[LMB] Rabid Foaming Weasels OT:
snelson134 at charter.net
Sun, 03 Feb 2002 22:18:54 -0600
This post was.... interesting. And revealing.
Marna Nightingale wrote:
> Stephen Nelson wrote:
> > This isn't a game, Marna.
> 1) Note patronizing sentence construction, class. Whenever someone uses one's
> first name like that, the word "naive" or some equivalent is coming along Real
Yes, class, note that your "instructress" has built a
beautiful straw man to demolish. Everyone else who posts
here uses Ms Nightingale's first name, but she only objects
when she's grasping for any straw available.
> Please try to keep the referents straight as well as the actual quotes. It
> improves the tone of the discussion.
> > It's just the simple fact
> "Simple fact" is generally A Bad Sign too, for people who find patronizing
> behaviour unattractive. People who go around pointing out Simple Facts to those
> over the age of five are generally trying to slip their own axioms into the
> position of Undiscussable Empirical Facts, trying to suggest that their opponent
> is disconnected from reality (their reality, which they are trying to position
> as "Reality", or both. Usually both.
Gee, half a screen so far and she hasn't addressed any of
the points of the post.. <yawn>
And, of course, class, you'll notice that in her
disagreements with Kiri, for example, she is able to adopt a
far more reasoned tone than she does with your humble
correspondent.... "But the Colonel's lady and Julie O'Grady
are sisters under their skin!" Me, I'm just one of the Mad
Libertarian Boyz, aka Member of the Patriarchy, so I'm
perfectly safe to diss.
For someone who has assured us that you can keep your
"issues" under control with your students... I'm not overly
surprised that your male students sensed enough bias that
they felt they had to complain about it.
> However, on the offchance that you are merely trying to ensure I don't come to a
> nasty end, thank you for your concern. However, I'm on it.
Ms Nightingale, I don't want anyone to come to a sticky end
anywhere outside an orgy. ;-) And I'm glad to know that
you've taken steps to ensure that I'll have your repartee to
<snip of actions you've taken that ensure that you are
> I have heard the polemic before. It is probably safe to assume that every
> committed pacifist in the world has heard it before. It's a particular hobby of
> many people to explain to female pacifists that we're obviously just so much
> free meat loose on the street.
Actually, neither of us is likely to be the victims of
random violence, precisely because we've taken various steps
to reduce or minimize the chances of it. We've directed the
time, effort, and money to get Brown Belts (you) or install
security systems (me). In my case, that also involved
getting a gun. I thought very carefully about what I would
need, both now and in the future, and made a reasoned
decision. And I've got the resources to use to handle the
problem. I know lots of people who don't have those.
<snippage of how people say stupid things to assault
Marna, whatever you or anyone else did in your situation...
was what you could do. If you're still breathing, it must
have been the right thing. I'm not going to second guess a
> I mean, gee, I managed to produce a list of nonviolent resistance/CBD techniques
> that shocked Bart and several other people. Something wrong there ... (OK, that
> was possibly contextual; I didn't take care to say "OK, some of these are kind
> of untasty and deeply illegal, but which ones do you actually consider worse
> than, say, bombing or mining?) :-)
That list contained quite a large number of things that _I_
would consider violent and decidedly non-pacifist. I suppose
it depends on the meaning of violence, or pacifism. And the
only difference between killing someone with a bomb and
through depriving them of the means to make a living by
closing the business they work at is that the bomb is
> It doesn't take a police officer on every street corner -- just a citizen or
> two with the testes/ovaries to yell "HEY! What are you DOING? Hey, everybody!
> Pay attention to this!" when they see a person in trouble. Or to approach
> really drunk people in bars who look as if they were in trouble and ask if they
> are okay and offer to put them into cabs. Or to just plain refuse to look away.
All of which I've done. Of course, there's the time that
myself and a buddy caught the guy prowling around our next
door neighbors' house, peeking in her bedroom window. A guy
who, when he heard that distinctive Shik-Clack that a pump
action shotgun makes when a round is jacked in, became vewy
vewy quiet.... and when the police searched him they found a
seven inch blade belt knife. I'm real glad we didn't have to
find out if we could take it away barehanded, and even
gladder he didn't get away to do it to someone else.
> However, you were discussing rape/sexual assault specifically.
Actually, I wasn't. If you recall the post, I was discussing
motivations ranging from insanity, to robbery, to
intoxication; sex never entered into it. That's YOUR filter
on the world.
> Of which street-attacks by total strangers who immediately upon confronting
> their victim use force is an insanely small part.
> As I say, you've been reading the wrong literature, I think.
No, as I pointed out above, you have a set of blinders on.
> That comes under the heading of 'street-crazy, truly unusually high-risk one who
> has somehow managed to pop a cog enough to do this while remaining functional
> enough both to have evaded the attention of the system AND to pull it off'.
Nope, sorry again. If that were the case, then the stories
about the psycho not taking meds / convict out on parole /
etc. who rob, assault, kill again wouldn't be so common. And
again, enough anecdotes in a given population becomes a
sufficient set of data.
<snippage of lots of good ideas on avoiding sexual assault /
Again, whatever worked for you is wonderful. I just prefer
that my arsenal has something a little more effective than
> Marna Nightingale
> marna at redmaplegrove.org
> "Women should not be enlightened or educated in any way. They should, in fact,
> be segregated as they are the cause of hideous and involuntary erections in holy men."
> St. Augustine.
> Lois-Bujold mailing list
> Lois-Bujold at lists.herald.co.uk