there would be less cheating and wanting to leave. It won`t be a 100% gone but down to natural levels.I always thought that man-made laws, not intune with natural laws,they`re made to be broken.Zenzoe,you don`t think creating a illusion of need,isn`t giving them what they want?

I don't know how to avoid the wounds. They're inevitable if you're truly alive. You try to make good choices and keep your head, but sh*t happens, right?  Sometimes it seems like life delivers a double-bind: You're doomed to emptiness if you don't get swept away by feeling; and you're doomed if you do—you fall in love, and whamo!  So, you just get up again and brush yourself off, hoping you learned something useful. Mostly you never do, and the old hormones kick in again, and whamo, once more.  Lucky for me, I've lived long enough to get past all that jazz.  At least I think I have. 

I don't know, Tayl. Isn't it all good?  You're alive!

tayl44 wrote:

No i having seen 'Journey' (2012),but if your son can get you to sell-out on some good video games,he would probably do the same to me.(joke)  I wish Alberto would focus on the 1% they way he do on feminism,he might make contact with world.

I wish Alberto would too.  He does, but he got derailed somehow.  Maybe he should play Journey (2012). 

 

D_NATURED
D_NATURED's picture
Ulysses]</p> <p>[quote=Zenzoe

Ulysses]</p> <p>[quote=Zenzoe wrote:

Sorry, Ulysses, but I think if you read Zinn's entire chapter again, you'll see that the anti-war movement played a huge and important role in ending the war. In fact, it was the protests, and events surrounding the anti-war movement, that ultimately influenced the middle class to turn against the war.

Howard Zinn wrote:

Back on September 26, 1969, President Richard Nixon, noting the growing antiwar activity all over the country, announced that "under no circumstance will I be affected whatever by it." But nine years later, in his Memoirs, he admitted that the antiwar movement caused him to drop plans for an intensification of the war: "Although publicly I continued to ignore the raging antiwar controversy.... I knew, however, that after all the protests and the Moratorium, American public opinion would be seriously divided by any military escalation of the war." It was a rare presidential admission of the power of public protest.  In Chapter 18

It's not quite that simple.  The movement was the barometer of opinion, but the opinion itself is what I was referring to.  The movement did little until the majority of the middle class joined it and added its weight to the protests.  It was that added weight that made Nixon and the rest of the Establishment take real notice of public opinion, public opinion which was exponentially increased when the middle class stopped condemning the various factions of the New Left and joined with them to end the war.  Can't agree that the protests turned the middle class against the war; it was their desire to stop funding an unwinnable conflict and their desire to stop feeding their sons into it as cannon fodder that turned them against the war.  The protests were indicators of massive discontent, not agents of change in and of themselves.  I remember.  I was in lots of them.

 

 

I've been reading back and forth between you and Zenzoe and each post has shifted me to another position. This post, I feel, says a lot about that conflict and every other one.

People don't dislike wars nearly as much when it's just the "other" guy getting slaughtered. Piles of dead Iraqis didn't turn this country against the war, it was the money and the American lives lost that did that. If Vietnam had just been a big Asian kill fest for American bombs, we'd still be there doing target practice on our little brown brothers.

Violence only requires courage when ones own ass is on the line. People always prefer their violence to be as safe as possible for themselves. In this way, technology continues to perpetuate war by giving us the false impression that it can be waged from a lounge chair, at a safe distance. The drones are not the pilot-less planes, they are the people flying them from bunkers and targeting other humans for execution without a trial.

Like Zenzoe suggested, being anti-war is to set yourself up for some uncomfortable moral dilemmas. It's better, perhaps, to be pro-human, for whatever that means in the moment.

Alberto Ceras
June 5, 2012Dear TH Message

June 5, 2012

Dear TH Message Board Members,

Coming up with a “kill list” using notes resembling baseball cards? Meeting on “Terror Tuesdays” to decide who lives and dies? Counting all military-age males in a drone strike zone as combatants to “minimize civilian casualties”? Saying that the decision to put an American on the hit list was “easy”? These recent revelations in the New York Times about President Obama’s drone attacks are horrifying.

Join us in telling Obama to Kill the Kill List.

It seems the White House released this information about Obama’s drone attacks as part of its election strategy, to portray the president as a tough guy for whom playing the role of prosecutor, jury, judge and executioner is all in a day’s work.

Help us show the White House that this strategy is backfiring, that you are outraged and demand an end to this barbaric behavior that is killing so many innocent people.

This week, I start touring nationally with my book Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control. Please get a copy and check out the tour stops at:
www.codepink.org/ booktour.

I look forward to meeting with CODEPINK members around the country and working together to kill the kill list and ground the lethal drones.

Thank you for taking action today to tell Obama to Kill the Kill List.

With determination to build a peaceful world,

Medea Benjamin
CODEPINK Co-director

PS In October CODEPINK is planning a trip to Pakistan to meet with drone attack survivors. If you are interested in joining us, please contact Alli.

 

 

Ulysses
Ulysses's picture
D_NATURED]</p> <p>[quote

D_NATURED]</p> <p>[quote wrote:
People don't dislike wars nearly as much when it's just the "other" guy getting slaughtered. Piles of dead Iraqis didn't turn this country against the war, it was the money and the American lives lost that did that. If Vietnam had just been a big Asian kill fest for American bombs, we'd still be there doing target practice on our little brown brothers.

Violence only requires courage when ones own ass is on the line. People always prefer their violence to be as safe as possible for themselves. In this way, technology continues to perpetuate war by giving us the false impression that it can be waged from a lounge chair, at a safe distance. The drones are not the pilot-less planes, they are the people flying them from bunkers and targeting other humans for execution without a trial.

Like Zenzoe suggested, being anti-war is to set yourself up for some uncomfortable moral dilemmas. It's better, perhaps, to be pro-human, for whatever that means in the moment.

Completely agreed!

Alberto Ceras
Zenzoe wrote: tayl44

Zenzoe wrote:

tayl44 wrote:

No i having seen 'Journey' (2012),but if your son can get you to sell-out on some good video games,he would probably do the same to me.(joke)  I wish Alberto would focus on the 1% they way he do on feminism,he might make contact with world.

I wish Alberto would too.  He does, but he got derailed somehow.  Maybe he should play Journey (2012). 

 

You two have just made Thom's case (feminism is a side issue) and you don't even recognize it. By the way, tayl44 that should be "the way he does on feminism" not "the way he do on feminism." 

Your country? Willful ignorance, stupidity. Call it what you will it is destroying the nation. Maybe has already destroyed it. Here are a few paragraphs from an Al Jazeera article by Mark LeVine. Click on the URL for the entire story. It ought to shake you up from head to toe. Anyone here remember Bradley Manning? For Christ's sake, the Vietnam war resisters? That was then, this is now.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/06/20126294459762126.html

Mark LeVine

Mark Levine is professor of Middle Eastern history at UC Irvine, and distinguished visiting professor at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at Lund University in Sweden and the author of the forthcoming book about the revolutions in the Arab world, The Five Year Old Who Toppled a Pharaoh.

The high price of 'dark fusion'

The US government can already detain citizens as enemy combatants; now it wants to deploy propaganda across the country.

Last Modified: 04 Jun 2012 12:14

During the last decade, more than 15 million Americans have entered the ranks of the global "have nots" whom Pentagon planners were, and no doubt remain, so worried about. It's no wonder that the militarisation of law enforcement, coupled with the reduction of constitutional protections for American citizens, have served as natural complements to large-scale incarceration and military recruitment as the best strategies for dealing with the problem of the unassimilable poor.

Yet at some point, gung-ho, ignorance-is-bliss patriotism, large scale imprisonment, foreign wars, even 1,000 TV channels and high speed internet won't keep people off the streets - especially in the wake of the worst recession in 70 years and a decade filled with multiple wars. And thus, the Occupy movement burst to life: inspired by the revolts in Tunisia and Egypt and ultimately sparked by the same underlying global neoliberal system that has concentrated wealth and power and increasingly criminalised dissent everywhere.

There’s more to the article. Click on the URL.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/06/20126294459762126.html

Zenzoe
Alberto Ceras wrote: You two

Alberto Ceras wrote:

You two have just made Thom's case (feminism is a side issue) and you don't even recognize it.

Women's issues are not "feminism," per se, Alberto. But, no, either way it's not Thom's case, at least not anymore. He covers the subject of women's issues AND feminism often.  He had a feminist on his show just the other night. 

Thus, as usual, you're full of shit, and you don't even recognize it.

Actually, given Alberto's interest in zero population growth and his concerns about over-population, he ought to be the first one on this forum advocating for women's issues. Women's issues such as birth control and abortion directly affect the size of population, which also connects to resource wars, etc.; and the issue of discrimination, that is inequality, directly affects the economy:

Joseph Stiglitz on Democracy Now! wrote:

AMY GOODMAN: Joe Stiglitz, yesterday every single Republican in the Senate voted against the Paycheck Fairness Act, so it cannot move forward. Explain what this act is, the significance of this for working women.

JOSEPH STIGLITZ: Well, this is one of the issues that I take up in my book, not the particular bill, but—what is distinctive about American inequality is that too much goes to the very top—that’s the 1 percent—the middle has been hollowed out, and the bottom is not—is doing very badly. The number in poverty are increasing. Well, when you look at what’s happening at the middle and the bottom, one of the factors that contributes to weaknesses in the middle or the bottom is discrimination. Women get paid on average less than 80 percent of men of the same qualifications doing the same kind of work. You know, that’s discrimination. And that weakens the economic fiber of our country, and it creates more inequality. And this bill was an attempt to circumscribe that kind of discrimination. You know, things are better than they were 30 years ago. We’ve made progress. But what is clear, that in spite of our awareness of this kind of discrimination, we haven’t closed the gap. We have a lot more to do.

tayl44
tayl44's picture
Zenzoe,please speak of the 1%

Zenzoe,please speak of the 1% world when you talk about being "crazy & mix-up".The 99% world is closer to nomal,we`re just trying to survive.  You can avoid wounds by keeping "balance"(ying & yang) Love can knock us off our feet,but if we`re balance,it`s not the end of the world.Having no income(or fear of it) is the most common reasons for being unbalance.The way you talk about love,you remind me of the actress Betty Davis,she said "I love falling in love". Yes, i love being alive! How can one not have the opposite feeling from death,it is being balance,right?   Alberto,get back on track,watch "Journey"(2012) 

tayl44
tayl44's picture
Alberto,i write do as short

Alberto,i write do as short hand for does. Side issues are in the eyes of the beholder. It`s good to see you on other issues,and it be even better to see some solutions.

Zenzoe
Hey Tayl, here's a preview of

Hey Tayl, here's a preview of Journey. Believe me, the visuals of the real game on a large screen are much more beautiful. And you can hear the sand swish as you travel through it. There's another longer, amateur review at YouTube too, if you have the time for it.

Alberto Ceras
This is Emma Goldman from

This is Emma Goldman from vol. 2 of her “Living My Life,” pages 556 and 557.

This incident reminded me of a similar occasion when I had lectured on woman’s inhumanity to man.  Always on the side of the underdog I resented my sex’s placing every evil at the door of the male. I pointed out that if he were as great a sinner as was being painted by the ladies, women shared the responsibility with him. The mother is the first influence in his life, the first to cultivate his conceit and self-importance. Sisters and wives follow in the mother’s footsteps, not to mention mistresses, who complete the work begun by the mother. Woman is naturally perverse, I argued; from the very birth of her male child until he reaches a ripe age, the mother leaves nothing undone to keep him tied to her. Yet she hates to see him weak and she craves the manly man. She idolizes in him the very traits that help to enslave her --- his strength, his egotism, and his exaggerated vanity. The inconsistencies of my sex keep the poor male dangling between the idol and the brute, the darling and the beast, the helpless child and the conqueror of worlds. It is really woman’s inhumanity to man that makes him what he is. When she has learned to be as self-centered and as determined as he, when she gains the courage to delve into life as he does and pay the price for it, she will achieve her liberation, and incidentally also help him become free. Whereupon my women hearers would rise up against me and cry: “You’re a man’s woman and not one of us.”

Zenzoe
"When she has learned to be

"When she has learned to be as self-centered and as determined as he, when she gains the courage to delve into life as he does and pay the price for it, she will achieve her liberation..."

Isn't that what you complain about, how the women's movement —feminists— try [you think] to be like men?

Emma Goldman is not my god, however, she had a few good things to say:

"The economic and social inferiority of woman is responsible for prostitution."

When we can't dream any longer we die.”

"...Her development, her freedom, her independence, must come from and through herself. First, by asserting herself as a personality, and not as a sex commodity. Second, by refusing the right to anyone over her body; by refusing to bear children, unless she wants them; by refusing to be a servant to God, the State, society, the husband, the family, etc., by making her life simpler, but deeper and richer. That is, by trying to learn the meaning and substance of life in all its complexities, by freeing herself from the fear of public opinion and public condemnation."

Women's issues, yes. Thanks for reminding me and proving my point.

And you need to get past the belief, Alberto, that feminists, or I in particular, blame men, as human beings, for everything, or hate men. Please, get over it

 

 

tayl44
tayl44's picture
Zenzoe,the beauty of the

Zenzoe,the beauty of the Journey preview is more than enough for me, i could easily want to get lost in a bigger picture.I grew up with tv from the 50s,video has come along ways. Only if social development could move as technology has,we might have peace on earth and Alberto and feminists breaking bread. Another idea,we make economic profit on advance technology,why not do same for social advancement? What it would be worth to not hate? Or keep a "balance" of love? I think i`m going backwards,we need to be avoiding putting a price on everything. Money has replace more important issues as #1,we need to reverse that.   Alberto,any solutions for a peaceful revolution?(1% vs 99%)  

Zenzoe
tayl44 wrote: Zenzoe,the

tayl44 wrote:

Zenzoe,the beauty of the Journey preview is more than enough for me, i could easily want to get lost in a bigger picture.I grew up with tv from the 50s,video has come along ways. Only if social development could move as technology has,we might have peace on earth and Alberto and feminists breaking bread. Another idea,we make economic profit on advance technology,why not do same for social advancement? What it would be worth to not hate? Or keep a "balance" of love? I think i`m going backwards,we need to be avoiding putting a price on everything. Money has replace more important issues as #1,we need to reverse that.   Alberto,any solutions for a peaceful revolution?(1% vs 99%) 

Tayl, in your own way, you're about as wise and full of the spirit of peace as anybody else here, certainly more than I.  I could not have imagined the notion of Alberto and feminists breaking bread, for one thing. ;-)  Of course, first a thing has to be imagined before it can be realized...

Though I agree it's not a good idea to literally put a price on everything, especially not on love (though it's done), I think you've suggested something that's being discussed elsewhere lately, namely, the focus on GNH, rather than GDP: Gross National Happiness vs Gross Domestic Product. Also, equality would certainly reverse the ills that come of inequality and would create a higher GNH.  How to get there?  I'll leave that to Paul Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz, Wilkinson and Picket, and all the other genius economists and social scientists out there to tell us where to start.

nimblecivet
nimblecivet's picture
There once was a guy named

There once was a guy named Alberto/with disaster yea he loved to a-flirt-o/a comment a day/too much to say/anxiously he did a-spurt-o

Zenzoe
It must be poetry day. With

It must be poetry day.

With D_NATURED and Ulysses specifically in mind, I came here to post a couple of poems by Pulitzer Prize winner Natash Trethewey, two poems I heard today on Fresh Air; and lo and behold, there’s Nimblecivet’s funny limerick. He’s expanding his repertoire, I see, beyond his more serious poetry.

Anyway, I certainly don’t mean to one-up NC’s effort, with Ms. Trethewey’s. I just thought D. & U.  might appreciate the subject of these two poems, since they've been talking about war.  If anybody wants to listen to her read the poems, that’s here: http://www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/  (an interview of Ray Bradbury also ran today.) 

The title of Natasha Trethewey's Pulitzer Prize-winning collection Native Guard (2006) references a regiment of African American soldiers, some of whom were freed slaves, others of whom had enlisted with the Confederate army but had ultimately escaped the rule of white Southerners. This special regiment fought for the Union army during the Civil War, standing guard on Ship Island, off the Mississippi shore, to ensure that Confederate prisoners did not escape.”  http://www.encyclopedia.com/article-1G2-3232100021/native-guard.html

(in the voice of an African American Union army soldier)

April 1863

When men die, we eat their share of hardtack

trying not to recall their hollow sockets,

the worm-stitch of their cheeks. Today we buried

the last of our dead from Pascagoula,

and those who died retreating to our ship—

white sailors in blue firing upon us

as if we were the enemy. I'd thought

the fighting over, then watched a man fall

beside me, knees-first as in prayer, then

another, his arms outstretched as if borne

upon the cross. Smoke that rose from each gun

seemed a soul departing. The Colonel said:

an unfortunate incident; said:

their names shall deck the page of history.

June 1863

Some names shall deck the page of history

as it is written on stone. Some will not.

Yesterday, word came of colored troops, dead

on the battlefield at Port Hudson; how

General Banks was heard to say I have

no dead there, and left them, unclaimed. Last night,

I dreamt their eyes still open— dim, clouded

as the eyes of fish washed ashore, yet fixed—

staring back at me. Still, more come today

eager to enlist. Their bodies—haggard

faces, gaunt limbs—bring news of the mainland.

Starved, they suffer like our prisoners. Dying,

they plead for what we do not have to give.

Death makes equals of us all: a fair master.

media_muse
Hmm....I am reminded of this

Hmm....I am reminded of this from  www.donclarkson.com

Tarot: The Lovers Card, the Gemini card,

 

Women Rejoice!

 

I think this is one of the most extraordinary cards in the whole deck and one of the most controversial. So stick with me...this could get sticky!

I have written here before about the primary message of the card and will only summarize in order to make a larger point. Note that the man, conscious mind, looks to the woman, the subconscious mind, who looks to the angel, the super conscious mind. And behind the angel is the largest sun in Tarot which represents Source or God. Therefore, the line of downward insight comes from God/Source through the Super conscious mind, into the subconscious mind and into consciousness. In short...the subconscious or feminine part of the mind is the gate keeper of what will become conscious. Reason enough to be on really, really good terms with your subconscious or feminine side! (And be sure you understand we're talking here of aspects of your mind NOT your gender. We all have both feminine and masculine aspects to the mind.) Note that this entire thesis puts the feminine figure in a very important spot when it comes to enlightenment. She is the gatekeeper to what the conscious mind will awaken to.

 

Now for the really good stuff.

Note that behind the woman is the Tree of Life with a serpent in it. We've all heard this story before. The serpent seduces Eve who tempts Adam to eat the apple and for this they are thrown out of the Garden of Eden and women are forever blamed for "the fall of man." It's in the Bible for God's sake!

 

But wait. That wasn't the ancient story at all! Quite the reverse. In the ancient Kaballah the serpent is called The Bringer of Wisdom. And note the five apples in the tree. They represent the five senses in humans. What the snake really did was tempt Eve to wake up through the feminine side...the sensitive, creative, imaginative side. It was this awakening that seduced and awakened the masculine side...the rational, reasonable side. So now the story says the woman woke up the man and for this they were forever thrown out of the garden...the place of sleep and ignorance...and into the real world where they knew that good and evil existed and they now had minds to understand and choose to be good or evil. Which leads to the understanding of the ancient name for this card...and a much better one I might propose. It was called The Choice. Humans now have a CHOICE in the matter instead of being asleep, numb and dumb in the garden.

 

I hear myself ask, "And who wouldn't want to be awaken like that." Then I wake up myself to the realization that much of the world does NOT want to be awake and aware. I'm reminded of listening to a fundamentalist Christian try to talk my daughter OUT of going to college because it would lead her to evil ways. I'm also reminded that over 50% of Americans believe...and apparently want to keep believing...that the sun revolves around the Earth.

In short: many, even most, people do NOT want to be awakened by the senses and would rather continue to blame women for the "fall of mankind" instead of recognizing the feminine side as the "awakening of mankind." The Choice is yours to make.

End of lecture.

Zenzoe
media_muse wrote: In short:

media_muse wrote:

In short: many, even most, people do NOT want to be awakened by the senses and would rather continue to blame women for the "fall of mankind" instead of recognizing the feminine side as the "awakening of mankind."

And now I am reminded, Media_muse, of Susan Griffin's powerful book, Pornography and Silence.  I'm wondering if you've read it. Your comment, above, makes me think you have read it, or at least you'd be simpatico with it, if you did. 

Susan Griffin wrote:

These pages will argue that pornography is an expression not of human erotic feeling and desire, and not of a love of the life of the body, but of a fear of bodily knowledge, and a desire to silence eros.  This is a notion foreign to a mind trained in this culture...

This is of the greatest importance to us now, for we have imagined, under the spell of this mind, in which we all to some degree participate, that the paths this mind gives us are given by destiny.  And thus we have looked at certain behaviors and events in our civilization, such as rape or the Holocaust, as fateful.  We suspect there is something dark and sinister in the human soul which causes violence to ourselves and others.  We have blamed a decision made by human culture on our own natures, and thus on nature.  But instead, what we find when we look closely at the meanings of pornography is that culture has opposed itself in violence to the natural, and takes revenge on nature.

Eros and nature, in this mind, are made into one force, and this force is personified as a woman.  But this is simultaneously a fatal and evil force.  It "clog[s] the soul," it "feast[s] the worm."  Thus eros, nature, and woman, in the synapses of this mind, bring death into the world, and desire, this mind imagine, leads one to die.  ....But we find this portrait throughout literature, in the poems of Baudelaire, in the novels of Celine, in Balzac, in Faulkner, in Wedekind's Lulu, in the paintings of Max Beckmann, Gustav Klimt, Segantini.  Thus, when the historian Carl Schorske, writing of Viennese culture, tells us, "Woman, like the Sphinx, threatens the male," he is describing a universal movement of the mind...

And now this mind, which is so terrified of woman and nature, and of the force of eros, must separate itself from what it fears.  Now it will call itself "culture" and oppose itself to woman and nature.  For now culture shall become an instrument of revenge against the power of nature embodied in the image of a woman.  And so now, within this mind which has become "culture," woman will either be excluded, and her presence made an absence, a kind of death of the mind, or she shall be humiliated, so that the images we come to know of woman will be degraded images.

Here this mind has made a metaphysical division.  It argues that spirit, which it associates with man, and matter, which it associates with woman, are separate.  It tells us that matter corrupts spirit...

[from Pornography and Silence, Culture's Revenge Against Nature]

Thank you, M., for reappearing.  Though I'm no philosopher, I welcome a conversation about the underlying ground of our worldview, the basic principles that inform our perceptions. Sometimes that's the only way to get at the problem, to understand what's going on; but you're right—many people don't want to be "awakened by the senses," being put off, or maybe confused, by abstract notions such as "feminine spirit," "masculine spirit," and blah blah blah.

media_muse
Good day to you Zenzoe  ;-

Good day to you Zenzoe  ;- )

Thank you,  from time to time I read the postings here and I see great dedication to awakening the senses! This is greatly needed - if we Americans were truly in touch with our senses and sensibilities we could not continue the raping & pillaging of women /children / men & our earth. I've read much thoughfulness & silliness by posters here -  the way of our world, eh? Through out this I admire your tenacity and focus. 

I wanted to mention - the exceptional comment you atttibuted to me is from a fellow I respect - Don Clarkson. I felt his interpretation of the Lovers card made spectacular sense and addressed the topic of this posting. Little by little we will get to an awakened place in our world - beyond the wired psuedo awakeness provided by caffeine.

From Don: "In short: many, even most, people do NOT want to be awakened by the senses and would rather continue to blame women for the "fall of mankind" instead of recognizing the feminine side as the "awakening of mankind."

If you ever seen a man in action, such as  ~  the control of the TV remote control  ~  this next part from Mr. Clarkson makes remarkable sense: "So now the story says the woman woke up the man and for this they were forever thrown out of the garden...the place of sleep and ignorance...and into the real world where they knew that good and evil existed and they now had minds to understand and choose to be good or evil. Which leads to the understanding of the ancient name for this card...and a much better one I might propose. It was called The Choice. Humans now have a CHOICE in the matter instead of being asleep, numb and dumb in the garden."

From my observations the remote control gizmo keeps the gizmo holder "asleep, numb and dumb in the garden."

 

 

media_muse
Yesterday I made a post

Yesterday I made a post to thinkingblue's post ~ GOP TO WOMEN; Equal Pay, No Way!  but I realized it is integral to this post. Hope you don't mind that I transported it here. It seems that there are so many interrelated issues for we women. Consequently since we are usually more than 50 % it seems odd to put the "Side" adjective in. 

media_muse wrote:

Recently while reading about Joan of Arc I was re-reminded that she was executed because she wore "male attire". This occurred in the year 1431. Here we are - five hundred eighty one ~ 581 ~ years later Women can sometimes  dress in "male attire". Hopefully - in these times - in the wearing of male attire - no woman or transgendered female person will encounter a male that will kill her - or execute her depending on his beliefs ~ if he still believes a female ought to be dressed in a dress. 

Now - almost 600 years later -  there are plenty of men who find it their business to stick their pricky noses into women's business. But somehow, some way, their prickyness has not removed the veil from their male brains. Their one & only male focus - no matter what - is strictly limited to controlling the female reproductive system.

Women are paid less than men for one simple economic reason. The less the guys pay out to the female worker - the more zero's they get for their bankster accounts. The gender pay discrimination benefits the upper holders of business - to hell with parity or equity. Who needs it with government sponsored sanctioned gender wage discrimination? It is built in to our Constitution and not likely to change. I wonder  ~   will it change within the next 600 years?  One can only hope for change. 

CHANGE? Sure as a working female I would love some change! I am sick & tired of the spare change thrown at females. Oh yeah, and how were supposed to be grateful for this. What a crock of fecal matter continually given to us.

 

nimblecivet
nimblecivet's picture
woman invading man's

woman invading man's sanctuary? http://www.curledup.com/damnbeer.htm

Zenzoe
Media_muse, thanks again for

Media_muse, thanks again for your comments, and, yes, so many subjects are "integral" to this thread, but especially that of your comment to thinkingblue (I don't comment on her stuff anymore, because she has never responded to me. Does she respond to you?).  I do so share your disgust and amazement at the continuing "crock of fecal matter" dished out to women.  And you put it so well, throughout. Terrific.

Can you imagine men putting up with less pay for equal work?!  Never.  There would be such an uproar...but then, you have to wonder why we put up with it.  It happened to me on my last job.  But I didn't know it was happening, because management made it glaringly clear that questions put to our colleagues about their pay would have dire consequences.  It was only when my supervisor made a stink about it and told me that I found out. Well, the economy is so bad, employees walk around on eggshells, too happy to have a job to complain.

Nimblecivet, I love that— "Get your own damn beer..."  Ha!  Sheesh, I never did understand the old, "I get to sit here watching football, while you get my beer and my nachos" thing.  Never would have worked on me.  Fortunately, my husband wasn't into football, so the conflict never came up, but when I was a college girl, I enjoyed football and went to games with my father.  I do understand most of it, and would watch it, but I'm into other stuff now.  Of course, we now know about the brain injuries the players sustain, so it might be kinda sad to sit and watch that.

media_muse
"Who would be against

"Who would be against fairness in pay for the same job, or against a bill to strengthen the hand of women when they seek to document and challenge demonstrable sex discrimination? " asks Naomi Wolf in todays Guardian. 

"Once again, with dispiriting regularity, yet another bill to make it easier to fight for equal pay for women and men has come up for debate by Congress. And once again, we are being bombarded by misleading punditry funded by interested thinktanks.

Is this issue dead, as claimed – and if so, is one of the key justifications for arguing that feminism is unnecessary, correct? Sadly, the answer is a resounding "no".......

FOCUS: Naomi Wolf | The Paycheck Fairness Act's Realpolitik
 
Naomi Wolf, Guardian UK 
Wolf writes: "On average, women make only 77 cents for every dollar men get. But election year grandstanding has put paid to real equity."
READ MORE

EdBourgeois
EdBourgeois's picture
Thanks for sharings this.

Thanks for sharings this.

D_NATURED
D_NATURED's picture
media_muse wrote: Hmm....I am

media_muse wrote:

Hmm....I am reminded of this from  www.donclarkson.com

Tarot: The Lovers Card, the Gemini card,

 

Women Rejoice!

 

I think this is one of the most extraordinary cards in the whole deck and one of the most controversial. So stick with me...this could get sticky!

I have written here before about the primary message of the card and will only summarize in order to make a larger point. Note that the man, conscious mind, looks to the woman, the subconscious mind, who looks to the angel, the super conscious mind. And behind the angel is the largest sun in Tarot which represents Source or God. Therefore, the line of downward insight comes from God/Source through the Super conscious mind, into the subconscious mind and into consciousness. In short...the subconscious or feminine part of the mind is the gate keeper of what will become conscious. Reason enough to be on really, really good terms with your subconscious or feminine side! (And be sure you understand we're talking here of aspects of your mind NOT your gender. We all have both feminine and masculine aspects to the mind.) Note that this entire thesis puts the feminine figure in a very important spot when it comes to enlightenment. She is the gatekeeper to what the conscious mind will awaken to.

 

Now for the really good stuff.

Note that behind the woman is the Tree of Life with a serpent in it. We've all heard this story before. The serpent seduces Eve who tempts Adam to eat the apple and for this they are thrown out of the Garden of Eden and women are forever blamed for "the fall of man." It's in the Bible for God's sake!

 

But wait. That wasn't the ancient story at all! Quite the reverse. In the ancient Kaballah the serpent is called The Bringer of Wisdom. And note the five apples in the tree. They represent the five senses in humans. What the snake really did was tempt Eve to wake up through the feminine side...the sensitive, creative, imaginative side. It was this awakening that seduced and awakened the masculine side...the rational, reasonable side. So now the story says the woman woke up the man and for this they were forever thrown out of the garden...the place of sleep and ignorance...and into the real world where they knew that good and evil existed and they now had minds to understand and choose to be good or evil. Which leads to the understanding of the ancient name for this card...and a much better one I might propose. It was called The Choice. Humans now have a CHOICE in the matter instead of being asleep, numb and dumb in the garden.

 

I hear myself ask, "And who wouldn't want to be awaken like that." Then I wake up myself to the realization that much of the world does NOT want to be awake and aware. I'm reminded of listening to a fundamentalist Christian try to talk my daughter OUT of going to college because it would lead her to evil ways. I'm also reminded that over 50% of Americans believe...and apparently want to keep believing...that the sun revolves around the Earth.

In short: many, even most, people do NOT want to be awakened by the senses and would rather continue to blame women for the "fall of mankind" instead of recognizing the feminine side as the "awakening of mankind." The Choice is yours to make.

End of lecture.

I like the lecture. I can't stand the attitude that humanity exists by the actions of men and despite those of women. We are, in truth,  interdependent and the nature of our species is cooperation.

So much of human tradition seems to contrast with our nature. What other species is so ready to question their own worthiness or prevent half the population from contributing in a meaningful way? What a crippling insecurity men have used to justify the cruel oppression of females and the social retardation that follows. I can hardly conceive of how our treatment of women has held our species in the garden of ignorance and squandered the contributions of untold numbers of "masculine" women and "feminine" men. How soundly and peacefully our species sleeps while time runs out. 

Yet, to many on the right, the battle is to maintain and cherish our ignorance, to protect our right to be wrong. Oye! Don't they see the cost? Can't they understand the idea that wasted talent is an evolutionary crime?  It is as if, to prove god or the magical-ness of life, you have to keep humanity stagnant. If we don't change, if we don't evolve, creation is established as fact.

You can't expect to have rights at the expense of another's fantasy, ladies. C'mon, let's be reasonable!

tayl44
tayl44's picture
Zenzoe,you say "i could never

Zenzoe,you say "i could never imagine Feminist`s breaking bread with Alberto",what they say about "never say never"? Yes i have heard about "Gross National Happiness" and the northern European countries had the best rate.Because they had a good "safety net" for its people,among other things.(like economic equality) How to get there,you ask? A "public bank"! Paul Krugman,Joseph Stiglitz,etc... don`t have the courage to give birth to a public bank baby.it will take Founding Father courage to make this solution reality.What will be the straw to break the camel back??

media_muse
I haven't read any of Susan

I haven't read any of Susan Griffins work for several years now.  I'll check out Pornography and Silence after I finish reading my current main book - Women and Madness by Phyllis Chesler. I wish I had read this before ~ whoooo weeeee ~  makes alotta them dominos fall in to place !   

From the introduction of Women and Madness by Phyllis Chesler, I find a pertinent excerpt - current for todays ongoing efforts of men's enforcement /intrude /circumscribe /legislate / opinionate upon women. Page 25, 2nd paragraph: " The cumulative effect of being forced to lead circumscribed lives is toxic. The psychic toll is measured in anxiety, depression, phobias, suicide attempts, eating disorders, and such stress-related illnesses as addictions, alcoholism, high blood pressure, and heart disease. Understanding and overcoming all this is a process; no instant "exorcism" is equal to the task.

It is not surprising that many women - still behave as if they've been "colonized." Let's not forget that in many countries the colonization is physical as well as psychological.

The image of women as colonized is a useful one. It explains why some women cling to their colonizers the way a child or a hostage clings to an abusive parent or captor; why many women blame themselves (or other women) when they are brutalized (she really wanted it, she freely chose it) ; and why most women defend their colonizers' right to possess them (God or loyalty to one family demands it).

"Colonization" exists when the colonized has valuable natural resources that are used to enrich the colonizer, but not the colonized; when the colonized does the colonizers work, but earns little of the colonizers money; when the colonized  try to imitate or please the colonizer, and truly believe that the colonizer is. by mature, superior/inferior, and that the colonized cannot exist without her colonizer."

media_muse
Cool! Way over due.

Cool! Way over due. Thanks!

With this development Alberto won't need to be worried about the take over of the sanctifed male urinals by the females.

nimblecivet wrote:

woman invading man's sanctuary? http://www.curledup.com/damnbeer.htm

Zenzoe
D_NATURED wrote: You can't

D_NATURED wrote:

You can't expect to have rights at the expense of another's fantasy, ladies. C'mon, let's be reasonable!

I know—really!  The nerve!  ;-)

Tayl, I've been looking into your public banking idea.  Tell me the name of an economist who proposes it, will you?  Also, so far, while it looks good from a state-economic standpoint, I'm not convinced that public banking would fix all the social ills we've talked about here—discrimination, sexism, racism, rape, etc. Perhaps you can direct me to info on that subject. This morning I tried to find specific details on such information, to compare North Dakota, which has the only state-owned, public bank in the nation, with the other states. I still have more looking to do, but it's interesting so far. For one thing, North Dakota's employment rate is lowest in the nation, at somewhere around only 4%. However, the state is 90% white, so I'm not sure it will be easy to find an apples-to-apples comparison. The state also went from 29th position for per capita income to 17th in one year, according to Wikipedia, the best in history; however, the site also attributed that success to the oil business there, not the public bank, which I read elsewhere is what conservatives do with such good information about public banking, that is, "It's the oil, Stupid!" (Wikipedia bias) Anyway, we'll see.  (and I have to stop looking now, for today, because I'm going to be visiting with family)

http://www.thenation.com/article/banking-people#

http://truth-out.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=3937:the-publi...

http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/water-solutions/more-states-may-create...

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/banking/story/2011-12-23/public...

media_muse
Hey D_Natured as you can see,

Hey D_Natured as you can see, Zenzoe knows we gals must use our feminine wiles for the great SIDE pretense!

Otherwise there would be none of us left for the reproducing & continuation of our species. See how smart we can be! We can be smart enough, reasonable enough and strategic enough to let the He-Men have their He-Man fantasies! 

  

media_muse
Zenzoe, are you familar with

Zenzoe, are you familar with Ellen Brown? You may be, she writes quite a bit about the banking situation...

Web of Debt - How Banks And The Federal Reserve Are ... www.webofdebt.com/Ellen Hodgson Brown may have done the impossible. She wrote a book about the most stupefying subject in the world - money, where it comes from and how it ...Web of Debt - Articles www.webofdebt.com/articles/Articles by Ellen Brown. As Featured On Ezine Articles Seeking Alpha Certified. May 29th, 2012. Out of the Mouths of Babes: Twelve-Year-Old Money Reformer ...


The Economics of Happiness fit in here so I'll include their link....
the Economics of Happiness | Home www.theeconomicsofhappiness.org/'The Economics of Happiness' - a documentary about the worldwide movement for economic localization

media_muse
And from another post that

And from another post that caught my eye 

Author says Bankster’ette Hillary Clinton is ‘overweight’ and ‘tired,’ but eyeing another White House run.

media_muse wrote:

Yes SIR!

Yes SIREE! Hillary is looking tired & overweight. Almost all of our legislature & executive branch folks look tired and overweight. So ...?

Bankster'ette is clever.  I''l give you that BUT ....

Once again this is THE ONLY FLIPPPIN' PLACE where a guy will trot out "preferential" treatment" for a female. By giving Hillary her own feminized negative word. Just calling her a Banskter won't do . SHE must be elevated to her own "ette". SHE must be DIFFERENT THAN THE MASSIVE MALE MALINGERS MOLESTING OUR ECONOMY. She must be given her notch beyond them? Really?

Not that I am in agreement with the pitiful limited range of current & past "He-Men" vocabulary un-tastefully place here by moi.  So, Douche bag isn't enough for you. Slut isn't enough for you. Cu*t isn't enough for you. Whore isn't enough for you. Pu**y isn't enough for you. Boob isn't enough for you. Fat cow isn't enough for you Feminist isn't enough for you. Iron Lady isn't enough for you. ? ? ?

Gosh, the He-Men must be really really scared of Hillary.

media_muse
Zenzoe, here is another

Zenzoe, here is another thread for your post. I was dialoguing with Mr. Entitlement Society 

What is the progressive stance on day traders and short selling? How about automatized trading?

media_muse wrote:

Hmm..me wonders about your comments here....

I wonder... where you left you mind?

Perhaps if you were a "worker" you would be aware that often times AMONG the "mindless" work is a plethora of a "mind needed" to work.

I'm wondering about you - you remind me of my last boss. At my last job my cheap stingy ass allegedly "progressive" green male boss guy finally gave me a raise. Although he called himself "boss"  - well, he was bossy, & bolstered BY testosterone so I guess that qualifies for BOSS - he thought everything he did was "mindful" and everything I did was "mindless".

But how did I get that raise? After working for the cheap ass stingy for 3 years one day after learning another computer system to keep our office going Mr. Stingy Ass commented that now I was probably going to want a raise. I said "of course not, I learned all the other programs here and you haven't given me a raise. Every time I have performed it hasn't made a difference. so I just call it "performance punishment". I perform and you punish me for it."

Mr. Stingy Ass gave a little laugh cough - almost choked because, well...what I said was true and FUNNY ! He couldn't wiggle his fat stingy ass out of that. So I got my pathetic little one time wage increase. There are now three who cover my job - 2 guys & one unguy. So now I call him Mr. Stud_pid Stingy Ass. He felt entitled, I wonder... is he is part of your Entitlement Society?

Entitlement Society wrote:

Lots of people complain about how all our mindless jobs went to China. They want the cost of everybody else to go up so we can pay them to do a mindless task. It's like they're afraid of learning a useful skill, because it requires just a little more effort. It's kind of funny.

Oh yeah, almost forgot - Mr. Stingy Ass pays the guys more than the unguys / females. He & ALL the guys were very well paid & all had health insurance as the "Entitled Executive" class. Yeaaah - let's hear it "E" - ENTITLEMENT FOR THE ENTITLELERS! YAHOOOOOO!

tayl44
tayl44's picture
Zenzoe,it`s very good you

Zenzoe,it`s very good you want to learn more about public banking. I would start off, you have economist all over the map with public banking.You will have to make up your own mind where you will stand ,your mind is as good as any so call experts.(they being so corrupted) Here my concept of public banking and to answer your question about not fixing social ills, A public bank can be fund by taxes,personal funds,workers labor & skills as collateralize credit.I could imagine a public bank refinancing up-sidedown mortgauges with near 0% loans and the same with loans for other "stuff"(cars,roofs,etc... and education) I could imagine near 0% loans to help start "workers-own" businesses,to build our own stuff,this will create jobs that will stay home. One of the most important reasons for a public bank, is the power to put a end to land speculation,the main reason for inflation that drive business away. I say public banking can end poverty on earth,if all people can have a labor/skill credit worth create by a public bank own by the people,base on the same FICO credit system(work history) Why cannot al have "bread & a roof"? If the 1% can print money in our name(tax-payer) and bail themselfs out,why not have our own "public bank"(aka Fed) print/create  money/credit in our name for ourselfs?? Zenzoe,read Thomas Paine,"Common Sense"(1776) and replace political freedom with economic freedom from the King of England,you will understand the most important reason for a public bank. With a public bank, and more economic equality,there will be less conditions for "social ills". It will take a new way of thinking to make PB work,just like with political democracy,we will need to "cooperate"  more!  Your info/links cover the state run PB,but we can also create a private run PB,i support any bank controlling the people money from the 1%. Hope you understand most of this, and welcome aboard PB.  

tayl44
tayl44's picture
Media,thanks for your post.

Media,thanks for your post. Ellen Brown is my "First Lady" outside this broad,and Zenzoe will have to move over,she has you for some wise company/partner. The 12 yr old is getting a lot of attention,i hope her video is being seen in Europe! It can save them. What do you think of public banking?

media_muse
If we had public banking we

If we had public banking we would not be subjected to crashing markets & savings accounts every decade or so.

If we had public banking we could afford to live.

If we had public banking we could own ourselves instead of being owned by corporations.

If we had public banking we wouldn't have to listen or ever see again the likes of such hypocritcal disgusting self smug arrogant derisive drug abusing lying cheating wife abusing banksters.

If we had public banking we would not ever again have to listen to smart tight ass men like Jamie Dimon.

If we had public banking the the lazy stubborn arrogant hypocritcal banksters could not continue to rob the American taxpayer.

Why aren't we doing public banking?

Zenzoe
Okay Guys, clearly I'm going

Okay Guys, clearly I'm going to have to study economics (I'll get to Ellen Brown ASAP), money, banking and all that financial jazz.  However, I hate to burst your bubble, but it looks like having a public bank doesn't solve every social problem in the world, especially not women's issues: The gender gap, for example. As it turns out, North Dakota, the only state with a public bank, has a "higher than average" gender gap in employment— 74¢ to every dollar a man makes, compared to the 77¢ national average.  That's just the beginning.  I have another page showing crime rates, which I want to compare with other state's crime rates, but so far it's not looking that much better. And that'll take more time.  In the meantime, it's looking like the public bank solution doesn't get to the heart of our problems, not as the fix-all you may think it will be.  Something else is going on, and that's why we talk about misogyny, etc.

http://topics.areavoices.com/2012/04/17/report-n-d-s-gender-gap-in-wages...
http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/2348-gender-gap-states.html

Speaking of misogyny, can anybody tell me why all the females on TV now wear eye make-up heavy enough to fool a raccoon?  Is this misogyny at the networks, or do we girls just have no brains and no gumption at all?  I mean, I wear a little bit of eye make-up, but ee-ee-eee-kkk!  Do men really require that look?  Would their pee-pee's just shrivel up and disappear to see a wholesome-looking woman?  Media_muse, you're a fashion gal, explain this to me, because it's getting truly bizarre. Or, is my TV dimming out, which is a real possibility...

EdBourgeois
EdBourgeois's picture
Zenzoe wrote: Speaking of

Zenzoe wrote:

Speaking of misogyny, can anybody tell me why all the females on TV now wear eye make-up heavy enough to fool a raccoon?  Is this misogyny at the networks, or do we girls just have no brains and no gumption at all?  I mean, I wear a little bit of eye make-up, but ee-ee-eee-kkk!  Do men really require that look?  Would their pee-pee's just shrivel up and disappear to see a wholesome-looking woman?  Media_muse, you're a fashion gal, explain this to me, because it's getting truly bizarre. Or, is my TV dimming out, which is a real possibility...

Plus the make-up and body hair shaving now being used more and more on men on tv too. 

Ulysses
Ulysses's picture
Zenzoe wrote: It must be

Zenzoe wrote:

It must be poetry day.

With D_NATURED and Ulysses specifically in mind, I came here to post a couple of poems by Pulitzer Prize winner Natash Trethewey, two poems I heard today on Fresh Air; and lo and behold, there’s Nimblecivet’s funny limerick. He’s expanding his repertoire, I see, beyond his more serious poetry.

Anyway, I certainly don’t mean to one-up NC’s effort, with Ms. Trethewey’s. I just thought D. & U.  might appreciate the subject of these two poems, since they've been talking about war.

Good poetry.  I'm not trying to be snide or sarcastic (unusual for me, on this board, due to battling the mutants hereon), in asking what it is that you'd like me to learn from it.   

Natural Lefty
Natural Lefty's picture
This thread has gone just

This thread has gone just about every which way since I last contributed, although Zenzoe said I had some relevant anecdotes on other threads. The one big lesson I would say that we men need to learn is that the future of humanity depends on the empowerment (equally with men) of women. That includes respect, caring, sharing and all that good stuff. I guess this will require what Media Muse refers to as the awakening of man kind. What were the 4 parts of love according to Fromm, Zenzoe? I forget again. You know how lousy my memory is.

One specific bit of information stood out as I read the last page of this thread. (No, I am not about to read all 643 replies.) Zenzoe, you mentioned that you stopped responding to Thinking Blue because Thinking Blue never replies to you. The same thing has happened to me as well. I used to think that Thinking Blue was a man, by the way, but there seems to be some indication that Thinking Blue is actually a woman. Anyway, on the site before this one, Thinking Blue was one of the more popular bloggers. That TH site had a "friends" function like facebook, ratings systems for blogs and members, and so on. I tried to "friend" Thinking Blue at the time (thinking that Thinking Blue was a man), but Thinking Blue never responded even to that. I don't know what Thinking Blue is thinking. It is certainly interesting how different people on this site operate.  I always try to respond whenever anyone replies to anything I have written, unless there seems to be mutual agreement that the topic has been depleted of much in the way of meaningful further content.

media_muse
Hmm....I wonder where

Hmm....I wonder where Representative Sam Farr heard about "The War on Women" ? ?

--- On Mon, 6/11/12, Representative Sam Farr <ca17smima@mail.house.gov> wrote:

From: Representative Sam Farr <ca17smima@mail.house.gov>
Subject: The War on Women

 

June 11, 2012

 

Knowing of your support for women's issues, I wanted to update you on the latest action in this area. 

 

I am sure you are aware that ever since the Republicans took over the Majority in the House on January 5th 2011, they have been enacting policies that have amounted to a "war on women". I am outraged that they have chosen to focus on attacking women and are not addressing the major issues that the American people care about most: the economy and jobs. 

 

Last month, the Majority passed a version of the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) that subjects women to even greater risk of violence and makes it even harder for them to receive the services and programs that are available to them. It reverses the modest gains that have been made since the first VAWA legislation was passed into law. VAWA had never been a partisan issue until this Congress. Once again, House Republicans have passed legislation that is almost exclusively partisan and does more harm to those it is intended to help. Unfortunately, a law that aims to help women escape abuse of all types has gotten caught up in a larger anti-woman agenda.  This legislation shows that the safety of women is not being taken seriously by those in charge. The Majority's bill was opposed by hundreds of groups within the domestic violence community, as well as law enforcement, civil rights and faith-based groups. For these reasons, I strongly opposed this bill. 

 

In addition to the fight over VAWA, just two weeks ago they brought up a bill that was supposedly attempting to ban sex-selective abortions. In actuality, the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (PRENDA) only served one purpose: restricting women's access to healthcare. It is quite simply another attempt by my anti-choice colleagues to reverse the freedoms women have gained over the last several decades regarding reproductive choice in health care. Its supporters claimed that  PRENDA addresses gender discrimination by preventing abortions that are being sought on the basis of sex but, while one of the most effective ways to end gender discrimination is to empower women,  PRENDA only serves to marginalize them even further.  This bill also restricts women's access by threatening doctors with up to five years in prison and other penalties with the intent of shutting them down. In essence, it is virtually impossible for reproductive health providers to even determine whether a woman seeks a sex-selective abortion, thus amounting to a "witch hunt".  However, I am happy to report that Democrats were able to beat back the Majority and defeat this harmful legislation. 

 

I want to assure you that I, and my pro-choice colleagues, will continue to do everything we can to oppose anti-choice legislation and stand up for women's rights. In the future, please do not hesitate to contact me about this or any other issue.

 

 

Sincerely,

SAM FARR

Member of Congress

 

SF/ jm

 

 

 

This is an official correspondence from Congressman Sam Farr.
 

tayl44
tayl44's picture
Media,"Why aren`t we doing

Media,"Why aren`t we doing public banking" A very good questioin,with a very good answer,"fear" is the reason.Between Michael Moore movie,"Capitalism,a love story" and the "moveyourmoney" movement.it was only logical to think the next step would be public banking? But i heard Michael Moore talk about all the heat he took after 9/11 movie and oscar awards(it was on Democracy Now) And Ellen Brown the stuff she get from right-wing blogs,whoever out front will have to be extra strong.We`re dealing with some very sick puppies!  But the ball is starting to roll down hill,and these sick puppies will be crush if they don`t get their act together in a positive way.  Zenzoe, you cannot bust a public bank bubble, no more than you can bust a democracy bubble,good ideas are here to stay. But you learn fast,all public banks aren`t created equal,and North Dakota State Bank is a public bank by 1% definition.  They use "trickle-down" economics for their stll for profit investments,but with less interest like a credit union.But as you see,they still have social ills,the reason being stated above.But still being that this public bank being control by 1% mindset,they still avoid the mess of 98% of the rest of the country,that speaks for itself.Wall st didn`t "sucker them"! They learn and remember 1919,when they was born. You talk about equal pay for women,imagine a public bank run by women(i think i suggested this idea way back) i would think that would bring equality in pay "ASAP"!  Zenzoe, men`s pee-wee & women`s wee-pee(sex drive) are being shrivel up by a fail system and they need "extra`s" to get thru their deading senses.(misogyny should plead not guility) With true public bank,everybody`s "wee wee" should be ok ,no more need for "extra`s".(i wouldn`t bet on it)   

tayl44
tayl44's picture
Media,you see how corrupt

Media,you see how corrupt media put "war on women" in the language? They have you thinking on the defensive all the time now. This need to be turn around,ladies need to study some tactics of war. Study a weakness and "Attack"!! These people have both feet in empire graveyard,they have no morals, except to the false god of money,they have no defense! Why aren`t the women(and men) attacking?? 

Zenzoe
EdBourgeois wrote: Zenzoe

EdBourgeois wrote:

Zenzoe wrote:

Speaking of misogyny, can anybody tell me why all the females on TV now wear eye make-up heavy enough to fool a raccoon?  Is this misogyny at the networks, or do we girls just have no brains and no gumption at all?  I mean, I wear a little bit of eye make-up, but ee-ee-eee-kkk!  Do men really require that look?  Would their pee-pee's just shrivel up and disappear to see a wholesome-looking woman?  Media_muse, you're a fashion gal, explain this to me, because it's getting truly bizarre. Or, is my TV dimming out, which is a real possibility...

Plus the make-up and body hair shaving now being used more and more on men on tv too

Hm-m-m...I haven't noticed that particular trend.  Who? What? Where? When?  I did notice a story today about a beard: "Just weeks from becoming a New York City police officer, an Orthodox Jew said he has been booted from the police academy because he refused to shave his beard."   I happen to like beards, except for those that function as bibs.  Not so attractive.

I'm still pondering the eye-make up thing.  I'm wanting to refer back to my "American burqa" theory, which claims that American women, especially on TV, evolve by social pressures toward a generic, "feminine" look, that is, feminine according to a commercial fashion and pornographic definition, and this is our burqa.  Anyway, that theory seems to be more and more valid as time goes on.

Ulysses wrote:

Good poetry.  I'm not trying to be snide or sarcastic (unusual for me, on this board, due to battling the mutants hereon), in asking what it is that you'd like me to learn from it.  

I'm glad you liked the poetry, and I believe you, because I trust you to be directly snide when you don't like something.  And I'm not being sarcastic either.  It's a good thing, your honesty.

Well, I didn't think I'd be teaching you anything with it.  I posted it mostly just as a "war sucks" kind of statement.  Nothing more challenging than that.  I just happened to be moved to tears by her reading of them; it was on my mind when I came here, that's all.

Do you remember back when we had that discussion about violence vs. empathy, or war vs. peace, and whether our species is doomed by virtue of our nature to be violent; that thing about "we've always been that way, so it must be how we are and will be forever?"  Remember when I said, "I agree that peace can be unstable under stressful conditions, but if we believe violence is our fixed destiny, our only choice, by virtue of our genes, that belief will determine our fate absolutely. Plus, it’s simply a false belief?"

Well, I wish I could post a clip of the speech by Dennis Kuchinich I just saw on Link TV, but I can't find it anywhere yet.  Anyway, he addressed that very question and pretty much made the same argument I did, that is, "belief will determine our fate absolutely. Plus, it’s simply a false belief.Not that I don't remember your point about social and economic stressors as catalysts for violence. (seems like you said as much, in essence)  Too bad you weren't there in the room with him to ask a question, or make a statement.  Anyway, he seems very big on the notion of our being wired for peace ("not an airy-fairy idea of peace," he said), compassion, empathy and the rest of those human characteristics.  Well, I'm sure you knew that about him.

I meant to ask Media_muse if she has seen the TV series, In Plain Sight?  I ask, because MM's style reminds me of the main character on it, Deputy United States Marshall Mary Shannon.  I mean it as a compliment, but you'd have to see the show to get it.  Anyway, I wish I had that character's gumption and gift of the instant, devastating retort (I'm sure Media_muse must be good at that too)— well, the script is good, quite literate. I was surprised. 

Zenzoe
Also this: I just googled

Also this: I just googled "raccoon eyes make-up" and found out I'm not the only person to have made the comparison. ("So, you think you're so original?")  If you google it, look at the first picture, with Ellen Degeneres and a raccoon. Ha! 

Natural Lefty
Natural Lefty's picture
I have a couple of anecdotes

I have a couple of anecdotes to mention. Just a while ago (shortly before waking up), I dreamed that I saw a neighbor's mother and daughter tied up in their back yard, so I went to untie them, at which point the irate toothless, hick husband who tied them up, grabbed me and threatened me. It probably had more to do with my conversation with my brothers last night, about my parents, than with women's issues, but it might be relevant.

The other thing actually happened on Sunday. My wife asked me to take her to Kohl's, where she bought some clothing for the first time in a while. As we were getting ready to buy the merchandise, she asked me to check for a certain type of cosmetics that she had a coupon for. When I went over there, I noticed a pretty young hispanic woman standing about 20 feet away. (Honestly, I looked at her face first.) Then I noticed that she was wearing a black, lacy see-through lingerie thingy, so I looked again to make sure, and it looked like she was wearing only a thong underneath (especially when she started bending over to look at something). I clearly thought her lack of clothing was inappropriate for a public place such as Kohls (although it might have fit in just fine at a strip club, which I wouldn't know since I don't go to those places). Maybe she was in the lingerie section and trying some on, but I doubt it. Anyway, I decided to resist temptation and not stare at her, so I quietly walked back to my wife who was in line and informed her that I couldn't find the cosmetics, before she showed up and saw me fantasizing about this other woman. (I didn't tell her that I saw a sexy woman in lingerie over there, though.) I am not sure what a man should do in that situation. If I scold her, I may be infringing on her rights, but if not, I am letting an inappropriate behaving sex kitten type fulfill her obligation to cater to men's fantasies.

I didn't notice if she had Raccoon eyes make up or not, by the way. I think I was a bit distracted by other parts of her anatomy.

That's the first time something like that has happened to me. I am usually the guy who didn't notice the pretty naked woman, the one who didn't see Bigfoot, or the one who didn't get abducted by aliens, etc.

Zenzoe
Well, shake my bootie, look

Well, shake my bootie, look who's here!  Natural Lefty!   ...it's about time...  ;-)

Speaking of bootie, on Sunday we —my grandchildren Raiff and Gwen, plus my son Steve and I— were chatting at the kitchen table, and the subject of "super-big-round rear ends" came up.  (we refrained from calling them "big butts," though I don't know why. The kids use it often enough.)  Somebody wanted to know what would be a nice word to describe such things, so, after many tries, we finally came up with "bootieful." The children thought that was hilarous. 

That dream you had sounds like the dream of a compassionate, caring person.  So how you ever managed to dream it, I don't know. ;-) 

I can just see you trying, but not trying, not to ogle the "sexy" shopper.  It's amusing, but something's amiss, when I come across your final comment about the incident: "I am not sure what a man should do in that situation. If I scold her, I may be infringing on her rights, but if not, I am letting an inappropriate behaving sex kitten type fulfill her obligation to cater to men's fantasies." I appreciate your honesty, but I think you must be kidding. Why would you scold her, if you enjoyed what you saw?  Just wondering, and leaving a lot of other questions to drift away for the moment.

Also, does your incident at Kohl's relate to subject of the raccoon-eyed babes on TV that I mentioned? 

Here's an article that questions men's ability to participate in finance and/or to govern, given the supposed overwhelming affect of testosterone: Men Probably Too Hormonal and Moody to be Trusted with Important Financial Decisions.  In the end, the article manages to ridicule the sexism inherent in the research; but it doesn't do much to fix the misunderstanding. 

Quote:

I usually give a hearty side eye to any research that suggests that because of hormones, humans are utterly incapable of controlling themselves; it's just as ridiculous to believe that men can't make grown ass adult decisions to keep their animal instincts in check as it is to assume that women are chronically mentally unstable because MENSTRUATION. But it's refreshing, in a schadenfreude soaked taste-of-your-own-medicine sort of way, to see The Man in the crosshairs for his hormonal impulses rather than being exonerated by them. Acknowledging a tendency is the first step to overcoming it, or working around it. In the meantime, I eagerly await the day we start seeing commercials for Testoster-OWN, a Midol-like pill for men who can't stop punching things.

For a more rigorous understanding, it's better to look to Dr. Robert Sapolsky and his book The Trouble with Testosterone, where he proves that social context makes for aggression, not bald testosterone, which only amplifies after the fact.  With apologies to Natural Lefty for the YouTube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGMHKzfaqH4