We don't hate amicus.....

[elsol]

*burp*

And so I quote Amicus:

Let me put this in simple terms. I am a racist and a bigot and a misogynist, I have and function from predjudice, pre-judging people according to race, gender and ethnicity.

Really people if the other side is going to come to the debate competition wearing the white bedsheet and pillow case with strategically cut holes, you don't argue ideology.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[amicus]

elsol]*burp*

And so I quote Amicus:



Really people if the other side is going to come to the debate competition wearing the white bedsheet and pillow case with strategically cut holes, you don't argue ideology.

Sincerely,
ElSol

[/I]

Your * burping and belching* in public is acknowledged, Elsol, you are accepted as a redneck illiterate, don't worry about it, you are loved anyway as a bumbling male.


"...*burp*

And so I quote Amicus:


Quote:
Let me put this in simple terms. I am a racist and a bigot and a misogynist, I have and function from predjudice, pre-judging people according to race, gender and ethnicity...."

By quoting that, (out of context) I suppose you wish to imply that you have administered the 'coup de grace', on the old amicable one and he is now not only as old as dirt, but, dirt itself.

The purpose of that post, as I recall it, was to remind you, and everyone, that we are all subject to 'prejudice' in our own ways and in many ways.

You may look down on the fella that swears by Mountain Dew, while you prefer Pepsi, but your S/O prefers Coca Cola.

We all have acquired ethnic, racial and gender preferences. My point, in pointing this out, was to give you confessional privileges, to admit being human and normal and not suffer the social disgrace of being politically incorrect for having personal preferences...

But you didn't get it, did you?

Thas okay, being stupid is not prosecutable.

amicus...

 

[Liar]

But when you enter the public arena of debate, certain rules, procedures and behaviors become protocol.

Yes, and seldom are they followed to the letter. By anybody. I've studied those protocols and others regarding human communication for about five years now, and the only thing I see you doing differently than most others, (who also slips from protocol on a regular basis -- me too, I would assume) is that you claim not to. Loudly, explicitly and repeatedly.

That being said, it would be dissapointing if you dropped or the radar. Who would we all huff and puff about then? Each other? Oh the horror.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

I have never questioned the necessity of the irrational, the emotional, the female, as an ingredient of existence, I just will not permit it, the subjective, to be a guiding force, at least in my thinking and in my life.

so, Ami, is the masculine (the rational, the reasonable, the logical) the only "correct" or "right" driving force? Do you believe that the feminine (the irrational, emotional) shouldn't ever be a guiding force?

Even for a feminine person?

Or don't you differentiate?

 

[Rope64]

Does anyone even read what Amicus writes? Why?

 

[Liar]

Does anyone even read what Amicus writes? Why?

*shrug* Why not?

 

[Stella_Omega]

so, Ami, is the masculine (the rational, the reasonable, the logical) the only "correct" or "right" driving force? Do you believe that the feminine (the irrational, emotional) shouldn't ever be a guiding force?

Even for a feminine person?

Or don't you differentiate?

Heh. Most of us try to balance rational modes of thought with irrational. We tend to chose a few places where we can enjoy and celebrate the feminine, intuitive, emotional, irrational. Sex is one of those places.
Regardless of the questionable validity of Ami's claims, to insist on rational discourse from a PORN FORUM seems kind of goofy!

 

[Selena_Kitt]

We tend to chose a few places where we can enjoy and celebrate the feminine, intuitive, emotional, irrational. Sex is one of those places. Regardless of the questionable validity of Ami's claims, to insist on rational discourse from a PORN FORUM seems kind of goofy!

that, m'dear, is a very good point!

 

[Stella_Omega]

that, m'dear, is a very good point!

whoah- nice av

 

[Selena_Kitt]

whoah- nice av

oh... thanks... *blush*

 

[matriarch]

Am i the only one who find it a little bit disturbing that

a) someone feel the need to start a thread saying we don't hate X
b) people feel the need to chip in with their opinions on X
c) it deteriorated into nitpicking whether he can write paragraphs or not

?

Really, guys. Go write some porn.

 

[matriarch]

Does anyone even read what Amicus writes? Why?

Most of the time, he gives me agood laugh......most amusing.

 

[Rope64]

*shrug* Why not?

Life is too short for: drinking mediocre beer; staying in a bad relationship; reading an idiot's ramblings.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

so, Ami, is the masculine (the rational, the reasonable, the logical) the only "correct" or "right" driving force? Do you believe that the feminine (the irrational, emotional) shouldn't ever be a guiding force?

Even for a feminine person?

Or don't you differentiate?

Ideally, a balanced world would recognize the necessity of both. Of course, in different contexts. A judge in a criminal court, for instance, even a female judge, should be focusing on masculine values, such as severity. I want a hard-ass judging criminals, at least for my tax dollars.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

So much for my attempt to restore humor and civility to the AH. I admit defeat in this battle and go away from this thread to lick my wounds.

 

[amicus]

SelenaKittyn]so, Ami, is the masculine (the rational, the reasonable, the logical) the only "correct" or "right" driving force? Do you believe that the feminine (the irrational, emotional) shouldn't ever be a guiding force?

Even for a feminine person?

Or don't you differentiate?[/[/I]QUOTE]
~~~~~~~~~


Rather than answer your question outright, let me pose one for you.

In most of the history of mankind, women have not been allowed to partipate in matters of state, not permitted to own property or acquire wealth.

Why do you think it was that way?

As was pointed out not too long ago on another thread, women until recently were not even permitted to choose a mate. That decision was made for them by the family or even the community.

Why do you think it was ( and still is in many places) that way?

So, it seems, the feminine, in most of history was not permitted to be a driving force, even for herself.

Am I wrong?

amicus...

 

[Selena_Kitt]

So, it seems, the feminine, in most of history was not permitted to be a driving force, even for herself.

Am I wrong?

no... you're not wrong...


I guess, then, my question would be about your definition of a "driving/guiding" force... ?

 

[amicus]

SelenaKittyn]no... you're not wrong...


I guess, then, my question would be about your definition of a "driving/guiding" force... ?[/[/I]QUOTE]
~~~~~~~~~

Successfully growing from boy to man to husband and father, being a man, has its own set of difficulties. As certainly does the girl to woman to wife to mother path to realization.

Although some will claim exceptions to the rule, I surmise that a successful union between two people with the same goal in mind, a family, security and a comfortable lifestyle, is somewhat of a joint venture.

Which, from my perception, is again what nature intended by scupting the male and female to evolutionarily compliment each other in the mutual goal of procreation and nurture.

If it were easy, everyone would do it right the first time.

It seems innate in the male, the need to 'protect' and provide. It seems innate in the female to nurture and comfort. I personally would not be comfortable switching roles and although I cannot speak for anyone else, I rather suspect most feel the same.

Back to the earlier question that I never completed, just briefly:

In nearly a half century of the quest for feminine equality, a I feel a competitive struggle has been fabricated between the sexes. I surmise that this competition has blurred gender roles to a point of confusion among those who were not 'born' extremely 'male' or 'female' oriented.

So, given the very early assertions to which you agreed, I think, that homosexuality is not normal, nor are people born that way, then perhaps this gender blurring is not the 'gender reversal' as you called it, just a blurring of the boundaries and an uncertainty and an inability to formulate a moral and ethical position on the issue.

Make any sense to you?

amicus...

 

[Selena_Kitt]

So, given the very early assertions to which you agreed, I think

I agreed with your historical premise, yes...

that homosexuality is not normal, nor are people born that way

I don't know that this isn't true... and don't profess to postulate on it... although I believe you were? That was your implication in your earlier explication, yes?

You may be onto *something*... but I think you may have hit the tree, but missed the target...

then perhaps this gender blurring is not the 'gender reversal' as you called it, just a blurring of the boundaries and an uncertainty and an inability to formulate a moral and ethical position on the issue.

the way I see it... and I agree with you, on a historical level, with what has happened between the genders... is that in trying to balance ourselves *internally* (the masculine has gotten in touch with his feminine side, the feminine in touch with her masculine side)... we have lost a great deal of polarity in our relationships. This applies across the board, whether you profess to be gay or straight or something in between. This, I think, is what has caused the confusion... and has served to help drive up the divorce rate... people seeking that feeling of polarity with someone else when the romantic love wears off in a relationship...

In order for there to be polarity, there need to be two poles... laws of physics... So, masculine attracts feminine, and vice versa. This happens in any type of partnering, whether it's M/M, F/F or M/F. Which is why I talked about gender reversals... we have a lot of masculine-identified women partnering with a lot of feminine-identified men in our culture.

I also believe that we have a core essence, and that if masculine and feminine were a spectrum, we would probably fall along the line somewhere between... perhaps 90% masculine and 10% feminine, or 60% masculine and 40% feminine... I believe that a *majority* of people fall toward the ends of the spectrum somewhere... and that fewer people fall truly in between...

but the way our culture appears at the moment, you might think the opposite, that most people fall in the middle.

I just don't believe that's so. That's my bias.

Make any sense to you?

You usually do on some level, when you're not in the middle of a pissing contest, anyway ... which is what makes me cock my head and chew my lip and wonder why I don't quite agree?

 

[entitled]

Is it bad that i know the Kingston Trio song referred to earlier in this thread? Or that i not only enjoy the occassional debate with ami, but can claim to be one of those that have made it through them in a more or less civil manner, with both of us agreeing that the other has valid points in their arguements?

They're rioting in Africa....

 

[amicus]

"...You usually do on some level, when you're not in the middle of a pissing contest, anyway ... which is what makes me cock my head and chew my lip and wonder why I don't quite agree? ..."
__________________
*~*~Selena~*~*


"Agreement..." is not really the concern, I think.

Should I have managed to stumble on a bit of 'truth' concerning the issue(s), that bit of truth does not just stand alone and wave a flag, it is both a conclusion to previous thoughts and serves as a foundation for wider ones.

Which translates into forming moral opinions and making ethical decisions that form the basis of action or inaction as you relate to the world around you.

In other words, if you vote, you may be faced with voting for or against the gay marriage legislation that may appear on your ballot.

One side will be proudly and openly supportive or in total opposition while many may be undecided and faced with opting out of the vote or hiding how they voted so as not to alienate either side.

While the catholic priest homosexual scandal is off the front pages for the moment, the issue still rumbles like an earthquake around the world, displacing the old ways with....with what?

amicus...

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

I tend to see it more as a matter of individuality. People are just adjusting to individuals who are different asserting their right to be themselves. Nothing more than that.

Btw, great avatar, SK.

 

[amicus]

entitled]Is it bad that i know the Kingston Trio song referred to earlier in this thread? Or that i not only enjoy the occassional debate with ami, but can claim to be one of those that have made it through them in a more or less civil manner, with both of us agreeing that the other has valid points in their arguements?

They're rioting in Africa....[/[/I]QUOTE]

"There is strife in Iran"

What mother nature doesn't do to us
will be done by our fellow man"

I suppose you also know the one about "...little houses made of ticky tacky'?

amicus...

 

[entitled]

"There is strife in Iran"

What mother nature doesn't do to us
will be done by our fellow man"

I suppose you also know the one about "...little houses made of ticky tacky'?

amicus...

hehehe... i always liked that one. Laughed my little tooshie off first time i heard it.

uuummm... Possibly? Dad used to have a whole bunch of their stuff and played it all the time. We all learned to sing in harmony because of that. i would need to 'hear' more of the song to know for sure.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

gosh I'm so less concerned with how it plays out globally than how it plays out on a personal level... which probably shows you my hand, as you have shown me yours

I have a sense and feeling that you have great love for your daughters, and a great love for humanity, actually...

and that even what you do in this forum, in challenging what you feel is the status quo, is done out of love for what you feel is a greater vision...

and I can say that, having been the brunt of a few of your off-the-cuff snotty remarks about the female persuasion...

I don't believe that love always shows up the way we want, or that it has to be "nice." And I think what you bring here has been undervalued in many ways...

I also think you can be a little deaf, and inflexible... and sometimes I get the feeling that you're trying to open everything with a hammer, because that's the tool you've got.... and you've learned to use it really, really well.

And I think we relate to the world very differently... which is probably why you'd say women don't belong casting ballots <grin>...

I vote from my heart. That probably scares the hell out of you....