|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday November 25, @09:56PM EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Once when I visited New Jersey once, I was peeing in a urinal when I spied a stick on face stuck to the wall of the urinal. It was Hanoi Jane, Ted's now ex-wife.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Anybody know how to put faces on stick ons? Now that I think about it, I've got a whole list of faces.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday November 25, @10:15PM EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
"Ted Turner has taken a small step to demonstrate his belief that women should run the world, because men have "mucked it up" with too much warfare and military spending."
His idea is completely sexist and idiotic. He thinks that because the problems associated with people have not been totally solved by all our good intentions, that this is somehow completely the fault of men.
What this hateful bigotted thinking fails to point out is all the good things that men have done.
When women have all power and control in government I suspect that they will still send men to fight in wars to get what they want, and that women will still be to good to serve in war.
Let's see women who have already done that:
Margret Thatcher
Queen Victoria
Queen Elizabeth
Queen Mary
Mary Queen of Scots
Joan of Arc
and more.
I would have included Joan of Arc, but she was a warrior who served with men in some capacity, and then too there was Zena Warrior Princess and Gabriel. Oh wait a minute, that's fiction.
Considering the way women beat on men in domestic violence and get away with it, about the only thing that will change is that female leaders will hide the bodies better.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You've written a good list of peace loving female rulers Ray. Names that immediately pop to mind as appropriate additions are Catherine the (so-called) Great, Boudicca, and Bloody Mary.
And let's not forget to list the violent men such as Jesus, Gandhi, and Buddha.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday November 26, @12:00AM EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
I'd hardly say that Magret Thatcher was a peace loving ruler.
"And let's not forget to list the violent men such as Jesus, Gandhi, and Buddha."
Those men weren't rulers either. Jesus supposedly denied any earthly kingship which was wanted of him. Gandhi was sort of an an-archist (no-rulers), and if I remember correctly Buddha gave up his aristocratic privileges to become like those he saw in poverty.
But of course since these are good quality's that some men have had we are gender nuetral. But when it comes to violent wealthy rulers, or bad quality's in men it becomes gender specific.
Funny how this thought process is normal.
P. George
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday November 26, @02:16AM EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
"And let's not forget to list the violent men such as Jesus..."
By the laws of the Roman government of that day Jesus was considered violent and seditious, when he whipped the money changers and turned over their tables in the temple. The Christian perspective on that action is explained in the Bible. Putting aside Christian beliefs for a moment, I've always thought that someone who cared enough about people to take away their pains through healing was a very good and caring person. Others will no doubt argue other points as he was controversial in theological ways.
I've never heard of Ghandi being overtly violent, although his non violence certainly led to violence against his own people when he staged his peaceful protests.
I'm not familiar with Buddha.
No matter what one believes or thinks about the goodness and evil of people, I think we should try to be as honest and open to truth as possible or we will just endlessly commit the same mistakes that have been made before. The fact that T.T. doesn't seem to have a clue about all the damage that feminist influence has done to men's lives over the last 30 years would be hysterically funny if it weren't so appallingly tragic. The ignorance required to make such frighteningly ludicrous statements as he did boggles the rational mind.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've never heard of Ghandi being overtly violent
Neither have I. Good grief! I used italics for "peace loving female rulers" and for "violent" in "violent men" to emphasize the sarcasm.
You're right about Jesus, however. He did use violence to drive the money changers from the temple.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd hardly say that Magret Thatcher was a peace loving ruler.
None of the women listed were peace loving rulers. I thought the sarcasm would be obvious.
Those men weren't rulers either.
Depends on what you mean by rulers. Perhaps you would prefer the term "leaders."
If you're a Christian, you believe that Jesus is God. Last I heard, God rules heaven and earth.
Gandi was for a time the leader of the Indian community in South Africa. He also, with others, led the Indians in their independence movement, calling on every Indian to lay down their lives if necessary for freedom.
As for Buddha, Siddhartha was crown prince of Kapilavastu, though he renounced the thrown to pursue spiritual enlightenment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday November 26, @10:39AM EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
"Depends on what you mean by rulers. Perhaps you would prefer the term "leaders."
I mean official positions of power and the power that comes from monstrous ammounts of money.
I do not consider leaders as rulers persa, but only if you follow them blindly or if they are in an official position of power over others
"If you're a Christian, you believe that Jesus is God. Last I heard, God rules heaven and earth."
Yes that's true but when he was alive he was wanted as an earthly king to rule the Jews, he denied that (at least in the bible).
I don't think it matters if someone believes that god rules heaven and earth. THe problem as I see it is religious people following their religious leaders claims to knowing what god wants of us.
It doesn't affect me if there is a belief in God who rules the earth, I'm not compelled or forced to follow him.
I was mainly just talking about Jesus before he was claimed to have risen from the dead. I was just talking about the earthly Jesus.
Sorry about this long post. Just trying to explain what I meant.
P. George
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please quote one Buddhist source that advocates violence!
It cannot be found.
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There was an homage to Blade Runner in a recent movie I watched... or maybe it was a Stargate SG1 episode. It was Roys final quote from the movie...
"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die."
Best damn Sci-Fi movie of all time. Star Wars... HA!
Dave K - A Radical Moderate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please quote one Buddhist source that advocates violence!
To whom are you addressing this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Try naming 3 women who've had the power to declare war but didn't. (Personally I can't think of any, though I'm not an expert on it.)
If Ted really thinks that gender can determine how likely a ruler is to declare war, than it'd be more logical for him to look at the percentages of men who've done so out of all those who could versus the percentage of women who've done so out of all those who could. But somehow I suspect he'd object to that approach, preferring instead to sigh and talk about how much better those pretty women are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday November 25, @11:49PM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
"Ted Turner has taken a small step to demonstrate his belief that women should run the world, because men have "mucked it up" with too much warfare and military spending."
Ted Turner doesn't want to admit that it's not men in power that's the problem, but power itself. But if he admitted that, he'd have to give up the power he has, and that's just not gonna happen. So he blames the corruption that comes from power on men (which is reactionary) and then I suppose conveniently exempts himself from being those 'other' men in power. At least that's my take on it if that's what he really said.
Women in power would act the same way as men in power. The corruption that comes from power doesn't discriminate on sex or race. It's hard to take anyone seriously when they say women would be better rulers. Any women who belives that is an outright reactionary chauvenist.
P. George
"It is only in folk tales, children's stories, and the journals of intellectual opinion that power is used wisely and well to destroy evil. The real world teaches very different lessons, and it takes wilful and dedicated ignorance to fail to perceive them. "
Noam Chomsky
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday November 26, @02:20AM EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
"Ted Turner doesn't want to admit that it's not men in power that's the problem, but power itself. But if he admitted that, he'd have to give up the power he has, and that's just not gonna happen. So he blames the corruption that comes from power on men (which is reactionary) and then I suppose conveniently exempts himself from being those 'other' men in power."
Your whole post was well said and very insightful. I couldn't agree more.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More Chomsky!
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ted Turner is nothing more than your everyday sexist ignoramus. Check out this interview with Turner that was published in the September/October 2000 issue of Modern Maturity magazine: http://www.aarp.org/mmaturity/sept_oct00/cameo.htm l
When the topic of his giving to so-called "women's issues" was raised, Turner's response was unmitigated misandry, fueled by outright stupidity. So only women suffer hardships, deprivation, and unfairness in this world -- the "short end of the stick", as Turner phrased it. Hey Ted, ever hear of the word "expendability"? As in the expendability of men on the job, in times of war, and when big ships go down in the North Atlantic? Is this what you would have us think is somehow the *long* end of the stick? Please get a clue, Ted.
And men should not even be allowed to hold public office for the next 100 years, eh? Unbelievable. (Would Turner apply this dictum to himself, I wonder? I suspect he'd just say, "hey -- men are jerks, but not me!") I guess that the told and untold sacrifices of generation upon generation of men, young and old, in peace and in war, for the sake and betterment of family, nation, and society count for nothing in the mind of Mr. Turner. How very sad. How terribly pathetic.
What odd, strange, and uninformed things this man has to say. One would think that a man in his 60's (70's, maybe?) would understand the realities of men, women, and life on planet Earth just a bit better. Gosh, what a dweeb.
Kyle Knutson
http://www.ncfm.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well said, Mr. Knutson. I agree completely. Turner does come across as a pathetic sexist fool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday November 27, @01:30PM EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
It appears to me that if anyone in America should wear the mantel of privileged patriarch it should be Ted Turner. I recall seeing a documentary on the this guy, but I don't recall seeing anything talking about him making the kind of sacrifices you mention, that so many G.I.'s have made. He does, however, appear to be a keen minded business man who has lived the “American dream.”
I find it very ironic, that as usual, the average shmucks like us are expected to bear the repercussions of being privileged patriarchs, while fat cats like him mouth off about male privilege, and female oppression. The fat cats bear no real societal repercussions for their own privileged behavior, but you can be certain the propaganda he spews will be painfully felt by average shmucks like us if militant feminists can in any way “capitalize” upon it (no pun intended).
It appears to me that there may be a dimension of hypocrisy underlying the apparent sexism and ignorance.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why is everyone so surprised at Ted Turner's late middle aged yammerings about how women would run the world much better than men have?
After all how much credibility can someone who married Jane Fonda have?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday November 27, @02:51PM EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
"Why is everyone so surprised at Ted Turner's late middle aged yammerings..."
Good question. I'm not so much surprised as I am sickened by the further damage that this media mogul can do to innocent, underprivileged men.
One has to wonder what imagery comes to Ted Turner's mind, when he talks about women running the world? If a woman is qualified, then more power to her, if not then that’s another story. The very first image that pops into my mind, when I consider Ted’s harangue, is Hanoi Jane wearing an NVA steel pot on her head and sitting in an NVA antiaircraft gun emplacement pointing at the sky’s, pointing at American jets.
When token wymen run the world as it appears Ted’s thinking condones, one thing, no doubt, we will continue to see will be the mindless male lackeys who feed them ammo.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get a laugh out of this link to the 3drealms forums:
Meddling Kids!
A bit late, but what the hell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So what can we DO about this? Here is a man who is up to his eyeballs in business. Does anyone know a way to find out what companies pay his bills? We should be having a boycott on all his companies, and loudly proclaiming why. I will look but I am not real good at finding this stuff. The Biscuit Queen
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
