Wikipedia, Patriarchy, Proof and Pudding

Meta Feminist Dyke of the Old School welcomes all.
No comment will be censored.
Bring it on.

My Photo
Name:
Location: WE Are EVERYWHERE, U.S. Virgin Islands

Music is my Medicine. Thinking is my Sport. Nature is my Faith.

Tuesday, December 05, 2006

Ms. Perceptions


Recently after seeing this blog, someone suggested to me that Y just "like to fight" . Y do not like to fight. Y do not look to fight. For one thing, fighting hurts. But fighting does not hurt me as much as if someone tries to screw me or you, and then Y do nothing, or even worse - cooperate.

11 Comments:

Anonymous contraculture said...

Out of the ways in which a person can "fight", the Internet is one of the most passive-aggressive, and certainly one of the most futile. The Internet shows all a person's motivations to fight without giving any consequential results.

"Live free or die"? Seriously? You mean you can somehow magically transcend the nets and the boxes that other people decide to put you in? You can escape having to pay taxes? You can get around bogus laws that are at odds with internally-consistent ethical codes? You can evade and change other people's first impressions? Utter bullshit, all of it. Freedom is an illusion. You're just too naive to realize that yet.

You are free to drop this fight at any time. But you don't. Why? You feel trapped by your sense of ethics. You see that the world could be a better place and you feel compelled to make it so. The natural course of action is to do nothing and live in ignorance of these problems. Billions of people worldwide live in exactly this state. The Patriarchy's not going anywhere, presuming it exists. And really, the more feminist complaining about ephemeral issues with the Patriarchy I hear, the more inclined I am to make a conscious effort to preserve the parts of our culture and heritage that they're complaining about. Feminism's been through three different revisions since its inception, and it still has failed to return significant gains. Any other philosophy with that poor a track record would be publically humiliated in academia.

You fight because some part of you wants it. It's that simple. You feel like you're defending something, like you'll hurt less, but really, you just get more drawn into conflicts that have an increasing likelihood of going over your head.

I'd dissect your argument more, but I can't make grammatical sense of the last "sentence".

Tuesday, December 05, 2006  
Blogger Lesbesquet said...

So, what's your point?

Tuesday, December 05, 2006  
Anonymous contraculture said...

...wow. All that explanation and you still miss the point. Feminism produces such perceptive minds! I'm not your tutor. Maybe one day you'll figure it out. Good luck.

Tuesday, December 05, 2006  
Anonymous Rintrah said...

"Out of the ways in which a person can "fight", the Internet is one of the most passive-aggressive, and certainly one of the most futile. The Internet shows all a person's motivations to fight without giving any consequential results."

You are right, and I could not have expressed it better. To me, dedicating oneself to fighting on the internet is like trying to prove to Scientologists that one's IQ is higher than what the Scientology test results give.

"But fighting does not hurt me as much as if someone tries to screw me or you, and then Y do nothing, or even worse - cooperate."

For your benefit, Contraculture, I will put it in more comprehensible terms:

"Fighting incurs less harm than allowing others to oppress me and you. By not fighting, I may only do nothing, or worse - cooperate."

By the way, if I remove all the cobblestones of good intentions, will the road to hell lead to heaven? Samuel Johnson would be proud of the catchphrase he inspired. I remember some lyric like "if I go to hell, I hope I burn well."

Wednesday, December 06, 2006  
Blogger Lesbesquet said...

C:...wow. All that explanation and you still miss the point. Feminism produces such perceptive minds! I'm not your tutor. Maybe one day you'll figure it out. Good luck.

Well, Y did get the point where you said, "I can't make (grammatical) sense..."

How could you know that my perceptive mind was first molded by my father, and then by a thouroughly roman catholic school system? Perhaps you should direct your complaints to the pope. Don't bother with my father...since he's dying from cancer at the moment.

Who said,"Know thy enemy?" Thanks, dad and god the dad!

Wednesday, December 06, 2006  
Anonymous Rintrah said...

'Who said,"Know thy enemy?"'

Sun Tzu: “Know thy self, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories.” (The Art of War)

I just realised it was rather inelegant for me to say "oppress you and me"; "oppress us" is better. Sorry Contraculture.

I am sorry to hear your dad is dying of cancer, Lesbesquet.

The pope is a senile old man who only needs to wear papal vestments and wave to excite the masses into a spiritual fervour.

Anyway, I am getting tired of this. I like debating, but it is becoming too personal now. Adieu.

Wednesday, December 06, 2006  
Blogger Lesbesquet said...

Ok. Bye bye. Redux.

Wednesday, December 06, 2006  
Anonymous contraculture said...

What's this now? Men are a problem? You refuse to take responsibility for your own position in life? I think we're starting to get somewhere here, provided you don't lose me again.

So it's your dying dad's fault, and God's fault, because God is male? Again, misguided atheist propaganda. If you'll look into things, you'd realize that most Christians generally think of God only as a Father because that's a comforting thought to them. Fundamentally, little theology (short of Mormons and other outliers) actually perceives God as having gender at all. Indeed, there are many who think that the Holy Spirit is best perceived as being feminine. But then again, most ignorant atheists gloss over the many subtleties of religion. Don't go thinking I'm Christian; I'm just trying for objectivity. You're objectively showing your ignorance. But oh, wait, feminism says I'm wrong, and we all know that feminism knows way more about Christianity than Christianity does. (I'm making an invalid overgeneralization here as a figure of speech. I hope you understand what I'm getting at. I think it's pretty obvious.)

Boo fucking hoo. God mindfucked you (or so you think) and now you're angry at him. Victim complex, much? If God exists then He's got a shitload more power than some impotent, whiny, self-victimized dyke (who most interpretations claims He still loves, regardless of the ethical implications of her sexual preference) and thus deserves Respect with a capital R, if that's not too phallic for your sensitive typographical conventions. If God does not exist, you're perpetuating a mentally-draining headspace because you like being a victim. Which one is it? The two are mutually exclusive but quite undeniable. Shit or get off the pot. But it's so trendy to hate God! Morons.

Yeah, sure, your dad dying sucks. But man, if every single crisis in a person's life derailed them- oh wait, drama's trendy too.

I guess I'm just not cut out for the bliss of senseless ignorance and trendwhoring.

Wednesday, December 06, 2006  
Anonymous Rintrah said...

Thanks Contra. You inspired me to post another comment.

I'm afraid you are likely to lose Lesbesquet very soon, assuming she was ever with you.

First of all, I don't think Lesbesquet was ever interested in arguing a point. Her blog combines sobbing, whining, indulging her desire to be a victim, and the substitution of the accepted first person pronoun for her own - which isn't patriarchal, of course.

Yes Contra. Men are the problem because a speculative theory called feminism, which posits all men are agents of a secret organisation called the patriarchy, says so. The facts of her own life are irrelevant if they conflict with her ideology. This fantasy of her being the victim of a great, amorphous system is like a fluffy doll to cling to so she can forget her own responsibility in life. If she were interested in objective knowledge, she would actually try to form an argument and at least affect the pretense of objective research; but she has run away from those too. She is more interested in claiming random things she finds out prove her victim fantasy.

You are sometimes impssible to understand Lesbesquet, but if I read your entry correctly, you are saying your Dad and the Catholic school system are responsible for your lack of or malformed education. Did public libraries deny you membership and bookstores refuse to sell you books because they are patriarchal? Please help me understand, Lesbesquet, are you trying to prove to the world 1+1=3 and the patriarchy has covered this up?

As soon as Lesbesquet starts to contemplate something in more time than it takes to smoke crystal meth, she forgets that arguments require some kind of logical framework and lets out red herrings from the zoo. Seriously, even your best attempts at argument are good source of research for scholars trying to find out about every logical fallacy. Maybe you should have one logical fallacy named after you in recognition of your work.

How much have you found out about wikipedia? You found out it sucks, it's mean to you, it's run by a big baddie called the patriarchy, it won't publish your rants, it won't lead social change against the patriarchy, and there aren't enough pages affirming your victim fantasy. You just look at random parts of it, form a half-hearted argument against it, and then post your rant on your blog. Your entries are scizophrenic; they jump from topic to topic without any internal or overall coherence. And what is it you want in the end? A drug dealer to give you a cap of heroin to help you escape reality, or another feminist to put her hand on your shoulder to console you because of your victim fantasy? And more importantly which one can your time and money buy?

Even though you hate Catholics, Lesbequet, you are perfectly suited to be one. "Get thee to a nunnery!... men know what monsters you make of them."

Thursday, December 07, 2006  
Anonymous Rintrah said...

I just remembered: my membership to the Patriarchy expires in 5 days. To renew it, I have to prove I have oppressed womenkind. Can you vouch for me, Lesbesquet? The veracity of your research and judgement is held in high esteem everywhere. You are one of the few radical feminists who is able to report the condition of womenkind truthfully and without hyperbole. The Patriarchy have marked you as their number 1 target because of this and your blog which undermines them.

Thursday, December 07, 2006  
Blogger Lesbesquet said...

My Contraculture:
Assumptions, inferences, and presumptions have caused you to consistantly misunderstand me. Y guess that's what it is, anyway.

My father is, interestingly enough, suffering from one of the man-made cancers. Y don't really care, Y only mentioned it because complaining to him would be futile.

To try again: Y CREDIT my father and the catholic education Y got for showing me so intimately the workings of patriarchy, the effects of patriarchy, the methods of patriarchy, the scholarly methods of patriarchy, the opportunity to know my enemy, and so much more.

"I guess I'm just not cut out for the bliss of senseless ignorance and trendwhoring."

Ok. Bye bye.

Thursday, December 07, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home