Is the all-time abortionist when he floods the whole Earth: so many unborn babies!

Promises no more big floods, but year after year, slips around that promise with lesser floods, aborting even more unborn babies.

Will still hang a rainbow in the sky after a lesser flood, as if that makes it all okay.

Makes people gay, but allegedly hates 'em.

Is pro-slavery and was happy to oversee the enslaving whole tribes, including those he considered to be his fave kids.

I did look up what I posted. I guess I just looked up that info at the wrong site.

Good point.

And it's working on me: I'm taking my dad to dinner on Sunday. It'll be to a just folks place, which is what he deserve for that's where he's comfy.

It's inarguable that men do much of the dirtiest, most dangerous work. However, claiming coal mine credit if one doesn't toil in a coal mine is even more unseemly than claiming rape credit if one hasn't been raped. At least, when one woman is raped, it reverberates through other women. The unraped woman might not have felt the prick in her, but she feels the fear. And claiming coal mine credit is also bad form if you're middle class. Those coal mine credits belong loosely to all working class men, the working poor, who toil in similar ways, but a guy who works at a desk has no claim to referencing dangerous labor. It's a class thing, not a gender thing.

I think class trumps gender, race, etc. It's fairly easy to talk about everything but class. Talk about class and you invite revolution, communism, etc. Talk about class and you also have to consider your greed if you're wealthy and your envy if you're poor. Talking about class is dangerous and shaming.

6Stringer, what do the men who rail here and in nearly every thread about gender want? To parallel Freud, what do these men want? I once engaged a couple of them in conversation and offered some compassion and both started flirting with me, which was creepy. This is not a hook up joint. Salon is a place where people chat. I think both men and women get a rotten deal. Part of the rotteness is immutable. We are born, ripen, and rot, rot, rot. And there are sociopaths everywhere and many rise to positions of power, exploiting what goodness is in folks. And each of us is selfish, so that means everyone you meet wants to use you in some way. I'd say it's all bad if it weren't for chocolate and puppies.

And, best of all, chocolate lab puppies.

Thanks.

Talking about class is also problematic in spiritual domains. I attend a liberal church and our pastor recently addressed some of the many passages in the Bible about money. He's usually bold and brave. On that day, he was timid and afraid. And he should have been.

In the end, people want...more.

And to acquire more, others must have less.

And more isn't just about stuff. It's about you having greater value as your portfolio's value rises. Circumspection is prudent when addressing class. It is rare when one incurs a friendly response, as I did from you.

And, again, I thank you for that.

Now, that's mightly neighborly of you! Thanks!

Great post.

We're going to lose the world, due to global warming. The global thermostat is being reset to deep fat fry.

I too lose track of who's inhuman this week, who we're supposed to hate. There are cons who post at Salon who want us to believe that this time it's really, really true that our current enemy is inhuman.

There's the ending of 1984, where the enemy changes once again and Winston Smith weeps joyfully for Oceania and its perpetual war.

"It will work on 100% of the Religious Right..."

If the Religious Right really believed in God, they'd embrace everything that would hasten their demise so that they could go cuddle with Jesus. Delaying death suggests doubt at the least and likely disbelief.

You're right. Terror is terror.

I agree, but your assertion also applies to everything. Everyone has an agenda, thus every position is compromised. Even a scientist who makes an observation and then poses a question to be subjected to testing is suspect because the question is the rudder. They who get to question control.

That sounds right. Now, unfortunately, I'm imaging the less powerful as the obsequious, cringing Gollum and the more powerful as a stony troll (not the Salon sort of troll, but the big, gray ones). No one wins in that analogy.

In the dynamic that Juliebird just referenced and in your latest post in this thread, your asserting, But-this-is-what-I've-been-saying-and-saying-oh-why-oh-why-doesn't-anyone-listen-to-me suggests that you're occupying the role of less powerful as evidenced by your tone.

You're unhappy even when you should be happy.

In your past, have you had good results in perpetuating a particular behavior, such as prompting more posts about men being stereotyped, from complaining when you got what you wanted? I haven't.

I think there are two things that offset agendas.

One is individual decency, which is, I think, rare.

The other is a system, such as the scientific process, which emphasizes numerical analysis and thereby inhibits subjectivity.

One of my friends is an engineer. He is decent and scientific. Of course, everything is a trade-off: he is sooo slow at analysis being so fair in analysis. He doesn't just cross his t's and dot his i's. He counts the electrons in those t's and i's.

You're funny!

They'd register in Mordor, of course, and many such similar couples are permanently registered (in the motel sense) in Motel Hell!

Seriously, neither role is fun. Both nag and power holder are self-reducing and reduce the other. There's also another inequity in play in all relationships: one person always loves the other more. This dynamic can reverse direction, hour by hour and even minute by minute, of course, making things even trickier.