[MD] The whole yin yang thing

[MarshaV]

John,

I've even heard women defend men with this kind of justification, 
but it is a masculine point-of-view.  It's a good story and there is a 
ring of truth to your rationality, but it is not very deep.  I can only 
ask you to consider what happens to a foot that is bound from 
infancy? I've seen photos.  It is very distorted.  The only thing I 
know to do at the moment, is to try to step outside of it.  


Marsha 


 
 




On Aug 31, 2010, at 11:49 PM, John Carl wrote:

> Marsha,
> 
> I'd like to just sorta start from scratch on a few issues that you brought
> up, without doing the whole line by line thing.  I wanna talk about your
> charges of the oppression of women through patriarchical organizations of
> politics and religion, especially religion.  And I figure the best place to
> start is by looking at what I'd call our predessesors, the victorians.   It
> doesn't make as much sense to discuss the fallout of mesopatamian attitudes
> toward women, they're so far removed their effects have been blunted.  The
> victorians, on the other hand, we feel more immediately present.    Not to
> mention, the Lila connection.
> 
> Furthermore, I'd say the victorian culture most exemplified the kinds of
> oppression you describe of  masculine denigration of women to mere roles in
> kitchen and bedroom.   Primogeniture and all that.
> 
> 
> However, I think you are mischaracterizing this as "male" domination -  I
> think, much more you are seeing patterns of feminine domination of society -
> other women, than you are male patterns.    You do know Victoria was a
> woman, don't you?  You blame religion all the time, but you know who the
> real church goers are?  Go sometime.  Look around.  It's almost all women.
> And if you looked deeper into the relationships, the men who are there are
> there because their wives dragged them.  They'd much rather be at home
> watching tv.  It's probably always been like that.
> 
> 
> Do you honestly think men came up with rules about strictly covering female
> flesh?  Hah!  Believe me, if men were in charge the rules would be way more
> lax.  Even during the Victorian era.  Concerns of fashion appropriateness is
> women controlling other women's dress.  Well, until modern times.  I think
> gay men are in charge now, and I must say it's an improvement!
> 
> You think it's men who burn witches?  It's usually women who gossip about
> the outcast or gang up with social networks to ostracize the different
> other.   Men just give them the muscle and intellectual justification to get
> it done.    It's this way because it's in  women's interest to rein in the
> purely biological urges in the interest of a social arrangement.  The human
> infant is the longest-developing in infancy of any animal, and it takes
> teamwork to survive while raising one.  Therefore the woman has the most
> vested interest in social controls, and it's women who shape the society's
> leanings.
> 
> Also, women are just more in tune with social cues and facial expressions
> and communicating from infancy.
> 
> Until they find a way to raise children in test tubes or whatever, men need
> women and the acceptance by a woman has always been the driver behind all
> civilizing progress, all intellectual or athletic competition among males.
> So what you see as a male dominated society, I see as a female-dominated
> one.
> 




 
___