Friday, 20 July 2012

Interview at gnosticmedia

Hi, all.

Between tripping over my kids and taking a back-hoe to my basement, I had a little time the other day to do an interview with Jan Irvin at gnosticmedia.com. They take on a lot of interesting topics there, and one of them is the Feminist Fallacy, which we probably could have discussed for longer than the 2+ hours we went at it. If you all want to go give it a listen, consider yourselves invited.

Hugs, all. :)

23 comments:

  1. No hugs from my side. How can I hug someone who doesnt post transcripts of her very-involved youtube videos? :-)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Where's your posts about all the NOW stuff you were going to share with us? :-}

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oy. It's summer, my kids are home, and I've had workmen in my yard and doing my gutters and downspouts for two weeks. Finding pockets of quiet is difficult, so I've been concentrating on working in the house while I'm unable to film.

      It will be soon, I hope!

      Delete
  3. Hi Karen: I am listening to your gnosticmedia interview. I first commented on one of your youtube vids posted on concen.org. I hope you dig this from Anthropologist Shelly Ornter's book Making Gender: The Politics and Erotics of Culture (1996) on the domestication of men.

    "At the same time, there is a great shift in the ideology concerning women. Before they were dangerous, but now they are said to be in danger, justifying male
    protection and guardianship. Before they were polluting, and this had to be defended against, but now they are said to be pure, and to need defending. At the same time, one finds for the first time symbolic idealization of woman in their mother-aspect, rather than in the sexual-reproductive aspect. Eventually, as the symbol system gets itself together in one part of the world with which we are all
    familiar, the ideal women emerges as all the best things at once, mother and virgin.

    Now the way in which I've described the pattern, and the way in which it might, at first glance, be viewed, is in terms of the domestication of women, a sort of
    Neolithic of the sexes wherein women, like plants and animals, were brought under control in the service of the race. Actually, however, my thinking is to envision the process in terms of the beginnings of the domestication of men, as part of a larger pattern of systemization of hierarchy and control in the evolution of state structures. I will return to this point later. (p. 50)

    (p. 53) The family became in a sense an administrative unit, the base unit in the political-economic structure of the state. The husband/father was no longer simply
    responsible to his family, but also for his family vis-a-vis the larger system. It became the base, and often the only base of his jural status. The reluctance of males to be involved with their families except on terms of
    distance, respect, and submission of the part of the other members is still I think to be seen in most of the world today, and the domestication of men is still largely
    incomplete.

    Male initiation rites virtually disappear in state societies.... In many cases marriage itself becomes the only rite of passage, and thus manhood becomes equated with responsibility for wife and children, part of the pattern described above. The pivotal point of such analysis would be that men were not only 'domesticated' as part of the crystallization of authority structures of the state; they were also juvenilized -- vis-a-vis women, senior men, and the rulers and overclasses of the system. Note that I have not tried to postulate motives for either women or men in this process. I have suggested that men were 'reluctant' about being domesticated, but I would imagine that women had equally mixed feelings about the greater presence of male authority in the family unit.

    The way out of the puzzle, I would suggest, lies in stressing the stratified nature of the state as a totality, and seeking the dynamics of the process in the interaction
    between elites and lower strata. In particular, my analytic instinct is to look at patterns of hypergamy (up-status marriage, virtually always between upper men
    and lower women) in state systems, and to consider very centrally the possibility that one of the significant developments in stratified societies was the shifting of
    marriage from an essentially lateral transaction, between essentially equal groups, to at least a potentially vertical transaction, wherein one's sister or daughter is
    potentially a wife or consort of a king or nobleman, or could be dedicated to the temple and the services of the priesthood."

    ReplyDelete
  4. Karen -- you said Afghanistan for the below comparison - I think you meant Iraq? Iraq was called the "Germany" of the Middle East by the UN due to their free state high tech healthcare. I'm not sure this stat still holds since the U.S.-led sanctions against Iraq. I mean is it "poor" men in the U.K. versus "poor" women in Iraq? I get this:

    http://geography.about.com/b/2007/05/08/life-expectancy-in-iraq.htm

    Due to the years of war and violence in Iraq, it is one of the few non-African countries to have a drop in life expectancy. Iraqi life expectancy in 1990 for males and females from birth was 66.5, now the Population Reference Bureau reports that life expectancy for both sexes in Iraq has dropped to a mere 59 and for males alone the life expectancy from birth is 57.

    http://www.avoiceformen.com/men/13-reasons-its-unlucky-to-be-a-man/

    In the City of Brighton & Hove in England, boys from the poorest neighbourhoods die THIRTEEN YEARS SOONER than girls from the richest areas and yet women’s projects still receive THIRTEEN TIMES MORE FUNDING THAN MEN’S PROJECTS

    Amazingly, girls in Iraq (71.3), India (72.6) and Indonesia (73.4) now live longer than a boy born in East Brighton (70.9 years).

    ReplyDelete
  5. Great interview. I knew there were "men haters" out there and bias in our judicial system, but I had no idea to what degree this problem exists.

    It's a shame that I had to resort to "underground" sources in order to appreciate men more. I see now that part of my relationship difficulties have in part stemmed from the feminist ideas that have leaked into mainstream society which pit "us" against "them." I bought into this, having grown up in a Latino culture that viewed women as weak and incompetent. In response, I developed my masculine side, which became problematic in relationships with men. I know better now.

    How many times don't we hear a woman say "men are pigs" - it curdles my blood every time. I also cringe at the way men are portrayed in movies and sitcoms as bumbling immature idiots whose wives/girlfriends are the voice of reason. I just don't find this funny at all.

    I also find the idea of "women aren't violent" so ludicrous. Almost all the bullying I experienced growing up was perpetrated by girls.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Nearly choked on my sarnie when I heard "...leader of the free world..." freedom is relative too I suppose, I'll remember that next time I'm at the airport.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Great vids -- I think this type of analysis gets very tricky because of dialectics.

    O.K. consider the femme fatale -- in my opinion a real man needs to learn to move beyond having his heart broken and being disposed like a sex object. That's what the femme fatale teaches. This is discussed in Camille Paglia's tome "Sexual Personae" and also how Western civilization is actually homosexual -- the men are not real men.

    My position is that this goes back to our primate origins with female chimpanzees using spears so they're not dependent on male chimps providing meat. Why? Because the male chimps will rape the female chimps if the female does not agree to take the meat in exchange for sex. So the female chimps learned to use spears to get their own meat so they won't be raped by the male chimps if the females want meat but don't want sex.

    So actually technology used by primates is essentially a means for females to protect themselves from rape. The question is does it work? Not really because despite the feminist movement this does not change the psychophysiology of why rape happens. As Professor Robert Sapolsky points out when the male ejaculates it triggers the stress cortisol hormone and Sapolsky studies primates. So this is a very deep issue. The bonobo primate males ejaculate very rarely but the male scientists don't understand the physiology because the male scientists ejaculate! haha. The Bushmen males, 90% of human history, had to train to sublimate their sex energy to have female vagus nerve orgasms internally. Consider that science didn't discover the vagus nerve connection to female orgasm until around 2004.

    So for a man to be a real man the Bushmen trance dancers go all night long -- dancing until their sympathetic stress nervous system goes to its extreme so there is a "rebound" to the opposite relaxation parasympathetic orgasm system. What happens is that for the usual male ejaculation the dopamine of the parasympathetic system switches to cortisol stress but for the vagus nerve internal orgasm without ejaculation then the dopamine switches to serotonin that bypasses the blood brain barrier through vagus nerve ionization.

    So for men to do this they have to first build up their kidney energy through rigourous physical exercise -- and even fasting -- and this is why qigong meditation is only after men become martial arts masters. Now consider the "old school" kung fu movies -- in those the females also train to be martial arts masters and also females can be qigong masters. But as the Bushmen culture states the men can not handle the pain of child birth while the females can't handle the pain of training to be a healer. What happens is that as the serotonin builds up then the left side vagus nerve connects to the heart and so the serotonin converts to oxytocin as the love hormone.

    For the male and female to experience real love there needs to be at least 30 mutual climaxes to build up the serotonin into oxytocin but this is impossible if the male external ejaculation causes the male to trigger his stress cortisol hormones. So instead for the modern male the electromagnetic focus of the body is stuck in the lower body since there is no vagus nerve internal sublimation of the neurohormones as happens with female orgasm. So the modern male continues to psychophysiologically be like a cry baby even though they may try to have a tough exterior - and also the true feelings of love are unknown. So the females have to rely on technology to protect themselves from male rape because the males have lost the true secret to love.

    ReplyDelete
  8. For the male to really understand true love then he has to study the female orgasm intently while most males during sex are not that interested. First is required "staying power" and this is why the male Bushmen training is done in solitude with fasting for a month during male puberty when the sex energy is strongest. What happens instead in the West is that when the males get together they don't really understand how to ionize the sex energy. So even if celibacy is practiced it just gets perverted into homosexuality -- and this is why if a young male joins the miltary then they'll become a sex slave by the other males. I have a relative that had this happen in another country -- working for the U.S. in a client state for the U.S. empire he joined the military at age 14.

    O.K. so as Cynthia Enloe points out in her excellent feminist analysis of international relations Bananas, Beaches and Bases -- the women are actually more productive for the U.S. empire because they work with the technology requiring nimble fingers in sweatshops. So the women are providing the "hard currency" for exports to the U.S. to pay off the developing countries loan shark loans from the IMF-World Bank. But since the male's can not handle the idea that they are not adding to the productivity of the country -- that they are deadbeat dads so to speak -- then the males use the earned "hard currency" to build "white elephant" construction projects that don't really make money. This is called the "Edifice Complex" or as Dr. Helen Caldicott calls it -- "Missile Envy." In other words the whole military-industrial complex is just the "toys of the boys" who have not really learned to be real men.

    So consider in the martial arts training -- for example Jim Nance was a black belt -- he is a big African-American former professional basketball player. So he would always win his black belt matches and he said that he saw things in slow motion like the Matrix - so he knew the opposition's moves in advance. So he would always win but then he would also feel the opposition's pain when he attacked the opposition. So he would win but he would be weeping. He didn't understand this and then the Chinese master visited and told Jim Nance it was time to train in "internal martial arts." Why?

    Because in "internal martial arts" it is learned that external reality is a holographic extension of our internal reality -- so that any external pain caused is experienced internally because the pineal gland transmits electromagnetic healing energy that then transduces and receives the electrochemical emotional status of the people around us. So that is the secret of true love -- that the heart creates electromagnetic energy after the oxytocin builds up -- and so the heart then transmits the built up electromagnetic energy and as the frequency increases then it goes into light energy that is coherent like a laser and creates spirit energy.

    All of this has been lost by modern males and females. Females are attracted to big muscle males because muscles are stored electromagnetic energy -- that is why electric fish use their muscles to store electromagnetic charge. So that when the muscles synchronize then the potassium versus sodium ratio enables a charge to transmit.

    ReplyDelete
  9. So really all this technology does not really touch the heart of the problem which is the psychophysiologically training to be a real man. Yes feminism has caused males to be boys but this was a trade off for women to get more meat to increase their iron lost from having big brain babies. So human language was developed with the synchronization of females' menstrual cycle with the lunar cycle and this enabled females to cooperative to fend off male primate raping. So by controlling the ability to hide when the females were reproductively fertile -- by having internal ovulation that is not visible by primate estrus -- then the females could also control their availability to males by having an organized "sex strike" synchronized with the lunar cycle. So the males have to provide meat for the females -- without raping the females -- because now the sexual success of the males' sperm is put into question. So then language co-evolved with this human cooperation system so that males could go long distance for meat hunting in league with the females ensuring the males sexual success for reproduction.

    So in the Bushmen culture the males have to provide for the females' family for three years before the male and female even have sex. So the original males actually had a much more strict discipline for economic priority. But what has happened is that the females relying on technology to ensure they are not raped by males -- by essentially an elitist female group aligning with military technology to expand a technofeminist empire. This means that there continues to be a vast oppressed female underground in sweatshops and sex slavery but this is to actually support an elite empire of techno-feminists. This was even proven for the Inca when they conquered the matrifocal lunar cultures -- so the males in order to get married had to be in the military for the Incas, and had to farm the land to pay taxes to the Inca empire. Otherwise the males could not get married. Sherry Ortner, the anthropologist, has argued that indeed it is the males who really are the victims of imperial marriage relations.

    I was just reading about how farming used to be matrifocal for gardening horticulture - using the hoe -- but then when the plow was used starting around 6,000 BCE suddenly the males created male gods, etc. This would appear to be patriarchical but when the females were doing the farming labor then they appreciated polygymy because it meant more females shared the labor of farming. The females actually had their economic value stronger when they lived off the land through horticulture. So after the plow-based system took over depending on the male for economic strength then if a family wanted their daughter to get married - the female has to provide money to the male. In other words now the female is no longer an economic asset but a dependancy and so the female's family has to make up for their daughter by paying off the husband's family.

    ReplyDelete
  10. What has happened with this extension of male technology -- the plow to the nuclear missile - it is really a homosexual projection as a phallic or penis sword fight without really addressing this deep physiological problem of real love for human primates through trance dance music training. So the females rely on technology to protect themselves from the "spoiled thug" males but then the females also lose touch with their inherent electrochemical female power -- called N/om and expressed through the female voice -- and tied to the lunar cycle and to the fertility of the land. So the technofeminists are against ecofeminists since the technofeminists think all females should be liberated from doing horticulture gardening and living in self-reliant communities, etc. But what happens by relying on technology is that now even the males are obsolete because the technology is taking over everything. The biggest cause of job loss in China is automation -- not to mention the real cause of job loss in the U.S. is jobs going overseas since automation allows outsourcing through computer networking, etc.

    So the elite females aligned with technology -- the technofeminists -- are also "spoiled thugs" out of touch with reality. But it's really the responsiblity of the males to learn how to be real males. Even though the Bushmen relied on hunting technology it was the trance dance that required the males to heal the females -- and this was the secret for males and females to experience true love. Nowadays only breast-feeding enables a female to experience true love as the oxytocin levels are so high from breast feeding. Essentially the males were able to hunt better to increase their food supplies and then around 10,000 BCE the males built megalith religious structures to praise their hunting success. This led to farming based on the solar cycle instead of the lunar menstrual synchronization that relied on the female electrochemical N/om love energy for healing. So the males lost their psychophysiological training requiring them to learn how to have internal female climaxes without male external ejaculation. So then with plows and a new male-centered reality of solar gods there was this myth that males could control Nature. The females went along with this because it was technology originally that enables females to protect themselves from rape of the males -- from being dependent on the males to get meat for them. So this original trade off using limited technology with trance dance love healing was lost -- the last remnants are the tantric kings and queens -- the sacred marriages of West Asia -- with the plow and the earth symbolizing the male and female sex organs. Without the males really training to sublimate their sex energy into electromagnetic energy then the art of being a true male was lost except in the secret societies.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You are a fucking retard.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. - Remember, ad hominem attacks diminish everyone involved. If you want to criticize anything, do so passionately and directly - but debate is about attacking ideas, not people.

      Delete
    2. Maybe feminism really is a hate movement. Yeesh.

      Delete
    3. The BIG missing factor here is that Simone de Beauvoir did not have her first full orgasm till she came to the U.S.

      Also de Beauvoir does excellent class analysis imo -- but the big missing factor here is:

      nonwestern ecofeminism.

      So it's doubly ironic that a female with male working standards -- i.e. can do construction work, etc. -- can then claim that feminism is wrong -- when in fact it was due to feminists of the early 1970s that broke the ground for women to learn "male" job training -- (not just like the assembly work women of WWII).

      O.K. so you take a female who has trained for male work standards and now claims feminism is not needed -- fine -- but again this completely ignores the hidden aspect of feminism as

      sexual liberation.

      The gnosticmedia interview didn't even get into that!

      It's as if suddenly sex was REPRESSED again!!!

      Crazy!!

      So Simone de Beauvoir proves that point and more so it is the hidden secret connection of sex as kundalini energy tied to lunar synchronization -- and this is only found through ecofeminism.

      It's even beyond ecofeminism but at least ecofeminists hint at it.

      So the Left like Soral -- but the U.S. equivalents like Doug Henwood bashes the ecofeminists Helena Norberg-Hodge and Vandana Shiva in Henwood's critique of Wall Street (based on Marxist analysis).

      O.K. same with Zizek bashing ecofeminism and anything that hints of nonwestern shamanism -- just dismissing it as bourgeois new ageism, etc.

      O.K. so yes this type of expose of bourgeois elitist feminism obviously has a role and is important but it is also dangerously regressive if the factor of sexual liberation is left out.

      I know Karen writes "erotica" but this leaves out the psychophysiological fact of the male external ejaculation creating stress -- and of course this factor is not even recognized in ANY social movement of feminism (that I know of) - - except maybe in yoga, etc.

      I mean I wrote what I wrote and there's someone following me around writing ad homimens against me --

      calling me a "fucking retard" and a "moron." etc.

      Of course I could read this was a male with a lower chakra blockage -- a closeted thug!

      And what of Camille Paglia stating that all of Western civilization is really homosexual! What does that make of Marxist class analysis which is still dependent on the Oedipal Complex -- or what Jung called for females trying to be like their dad (and secretly in love with their dad) -- I have the term in one of my earlier books.

      Delete
    4. The Electra Complex

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electra_complex

      So the real issue here is that the secret of real LOVE -- physiologically -- still remains unknown in the West because that secret requires 40 mutual internal climaxes between the male and female. This was the standard training for the Bushmen culture but it's only passed on in secret society tantra training in the East and the whole Western civilization based on this failed role of technology to protect against rape.

      It fails because it doesn't solve the root physiological cause of the problem -- so you have these people saying feminism is not needed because women are just as bad as males -- hello? Two wrongs doesn't make a right! They still don't know the solution to the problem!!

      So in other words feminism is a failed attempt at a solution but at least it's an attempt that needs to be acknowledged. It's like Chomsky saying we shouldn't get rid of social welfare gains even though they are the product of the corporate-state putting band-aids on a failed system.

      So it takes bigger balls to acknowledge the real gains of feminism. I could give more personal examples -- anyway lets just say I know someone -- a female who told me she didn't need feminism and that was a long time ago. So then her life took a certain path where now she completely desires feminism to help her life. I mean the fact is that even the females can be just as destructive as males -- especially when females are driving the quest for technological power -- physiologically it is the male external ejaculation that is the root cause of the problem.

      So the male external ejaculation is repressed as the problem and yet in the family situation and any interpersonal dynamics it is always the male external ejaculation that pulls down other women to be dependent on technological solutions (with all their structural oppressive externalities).

      O.K. the basic dynamic of feminism is this:

      repression of sexual liberation. Projection of that repression through psychological technology. This projection is then inherently oppressive.

      What I have done is taken that to a deeper level and even based on in wrong mathematical logic! haha. My analysis was based on my final class as self-directed research led by the teacher of the class

      "Race, Class and Gender" in the African Studies Department by a female professor with an economics focus.

      So this "anti-feminist" view only takes into consideration class but not race nor ecological factors and their physiological basis. I mean the Left still relies on Freudian psychological analysis -- it's very antiquated. Zizek says he relies on the latest science but he doesn't even know much about quantum physics, etc.

      It's kind of tragic really because leftist intellectuals do come out of their own class struggle background and so there is a reactionary attitude based on their own upbringing making them basically anti-intellectual to viewpoints that challenge their own personal quest to climb the socioeconomic ladder (despite it's overall limitations in the larger context of the ecological crisis).

      For example consider the book Women of the Hoe on african matrifocal farming. Put that into the antifeminist debate - throw it in there - -and it doesn't even fit into their framework yet it's a real reality for probably a third of the females on the planet. Considering 2 billion people live on less than $2 a day - -those are the people I align myself with since they are most in tune with the natural cyclical reality of Earth -- like Winona LaDuke.

      Delete
    5. Women Wielding the Hoe: Lessons from Rural Africa for Feminist Theory and Development Practice (Explorations in Anthropology) [Paperback]
      Deborah Fahy Bryceson (Editor)

      http://www.amazon.com/Women-Wielding-Hoe-Explorations-Anthropology/dp/1859730736

      http://books.google.com/books?id=INci71MNlhQC&pg=PA15&lpg=PA15&dq=women+wielding+the+hoe&source=bl&ots=-qRPPAEVax&sig=PdL-kdW3fr6W7GwC-IlezpIkpyY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=d4IUUM3iGo24qQH484G4Dg&ved=0CFYQ6AEwCTgU#v=onepage&q=women%20wielding%20the%20hoe&f=false

      So this "Readings on Gender in Africa" completely challenges Western feminism but does so -- NOT from a "white male" working class perspective (whereby white women who learn to be white males no longer need feminism!). haha.

      Yeah so let's consider men raped by men in the military.

      So that is a post-feminist issue?

      I mean the problem is still the male.

      So what if females represent the solution? haha.

      There is a deeper solution that this "post-feminist" or "anti-feminist" analysis is lacking.

      Nevertheless if a female claims she doesn't need feminism and then she marries a man who was raped in the military as a young male -- do you think she will still no longer need feminism?

      This anti-feminism just assumes males going into the military do so as sacrifice for females. haha. What if they really do so due to closeted homosexuality?

      Delete
    6. sorry, but this just comes across as a lot of incoherent, new-age rambling with no real point behind it.

      Delete
    7. non-western = new age? How quaint. haha.

      New Age is actually Freemasonic propaganda as the techno-spiritual structural "tantric trajectory of technology."

      I recommend reading David F. Noble's book "The Religion of Technology" for a good expose on the real New Age.

      Delete
  12. fulllotus even though you have some interesting things to say about orgasms, you're an asshole for being a misandrist and thinking it's enlightened. I challenge you to watch the videos full of research on false rape and abuse allegations on a youtube channel manwomanmyth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7745088455537169028

      Try out "Deliver Us From Evil" the award winning 2006 doc on how the church is full off pedofile child rapist molesters.

      The irony being these "priests" are supposed to be the highest moral standard of Western civilization -- of course it's all males.

      The problem is the West lacks yoga so that the priests in no way are able to truly control their lower bodies and in fact the opposite is the case - the institution like the mafia or a cult is a cover-up for heinous crimes against humanity.

      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6637396204037343133

      UNREPENTANT: KEVIN ANNETT AND CANADA'S GENOCIDE (documentary)

      So here we have a rare minister who spoke the truth he discovered about his church - how it relied on sex crimes to commit mass murder against non-westerners -- why? for materialist greed.

      So obviously things like "false rape" charges are a problem but part of a much larger problem. To stop "false rape" charges does not address the root cause of the problem -- the inability of males to control their lower bodies.

      Biologically Nature is female -- most of nature reproduces through parthenogenesis. Males are here to provide DNA diversity but otherwise are unneeded. Civilization is a con-job created by females in an attempt to use technology to protect females from male rape, as is the common problem for chimpanzees. The bonobos in contrast use female solidarity to use sex to control the males in a peaceful manner. In bonobo society the males rarely ejaculate yet have sex all the time -- why? Well the male scientists don't understand since physiologically they don't know how to have internal climaxes via the vagus nerve. haha.

      Still the original human culture, the Bushmen, required 90% of the males to train for a month in isolation from females so that the males opened up their pineal glands to transmit electromagnetic energy back into females to activate their vagus nerves at a distance. This Bushmen culture was peaceful with no warfare for 90% of human history -- from 100,000 BCE to 10,000 BCE.

      O.K. so also the Bushmen culture had no gay males -- much to the shock of our "liberal" aka "liberated" modern culture fixated on male ejaculation. haha. Robert Sapolsky reveals in great physiological detail as he is a Stanford professor on primate physiology - the male external ejaculation triggers the stress cortisol sympathetic nervous system.

      So no morality needed - it's a biological truth of evolution.

      Delete
  13. Debate is indeed about attacking ideas ant not the people. But participating in a serious debate has some prerequisites, one of them is not being completely retarded, Mr. fullotus. "no ad hominem" is becoming too much of a mantra used by people who want their ridiculous bullshit ideas taken seriously. The truth is some so called ideas do not deserve to be taken seriously. Nobody's gonna give your bullshit more legitimacy by seriously debating with you. Get over it. I know I sound harsh. I do not apologize for that. Sometimes spades must be called spades.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That was directed to fullotus and all that "so that the males opened up their pineal glands to transmit electromagnetic energy back into females to activate their vagus nerves at a distance." crap to be sure. Not to the content or author of this BLOG which I respect a lot.

      Delete

Commenting policy:

All comments are welcome here. I refuse to censor points of view that differ from my own.

I recognize that I may be challenging the deep-seated beliefs of some people, and perhaps stirring up emotions in others. However, I would ask:

- if you care to respond to anything that I have said, please do not simply link to or quote some statistic. Do not simply regurgitate things you have been told are true. Think about what I am saying. Respond with an argument. Offer something from your personal observations, and explain to me how you feel your statistic is connected to your experience.

- If you wish to be part of a discussion, try not to dismiss what I or a another commenter says out of hand. Yes, that means that some lines of thought or ideologies may not stand up to scrutiny (perhaps even my own).

- Remember, ad hominem attacks diminish everyone involved. If you want to criticize anything, do so passionately and directly - but debate is about attacking ideas, not people.

Have at you!