[lit-ideas] Re: A Question REALLY Answered

 
<<But  feminism is dead,
gone, probably never to be seen again in our  lifetimes. >> 
Huh??? 
Julie Krueger 
thinking I must still be misreading  the above 



========Original  Message========     Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: A Question REALLY 
Answered  Date: 12/22/05 5:58:38 PM Central Standard Time  From: 
_aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)   To: 
_lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
(mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)   Sent on:    
> [Original Message]
> From: Paul Stone  <pas@xxxxxxxx>
> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date:  12/22/2005 3:40:46 PM
> Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: A Question REALLY  Answered
>
>
> >For Paul, my point is that fantasy is a  problem only if there's no
reality
> >to countersink it.  Even  then, sex is so subjective and so, what's the
> >word, problematic,  because it involves what so few people are capable of,
> >which is  emotional stripping.  Given all that, who's to say what's right
>  >and wrong?  I think an good argument might be made that fantasy is  the
> >perfect place for sex, even fantasy in isolation like with the  sex dolls,
>
> Everything in moderation... even some things in  extreme are harmless. Who 
> is anyone to say that me being obsessed by  sex (or drugs, or rock and
roll) 
> interferes with my life? This is  where your 'astute' [psychological] 
> observations often fall to less  than astute IMHO. As long as I embrace my 
> obsession and it doesn't  adversely affect my life, then why is it at ALL 
> unhealthy for me or for  anyone else?
>


I'm not necessarily talking about moderation but  about balancing fantasy
with reality.  (BTW, I wasn't talking about you,  and I'm assuming you're
using yourself as a hypothetical).  Fantasy is  fun, but not when it governs
reality.  Then it becomes politics.   BTW, I'm curious.  What drugs taken in
extreme are harmless?  I  can't think of one.  In extreme quantities even
water will so dilute the  electrolytes that death will follow.  If one is
spending all one's time  having sex (in whatever form one chooses to have
it), what's left over for  the rest of the day?  How is that different from
an addiction?  I  don't think it's necessarily unhealthy, just imprisoning.  





> >until fantasy begins to do real damage, as in  these female idiots
thinking
> >that if they stay cute little  bunnies forever all will be right with the
> >world.  That's where  sex turns into politics and stops being sex.  That's
> >where I  think Maureen is right.  It also hurts the men because now they
>  >will have to singlehandedly support all those big houses on one salary.  
If
> >that's not stress, what is?  Maybe it will mean a return  to the more
> >reasonable houses and lifestyles of the 50's.  Or  maybe it will just mean
> >more debt and more stress for the  men.
>
> Powerful [i.e. usually rich] men will always  


Always?  Maybe the ones who are unable to form connections,  which is a lot
of people, but the relationship is with their money and their  position, not
with them, so who cares about them.  But some people do  genuinely love each
other enough to want a person and not an emblem.   Some lucky few do think
their partners are irreplaceable.  There's an  emptiness in only caring
about external things like appearance.  Have  you not heard about the spouse
who dies of a broken heart when his/her spouse  dies?  




trade in 30 year old wives for 
> younger  ones, simply because they CAN afford it. But they are in the vast 
>  minority. Most men live wretched lives with the women that will tolerate  
> them. Most women, do too I imagine.
>


What a bleak  view of marriage.  I don't think money enters into it.  People
who  can't relate, can't relate.  They can be poor as dirt and still  find
somebody else poor as dirt but younger.



> >Uneasy  rests the head that wears the crown.
>
> Sometimes. Sometimes, it's  GREAT to be the king -- just ask Mel Brooks.
>


Mel Brooks, if  he was king, was king in a fantasy, on the silver screen. 
Why don't you ask  real royalty, like Prince Charles or one of them.  A more
miserable  bunch of people would be hard to find.  Clinton didn't have
bypasses at  death's door because his job was stressless.  Money and
happiness don't  correlate, virtually at all (old thread).  




>  >Regarding the review of Maureen Dowd, I haven't read it yet except  to
> >gather that it's negative.  One can't please all the people  all the time
> >and the smart ones don't try to.  She's acerbic,  yes, but if she weren't,
> >she'd be out of a job.  It's what they  pay her for, to be controversial,
> >bring in readers.  What about  Creepy Crawly Safire?  What do you think of
>  >him?
>
> I think Safire is MUCH smarter than Dowd -- well he  used to be before he 
> started getting old -- but he has just as many  silly opinions. I like
about 
> half of what he writes. At least he has  variety. But... at the end of the 
> day, they are both, blech,  journalists.
>


Somebody's gotta do it.  I caught the end  of The Apprentice (it's pretty
good, maybe I'll see if I can catch it next  time) and Donald Trump hired a
businessman over a journalist. Just thought  I'd throw that in.



> >Regarding Dan Quayle's wife, I don't  know what she looks like, but looks
> >are only part of the  story.
>
> Take Barbara Bush and add a manly  quality.
>


Whatever floats your boat.  Who are we to say  what's beautiful and what
isn't.  Rather restrictive, isn't it, for  someone who thinks drugs in
extreme quantities are okay?



>  >Looks, in my opinion, are like wallpaper. After a while, you don't even  
> >see them.
>
> Sadly, emotions are like that too. I  would far rather lose interest in my 
> partner sexually than lose  interest in her 'self'. Unfortunately, so many 
> women are SOOO wrapped  up in trying to stay looking like 'girls'



Now *why* would they do  that?  If society were a bunch of feminists, we
wouldn't have to  worry.  Likewise guys wouldn't have to worry about getting
bald or  impotent or be under pressure to be macho.  But feminism is dead,
gone,  probably never to be seen again in our lifetimes.  I know, I know,
who  wants the feminazis's anyway.  It's interesting that supposedly  the
women are driving this.  Rush Limbaugh must be  overjoyed.



that they 
> don't ever develop the self. I  believe that a lot of the reason that
there 
> are 14 year old truck  drivers {that's Irene's characterization, one that
I 
> don't agree  with and personally take offense to, [not really, just making
a 
> mock  appearance for my fellow brethren boys]} out there is that men are 
>  extremely visual creatures and perhaps, because of it, remain forever 
>  superficially possessed by tits and ass. And through no accident, women,  
> Machiavellian as they are, keep showing off their tits and asses. As  long 
> as that happens, we'll be in the state we're in. Perhaps all the  vacuous 
> women never develop their selves because, as long as they stay  with Mr. 
> Dullard, they needn't.
>


No shifting the  blame.  Vacuous people are vacuous because they're vacuous,
not because  of who they live with.  Unless we're talking Taliban or
something like  that.  



> >Regarding your last sentence about assuming  the identity of men, there's
no
> >way I can take it back.  I'm  just wondering, was it that horrible knowing
> >Andy?  Would it  have been better if Andy never existed?
>
> No... actually I miss  "Andy". But sort of like I miss my [when I was 3 
> years old] sense of  immortality. Nice idea, but neither reality existed
in 
> the first  place. My point was that a woman will never understand what it
is 
>  like to be "a man in full".
>


Mars/Venus.  Maybe that's  what was so appealing about Andy, if he was
appealing (Carol, calm down),  that he was so androgynous.  It's funny how
Andy was catnip, Irene is,  what?  Dry cat food?  Nourishing, but you know
how it is  ...




> paulo
>
> ##########
> Paul  Stone
> pas@xxxxxxxx
> Kingsville, ON, Canada 
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To  change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest  on/off), visit  www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html


------------------------------------------------------------------
To  change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest  on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: