The c word is definitely asking for conflict. The b word, not so much. In fact, I consider that one a badge of honor and wear it with pride since I only get it when I'm being strong and assertive, something greatly admired in the opposite sex. ;->

Past my bedtime! 'Night all.

Oh, shoot!

Well g'night then but I was going to post Roy Edroso's famous apologia for the c word. He's the gifted writer from Alicublog.

Tuesday, March 06, 2007

FURTHER THOUGHTS ON BAD WORDS

http://alicublog.blogspot.com/2007_03_04_archive.html#5330626011748641288

And let's not forget Derek and Clive (Peter Cook and Dudley Moore)

http://www.phespirit.info/derekandclive/live_02.htm

"The Coming of The Purple Better One"

The scene is Grant Park, Chicago, 1968. A full-scale model of the Mayflower, with American flags for sails, has been set up. A.J., in his Uncle Sam suit, steps to a mike on the deck :

“Ladies and gentlemen, it is my coveted privilege and deep honour to introduce to you the distinguished senator and former Justice of the Supreme Court, Homer Mandrill, known to his friends as The Purple Better One. No doubt you are familiar with a book called The African Genesis, written by Robert Ardrey, a native son of Chicago, and, I may add, a true son of America. I quote to you from his penetrating work : ‘When I was a boy in Chicago, I attended the Sunday School of our neighbouring church. I recall our Wednesday night meetings with simplest nostalgia. We would meet in the basement. There would be a short prayer and a shorter benediction, then we would turn out the lights, and, in total darkness, hit each other with chairs.’ Mr. Ardrey’s early training tempered his character, to face and make known the truth about the origins and nature of mankind : ‘Not in innocence and not in Asia was mankind born. The home of our fathers was the African Highland. The most significant of all our gifts was the legacy bequeathed us by our immediate forebears, a race of terrestrial flesh-eating killer apes.’

“Raymond A. Dart of the University Of Johannesburg was the strident voice from South Africa that would prove the southern ape to be the human ancestor. Dart put forward the simple thesis that man emerged from the anthropoid background for only one reason : ‘because he was a killer. A rock, a stick, a heavy bone, was to our ancestral killer ape the margin of survival.’ (And now we sat in his office at the wrong end of the world). ‘Man’s original nature imposes itself on any human solution. The aggressive nature of the southern ape, suh, glowing with menace, fought your battles on the perilous veldts of Africa, 500,000 years ago. Had he not done so, you would not be living here, in this great city, in this great land of America, raising your happy families in peace and prosperity.’

“Who more fitted to represent our Simian heritage in all its glory than Homer Mandrill, himself a descendent of that illustrious line? Who else can restore to this nation the spirit of true conservatism, that imposes itself on any human solution? And at a time when this great republic is threatened by enemies foreign and domestic? Actually, there can be only one candidate : The Purple Better One, your future President!”

more of this timeless americana at

http://niqnaq.wordpress.com/2008/02/23/wm-burroughs-the-coming-of-the-purple-better-one/

it took me quite a while to find this and edit it down, so I feel OK about touting the link.

"RMP

"It really is disgusting what they did to Scott Ritter. For being so right, at such a wrong time, his reputation and public standing were utterly destroyed.

"-- DCLaw1 Sunday, May 11, 2008 07:02 PM"

Not destroyed with me. He and I probably don't agree on much politically. But we do agree on telling the truth, no matter the risk.

He is the closest we have today to a "Pentagon Papers".

Charles Manson comes to mind.

"Is really exceptionally vile.

"-- -Mona- Sunday, May 11, 2008 07:05 PM"

Take your pick: stupidity or lunacy. Either way the rejection of reality is not wisdom -- or sane.

JNagarya

You seem like an intelligent person, but seriously.

"I have an actual education in actual law. You don't."

You come across as if you have an actual education in behaving like a pompous ass.

-- bamage Sunday, May 11, 2008 07:35 PM"

Yes: putting rule of law before idiotology makes one a pompous ass. And I admit putting rule of law before idiotology.

Pedinska --

JNagarya

You neglect to mention that it is also inslting to men.

Not that that should matter, of course. Only men are draft-eligible, and only women are oppressed.

"You not only missed my point but you are a humorless ass as well."

Actually I didn't, and actually I'm not. But I am one who has the misfortune of from time to time dealing with so-called "feminists" who routinely state the fact that women are only victims, and all evil is male. Most recent is the bigot who asserted, "Women are smarter than men" -- which is only a sexist assertion if a man says it. Since then I've discovered that her notion of "smarter" is actually "lies more" (at least in her case).

"The issue is not oppression of women, but rather why men feel that referring to other men as being a part of a woman's body should be insulting at all."

It is you who missed my point: the term with which I'm concerned and to which object is "prick". It is the equivalent of and no more friendly or flattering than the four-letter "c" word. And yet women who furiously object to the use of the latter have no compunctions about using the former as a matter of routine.

I also don't like such words as "cock" because I don't like dehuminizations of human beings -- which we all are before we are male or female.

"It implies that women are, by nature of possessing said anatomy, lesser, and therein lies the insult. You equate a man with a woman and, voila, you have somehow made him a lesser being. Nice."

No, it does not imply that woman is lesser. It implies that the male isn't sufficiently male. It isn't actually about women at all. Or do you think that men who call other men by that term sat down and thought it through and decided, "Women are less than men, so I'll insult men by calling them a word which some associate with woman/sex, instead of characteristics such as physical strength = physical courage"?

And is that "playing chicken" male "physical courage" always smart? I don't think so. So in their view I would be a "pussy" -- coward.

"I think the draft should come back and I think women should be eligible too. I think it would make us a lot less eager to enter unnecessary wars."

I wish that were true, about less eager. In fact, the women's movement of the 1970s had as its announced goal as concerned militaries and militarism the "feminization" -- softening -- of society so that militaries would (ideally) dissolve from lack of need for them. In view of present realities, and the fact that most of the Federal budget goes to radically excessive militarism, including of the society, I continue to align myself with that "ancient" feminist proposal.

Contrary to that are the women "feminists" of later generations who enlist in the military to prove their equality, or whatever. Who nonetheless affirm the militarism.

There is, of course, still sexism in the military against women. One example of that is the high rate of rape. Another is such as the disparity in the Graner-English sentences, and the controversy concerning one of those.

Graner? Uncomplicated: lock him up, throw away the key. He got ten years.

English? She couldn't possibly have done what the photos show her doing, because it isn't possible for "empathetic" "peace-loving" women to do such things. So it must have been that someone or something else was responsible for her decisions and actions and the consequences thereof -- since women are not capable of being competent and responsible [because excuses are provided so they need not be -- which also happens to be not merely patronizing but also infantilizing].

So it was essentially concluded that it wasn't English who was responsible for English's decisions and actions and the consequences thereof, despite the photographic evidence, which was sufficient in Graner's case to find him guilty open-and-shut. It was the fault of the "patriarchy" -- yeah, that's the ticket.

English got three years.

And she didn't demand equality in sentencing.

"Oh, and I'm not oppressed. Men like you, who are weak enough to think that a comparison to a woman somehow automatically lessens you, aren't strong enough to oppress me."

I'm not at all offended or threatened by such comparisons. In fact, I quite like my softer feelings -- prefer them, actually -- and my pacifism based upon putting life before death. (Of course, there are women who don't like such "wimps".)

Moreover: I don't know whether "penis envy" exists, but I will tell you that I'd testify under oath that I have "womb envy".

But don't get me wrong: I realize that women, unlike men, can read minds, so they know more about what men think, and are, and mean, than do men.

Or, rather, that women routinely substitute unexamined assumptions about men for actual knowledge, that being one of the fatalities of being a presumed-humorless ass worthy only as a target for imputed female-sexist cliches based upon the solidly-confident missing of my point.

I love women with the profoundest of tenderness and respect. So I am sorely disappointed when they don't live up to their self-billing. When, for example, they oppose all double-standards -- except their own; when, for example, they oppose all discrimination based upon sex -- escept their own. But that's what happens when one is always pointing the finger of blame away from oneself: one fails at self-examination.