There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist. These people are crying wolf. If you call someone a racist or a misogynist who isn’t, you become not credible when a real racist or a real misogynist appears.

Obviously these people haven’t dealt with real racists and real misogynists. I have. Real misogynists call me a p*ssy-whipped idiot. Real racists call me a dirty Jew. I haven’t seen these people confront either. Instead they attack someone who’s easy to attack while doing nothing to fight real wrongdoers.

If I had been a racist or a misogynist, I wouldn’t care that I was called such things. I would have believed that being a racist or a misogynist was the way to go. Instead it bothers me that some people call me such things; so I am not a racist or a misogynist.

The people who say such things aren’t better than real racists or real misogynists. They have been tearing families apart for unsubstantiated allegations. They have been getting people fired for looking at a female co-worker the wrong way. They have been teaching women to be horrible people and to be ugly to men. The two sides in this war deserve each other. The rest of us deserve to be free of both of them.

I am not going to side with racists and misogynists. But don’t expect me to side with these people either.

On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist. These people are crying wolf. If you call someone a racist or a misogynist who isn’t, you become not credible when a real racist or a real misogynist appears.
>

They are basing their accusations on the content of your essays which fall under both classifications.

You don't have to hate Jews or Blacks to be a racist, or hate women to be a misogynist. You can be considered a racist and/or misogynist if you share many of the basic assumptions that racists and misogynists espouse.

Your essays tend to lump people into stereotypical categories based on the sex and/or ethnicity. They make unsupported blanket assumptions like "most Blacks do this" and "most Jews are like that."

You make similar assumptions about members of religions you don't identify with as well.

Your essays see things in black and white terms, usually from an arch-conservative, Christian perspective, and advocate that other arch-conservative Christians learn to tolerate those who have different lifestyles, beliefs, etc.

> Obviously these people haven’t dealt with real racists and real misogynists. I have. Real misogynists call me a p*ssy-whipped idiot. Real racists call me a dirty Jew. I haven’t seen these people confront either. Instead they attack someone who’s easy to attack while doing nothing to fight real wrongdoers.
>

No... they are merely aware that racism and misogyny can be subtler, more insidious, and have other causes than blind hatred.

Just because you aren't openly out to persecute others doesn't mean that your narrow-minded, gender and/or ethnicity based opinions don't express racist and misogynistic ideas.

A card-carrying KKK member might say that Blacks are inferior to Whites and should be segregated; whereas you have said that an unspecified number of Blacks who are "gangsters" should be sent back to Africa. Which view is more racist? Yours strongly implies that a large percentage of African-Americans are criminals who should be segregated -- only instead of limiting them to the back seats of a bus, you would segregate them to another continent..

As to your views on women, you claim that they should all follow the examples set by Russian women (an ethnicity-based generalization) and make themselves as beautiful (i.e., physically attractive to men) as possible. You also portray them as easily hurt by the harsh words of (apparently unattractive) "third wave femininists," and place yourself in the (superior) position of a gallant knight coming to the aid of beautiful damsels in distress.

> If I had been a racist or a misogynist, I wouldn’t care that I was called such things. I would have believed that being a racist or a misogynist was the way to go. Instead it bothers me that some people call me such things; so I am not a racist or a misogynist.
>

No... you don't wish to be a racist or a misogynist, even though the ideas you express are inherently racist and misogynistic.

You don't believe you are because you have fallen for the negative stereotypes espoused by patriarchal, Christian society for hundreds of years. In the name of conservativism, you cling to inherently negative views that progressive human rights groups have spent the past century actively fighting against.

> The people who say such things aren’t better than real racists or real misogynists. They have been tearing families apart for unsubstantiated allegations. They have been getting people fired for looking at a female co-worker the wrong way. They have been teaching women to be horrible people and to be ugly to men. The two sides in this war deserve each other. The rest of us deserve to be free of both of them.
>

Listen to yourself!

You're insisting that women have a duty to make themselves attractive, and subservient to, men. Sure, you'll give them equal pay and an equal chance at promotion -- but you would force them to be Stepford wives in their homes.

> I am not going to side with racists and misogynists. But don’t expect me to side with these people either.
>

You don't need to side with anybody. You have already made your allegiances abundantly clear.

People will continue to consider you a racist and a misogynist because you will continue to express such beliefs in your essays.

You're also an inconsiderate asshole, because you continue to post these essays in a poetry group in spite of AAPC member complaints.

Post your poetry and poetry translations here, but take your essays elsewhere.

Michael Pendragon
“If I wrote it, quote it, with proper attraction.”
-- Will Dockery

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 12:22:44 AM UTC+10, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist. These people are crying wolf. If you call someone a racist or a misogynist who isn’t, you become not credible when a real racist or a real misogynist appears.
> >
> They are basing their accusations on the content of your essays which fall under both classifications.
>
> You don't have to hate Jews or Blacks to be a racist, or hate women to be a misogynist. You can be considered a racist and/or misogynist if you share many of the basic assumptions that racists and misogynists espouse.

That is not true. "Misogynist" literally means "hater of women." I am not a misogynist at all. For a long time I saw women as being better than men. My dealings with feminists cured me of that error. I did not replace my stance with that of Eminem or Osama Bin Laden. I replaced it with a rational stance: Namely that anything capable of choice can be good or bad.
> Your essays tend to lump people into stereotypical categories based on the sex and/or ethnicity. They make unsupported blanket assumptions like "most Blacks do this" and "most Jews are like that."
>
> You make similar assumptions about members of religions you don't identify with as well.

Something to answer your concerns: https://sites.google.com/site/ilyashambatthought/-stereotypes-and-generalizations

> Your essays see things in black and white terms, usually from an arch-conservative, Christian perspective, and advocate that other arch-conservative Christians learn to tolerate those who have different lifestyles, beliefs, etc.

1. Funny. Real conservatives see me as a left-wing radical.

2. You don't see what I am doing at all. I have had a lot of dealings with these people. I have been refuting their arguments. I do this both for myself and for society. I do it for myself because, when someone says something wrong, it sticks in my head until I refute it. I do it for society because I have original arguments against these people that can be useful for others, including people like you.
> You're insisting that women have a duty to make themselves attractive, and subservient to, men.

Regarding subservience: Not at all. I like to see women rise to positions of power.
Regarding attractiveness: I insist that men and women be good to one another. Being attractive to men is part of being good to men, and there is nothing misogynistic about it.

> You're also an inconsiderate asshole, because you continue to post these essays in a poetry group in spite of AAPC member complaints.
>
> Post your poetry and poetry translations here, but take your essays elsewhere.

Negative. There are any number of people here who respond favorably to my essays.

On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist. These people are crying wolf. If you call someone a racist or a misogynist who isn’t, you become not credible when a real racist or a real misogynist appears.
>
> Obviously these people haven’t dealt with real racists and real misogynists. I have. Real misogynists call me a p*ssy-whipped idiot. Real racists call me a dirty Jew. I haven’t seen these people confront either. Instead they attack someone who’s easy to attack while doing nothing to fight real wrongdoers.
>
> If I had been a racist or a misogynist, I wouldn’t care that I was called such things. I would have believed that being a racist or a misogynist was the way to go. Instead it bothers me that some people call me such things; so I am not a racist or a misogynist.
>
> The people who say such things aren’t better than real racists or real misogynists. They have been tearing families apart for unsubstantiated allegations. They have been getting people fired for looking at a female co-worker the wrong way. They have been teaching women to be horrible people and to be ugly to men. The two sides in this war deserve each other. The rest of us deserve to be free of both of them.
>
> I am not going to side with racists and misogynists. But don’t expect me to side with these people either.

Well put, Ilya.

Keep correcting the lies and misrepresentations and keep seeing the record straight.

HTH and HAND.

On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 8:01:00 PM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 12:22:44 AM UTC+10, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist. These people are crying wolf. If you call someone a racist or a misogynist who isn’t, you become not credible when a real racist or a real misogynist appears.
> > >
> > They are basing their accusations on the content of your essays which fall under both classifications.
> >
> > You don't have to hate Jews or Blacks to be a racist, or hate women to be a misogynist. You can be considered a racist and/or misogynist if you share many of the basic assumptions that racists and misogynists espouse.
> That is not true. "Misogynist" literally means "hater of women."

Yes, that's what it literally means. However, it has been argued that men who believe women have a duty to serve their sexual needs see women as inferior to them -- an object -- a second class citizen -- chattel -- etc., do, in fact, hate women.

Your love poems are fetishistic masturbatory sessions wherein you place a naked woman on a pedestal and fantasize about "worshiping" here through various sexual acts.

You can claim that worship is the highest form of love, but it's really a passive form of subjugation -- turning women into sexual fantasy objects. IOW: women exist primarily to satisfy male desires -- whether those desires are physical or psychological -- and they have a duty to make themselves attractive to men, not only by dressing nicely, wearing makeup and fixing their hair every day, but by presenting an "attractive" (friendly, smiling, acquiescing, flirtatious) personality as well.

That's not the love of two equals -- that's domination based on 2,000+ years of patriarchal civilization.

> I am not a misogynist at all. For a long time I saw women as being better than men. My dealings with feminists cured me of that error. I did not replace my stance with that of Eminem or Osama Bin Laden. I replaced it with a rational stance: Namely that anything capable of choice can be good or bad..
>

You're a passive misogynist. You don't beat women... you just attack (in essay form) women who fight against the subservient, patriarchal values that you love.

Nor is your new stance a rational one. Anyone who believes that human beings are capable of choice is extremely naive. Baron d'Holbach argued that "free will is an idle fancy," as we are genetically programmed to choose whatever thing/course of action/etc., that we perceive to be most beneficial to ourselves. If we give money to charity, it is because we believe that we will benefit more from giving it away (in terms of pride, community respect, assurance of a place in Heaven, etc.) than from keeping it. We do not choose to do it -- we are simply being true to our nature.

Arthur Schopenhauer and Friedrich Nietzsche have shown that time is construct of the human mind and that we consequently experience our lives over and over again -- without the slightest variation or change. If we are unable to change a single thing -- right down to scratching our head, or cracking a smile -- then we are simply going through a series of unchangeable, predetermined motions.

The Christian belief that one "chooses" to perform "good" or "evil" actions is the product of the slave mentality of the original Christians (who were Roman slaves) and Holy Roman Empire who found it to be a powerful tool for keeping the slaves/peasants in line.

> > Your essays tend to lump people into stereotypical categories based on the sex and/or ethnicity. They make unsupported blanket assumptions like "most Blacks do this" and "most Jews are like that."
> >
> > You make similar assumptions about members of religions you don't identify with as well.
> Something to answer your concerns: https://sites.google.com/site/ilyashambatthought/-stereotypes-and-generalizations

Wow. You really should bury that one.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. With a few minor changes, that could have been written by a Neo-Nazi or KKK member.

"Is Israel, as many people claim, full of fascists? Yes."

Your basic argument is that ethnic stereotypes are based on a large degree of truth, and rather than pretending these stereotypes don't exist, we should work on changing the perceived beliefs/behaviors of the various ethnic groups. You're viewing various ethnic groups as the proverbial "White man's burden," and advocating "re-educating" them to think, worship and behave the way you do -- with or without their consent.

> > Your essays see things in black and white terms, usually from an arch-conservative, Christian perspective, and advocate that other arch-conservative Christians learn to tolerate those who have different lifestyles, beliefs, etc.
> 1. Funny. Real conservatives see me as a left-wing radical.

Really? And who would they be?
> 2. You don't see what I am doing at all. I have had a lot of dealings with these people. I have been refuting their arguments. I do this both for myself and for society. I do it for myself because, when someone says something wrong, it sticks in my head until I refute it. I do it for society because I have original arguments against these people that can be useful for others, including people like you.
>

I do see what you're doing. You're expressing naive, illogical, poorly thought out opinions as though they were philosophical and moral truths.

Both NancyGene and I have pointed out numerous grammatical flaws, inconsistencies, lack of logic, lack of statistics, lack of sources, etc., in your essays, but you fail to correct them. How many times does one have to explain to you that "rightful" means that you have a legal claim to something, and has nothing whatsoever to do with moral or ethical right and wrong?

You don't refute anything. Your "conclusions" are based on... your own highly skewed perceptions and the perceptions of those you've come into contact with.

What I don't see is why you feel a need to post them in a poetry group, where they are off-topic and as such disliked by the majority of the poetry group's members. Are you trying to make yourself as universally detested as Will Donkey?

> > You're insisting that women have a duty to make themselves attractive, and subservient to, men.
> Regarding subservience: Not at all. I like to see women rise to positions of power.

That's not what I'm talking about, Ilya. You insist that they should be subservient to men *in their personal relationships* and sex lives. In your expressed worldview, a woman can be President of the United States, but she'd better make her self as beautiful, feminine, and appealing as she can to satisfy the needs of her hubby.

> Regarding attractiveness: I insist that men and women be good to one another. Being attractive to men is part of being good to men, and there is nothing misogynistic about it.

And being attractive to women is also part of being good to one another, but I don't hear you constantly advocating designer haircuts, manscaping, dressing in Armani suits, and splashing on X for Men cologne. Nor do I hear you saying that men should be friendly, acquiescent, and innocently flirtatious with all of the women they interact with.

> > You're also an inconsiderate asshole, because you continue to post these essays in a poetry group in spite of AAPC member complaints.
> >
> > Post your poetry and poetry translations here, but take your essays elsewhere.
> Negative. There are any number of people here who respond favorably to my essays.

You can't count to two?

"Any number" translates to Will Donkey (1) and General Zod (2) -- and neither of them appear to actually read your essays. And the reason that they pretend to like your essays is that they help draw fire away from Will.

Michael Pendragon
PJR: Do you ever read the posts to which you reply?
WILL DOCKERY: Okay, good point.

Stop lying, Pendragon.

Zod and I read and appreciate Ilya's essays, as do Jordy, Rachel and George Dance to name a number of other readers.

If you're not interested in Ilya's essays then why not simply skip and ignore them?

HTH and HAND.

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 10:01:00 AM UTC+10, Ilya Shambat wrote:
> Regarding attractiveness: I insist that men and women be good to one another. Being attractive to men is part of being good to men, and there is nothing misogynistic about it.

More on this: I've been with two women who were extraordinarily beautiful. For them it wasn't about being attractive to men, it was about art. They were both artists - excellent ones - and they valued beauty for the sake of beauty. It was also, for them, something that heals and inspires. Neither of them was stupid or weak; they were bright and strong enough. As for the women who look good for the sake of men, they have every right to make that choice without facing nastiness.

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 11:20:58 AM UTC+10, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 8:01:00 PM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 12:22:44 AM UTC+10, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist. These people are crying wolf. If you call someone a racist or a misogynist who isn’t, you become not credible when a real racist or a real misogynist appears.
> > > >
> > > They are basing their accusations on the content of your essays which fall under both classifications.
> > >
> > > You don't have to hate Jews or Blacks to be a racist, or hate women to be a misogynist. You can be considered a racist and/or misogynist if you share many of the basic assumptions that racists and misogynists espouse.
> > That is not true. "Misogynist" literally means "hater of women."
> Yes, that's what it literally means. However, it has been argued that men who believe women have a duty to serve their sexual needs see women as inferior to them -- an object -- a second class citizen -- chattel -- etc., do, in fact, hate women.

So then, do women who believe that men have a duty to serve their material needs hate men?
> Your love poems are fetishistic masturbatory sessions wherein you place a naked woman on a pedestal and fantasize about "worshiping" here through various sexual acts.

That is bulls*it.
> You can claim that worship is the highest form of love, but it's really a passive form of subjugation -- turning women into sexual fantasy objects.

My interactions with these women were real enough. There was nothing "fantasy" about it. They were very sexy and beautiful, by their own choice. They have a right to that choice. And there is nothing misogynistic about it.
> That's not the love of two equals -- that's domination based on 2,000+ years of patriarchal civilization.
> > I am not a misogynist at all. For a long time I saw women as being better than men. My dealings with feminists cured me of that error. I did not replace my stance with that of Eminem or Osama Bin Laden. I replaced it with a rational stance: Namely that anything capable of choice can be good or bad.
> >
> You're a passive misogynist. You don't beat women... you just attack (in essay form) women who fight against the subservient, patriarchal values that you love.

I don't have patriarchal values. People with patriarchal values attack me a lot.
> Nor is your new stance a rational one. Anyone who believes that human beings are capable of choice is extremely naive.

They include most intelligent people in the world. You have a choice whether or not to respond to my posts. I have a choice whether or not to respond to yours. You attack me over the choices that I have made. I confront you over the choices that you have been making.

> The Christian belief that one "chooses" to perform "good" or "evil" actions is the product of the slave mentality of the original Christians (who were Roman slaves) and Holy Roman Empire who found it to be a powerful tool for keeping the slaves/peasants in line.

That belief is not unique to Christianity. It is found all over the world in all sorts of belief systems. Not believing that you have a choice is a cover for lack of responsibility over your actions.

> Your basic argument is that ethnic stereotypes are based on a large degree of truth, and rather than pretending these stereotypes don't exist, we should work on changing the perceived beliefs/behaviors of the various ethnic groups. You're viewing various ethnic groups as the proverbial "White man's burden," and advocating "re-educating" them to think, worship and behave the way you do -- with or without their consent.

I advocate no such thing.

> > > Your essays see things in black and white terms, usually from an arch-conservative, Christian perspective, and advocate that other arch-conservative Christians learn to tolerate those who have different lifestyles, beliefs, etc.
> > 1. Funny. Real conservatives see me as a left-wing radical.
> Really? And who would they be?

I've been involved in a fight against domestic violence. Mainly I was supporting my then-wife, who did quite a lot for that cause.

> > Regarding subservience: Not at all. I like to see women rise to positions of power.
> That's not what I'm talking about, Ilya. You insist that they should be subservient to men *in their personal relationships* and sex lives.

Not at all. I say that men should be good to women and women should be good to men.

> In your expressed worldview, a woman can be President of the United States, but she'd better make her self as
> beautiful, feminine, and appealing as she can to satisfy the needs of her hubby.

A good woman, like a good man, wants to be good to the person she loves. If a woman doesn't like men, she should go without one. Similarly if a man thinks that women are bad, he should either be celibate or gay. In either case, a person who comes from position of ill will toward the other gender should not have involvements with them. So I advocate intercultural flux for intermarriage, bringing together men who are willing to be good to women with women who are willing to be good to men. That way the people involved in the mix will have good relationships, and the men who are not willing to be good to women and women who are not willing to be good to men will have to change their ways or see the other gender leave in large numbers to be with people who are willing to be good to them.

On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 10:10:15 PM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 10:01:00 AM UTC+10, Ilya Shambat wrote:
> > Regarding attractiveness: I insist that men and women be good to one another. Being attractive to men is part of being good to men, and there is nothing misogynistic about it.
> More on this: I've been with two women who were extraordinarily beautiful.. For them it wasn't about being attractive to men, it was about art. They were both artists - excellent ones - and they valued beauty for the sake of beauty. It was also, for them, something that heals and inspires. Neither of them was stupid or weak; they were bright and strong enough. As for the women who look good for the sake of men, they have every right to make that choice without facing nastiness.
>

Of course they have that right, but they also have the right to expect their men to do the same for them in return.

Gender equality is a two-way street.

Your essays, however, give the impression that these are mostly Russian women, and they are doing it to placate the boorish Russian spouses/lovers -- that they are still trapped into the traditional patriarchal gender roles that have characterized Western Civilization for the past 2,000+ years.

On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 10:40:03 PM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 11:20:58 AM UTC+10, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 8:01:00 PM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 12:22:44 AM UTC+10, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist. These people are crying wolf. If you call someone a racist or a misogynist who isn’t, you become not credible when a real racist or a real misogynist appears.
> > > > >
> > > > They are basing their accusations on the content of your essays which fall under both classifications.
> > > >
> > > > You don't have to hate Jews or Blacks to be a racist, or hate women to be a misogynist. You can be considered a racist and/or misogynist if you share many of the basic assumptions that racists and misogynists espouse.
> > > That is not true. "Misogynist" literally means "hater of women."
> > Yes, that's what it literally means. However, it has been argued that men who believe women have a duty to serve their sexual needs see women as inferior to them -- an object -- a second class citizen -- chattel -- etc., do, in fact, hate women.
> So then, do women who believe that men have a duty to serve their material needs hate men?

I believe that they are victims of a patriarchal society that separates men and women economically, and keeps women financially dependent upon (and, therefore, subservient to) men for their survival.

If they don't hate men, they certainly should.

> > Your love poems are fetishistic masturbatory sessions wherein you place a naked woman on a pedestal and fantasize about "worshiping" here through various sexual acts.
> That is bulls*it.

That is how they come across to me.

> > You can claim that worship is the highest form of love, but it's really a passive form of subjugation -- turning women into sexual fantasy objects..
> My interactions with these women were real enough. There was nothing "fantasy" about it. They were very sexy and beautiful, by their own choice. They have a right to that choice. And there is nothing misogynistic about it.
>

I'm not discussing your relations with women -- I'm talking about your poetry. If you want to pull a Willie and claim that your poetry is based on your sex life, I'd prefer not to be acquainted with the details.

> > That's not the love of two equals -- that's domination based on 2,000+ years of patriarchal civilization.
> > > I am not a misogynist at all. For a long time I saw women as being better than men. My dealings with feminists cured me of that error. I did not replace my stance with that of Eminem or Osama Bin Laden. I replaced it with a rational stance: Namely that anything capable of choice can be good or bad.
> > >
> > You're a passive misogynist. You don't beat women... you just attack (in essay form) women who fight against the subservient, patriarchal values that you love.
> I don't have patriarchal values. People with patriarchal values attack me a lot.

Really?

Why are all these people always attacking you and your female lovers and friends?

> > Nor is your new stance a rational one. Anyone who believes that human beings are capable of choice is extremely naive.
> They include most intelligent people in the world. You have a choice whether or not to respond to my posts.

No, I don't.

Each moment of our lives is happening simultaneously. The sum total of our lives are like the images on a reel of film. Each image exists alongside all of the other images -- from the beginning of the movie to the end. If we *view* the images through a projector, they will appear to be occurring one after the other -- when, if fact, they all exist together on that same reel of film.

I am always responding to this post. I have been responding to this post since for an infinitude of aeons, and shall still be responding to it an infinitude of aeons from now.

Nothing ever changes. Nothing ever happens. All of the images on the reel of film are static -- still photographs.

> I have a choice whether or not to respond to yours.

No, you don't -- for the same reason.

> You attack me over the choices that I have made.

I am not attacking you, and you have not made any choices.

> I confront you over the choices that you have been making.

You are not confronting me, and I have never made any choices.

> > The Christian belief that one "chooses" to perform "good" or "evil" actions is the product of the slave mentality of the original Christians (who were Roman slaves) and Holy Roman Empire who found it to be a powerful tool for keeping the slaves/peasants in line.
> That belief is not unique to Christianity. It is found all over the world in all sorts of belief systems.

No, it's not unique to Christianity. But it's hardly found "in all sorts of belief systems." As I said, it's a slave mentality, common to enslaved peoples.

Free thinking individuals will generally have none of it.

> Not believing that you have a choice is a cover for lack of responsibility over your actions.

No, it's merely a recognition of truth. Since nothing ever changes, I have no actions.

> > Your basic argument is that ethnic stereotypes are based on a large degree of truth, and rather than pretending these stereotypes don't exist, we should work on changing the perceived beliefs/behaviors of the various ethnic groups. You're viewing various ethnic groups as the proverbial "White man's burden," and advocating "re-educating" them to think, worship and behave the way you do -- with or without their consent.
> I advocate no such thing.

You wouldn't use such terminology, but that is to-all-intents-and-purposes what your essay is saying. People haven't been calling you a racist and misogynist for the hell of it. They've come to think of you as such because of your essays.

> > > > Your essays see things in black and white terms, usually from an arch-conservative, Christian perspective, and advocate that other arch-conservative Christians learn to tolerate those who have different lifestyles, beliefs, etc.
> > > 1. Funny. Real conservatives see me as a left-wing radical.
> > Really? And who would they be?
> I've been involved in a fight against domestic violence. Mainly I was supporting my then-wife, who did quite a lot for that cause.
> > > Regarding subservience: Not at all. I like to see women rise to positions of power.
> > That's not what I'm talking about, Ilya. You insist that they should be subservient to men *in their personal relationships* and sex lives.
> Not at all. I say that men should be good to women and women should be good to men.

And, IIRC, you have said that men should "be good to" women by not beating them or insulting them. Whoop-de-damn-do.

> > In your expressed worldview, a woman can be President of the United States, but she'd better make her self as
> > beautiful, feminine, and appealing as she can to satisfy the needs of her hubby.
> A good woman, like a good man, wants to be good to the person she loves. If a woman doesn't like men, she should go without one. Similarly if a man thinks that women are bad, he should either be celibate or gay. In either case, a person who comes from position of ill will toward the other gender should not have involvements with them. So I advocate intercultural flux for intermarriage, bringing together men who are willing to be good to women with women who are willing to be good to men. That way the people involved in the mix will have good relationships, and the men who are not willing to be good to women and women who are not willing to be good to men will have to change their ways or see the other gender leave in large numbers to be with people who are willing to be good to them.
>

You seem to be saying that a happy marriage is a non-abusive marriage.

Perhaps in Russia... in America, that alone would not cut it.

On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist.

There are pretty good reasons for that to be happening. Go to Hell.

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 2:39:20 PM UTC+10, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 10:40:03 PM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > That is not true. "Misogynist" literally means "hater of women."
> > > Yes, that's what it literally means. However, it has been argued that men who believe women have a duty to serve their sexual needs see women as inferior to them -- an object -- a second class citizen -- chattel -- etc., do, in fact, hate women.
> > So then, do women who believe that men have a duty to serve their material needs hate men?
> I believe that they are victims of a patriarchal society that separates men and women economically, and keeps women financially dependent upon (and, therefore, subservient to) men for their survival.

But there are any number of women who choose that kind of setting willingly.. That is the case even with many women who've been exposed to feminism.
> > > You're a passive misogynist. You don't beat women... you just attack (in essay form) women who fight against the subservient, patriarchal values that you love.
> > I don't have patriarchal values. People with patriarchal values attack me a lot.
> Really?
>
> Why are all these people always attacking you and your female lovers and friends?

Why are you attacking me?

> > > Nor is your new stance a rational one. Anyone who believes that human beings are capable of choice is extremely naive.
> > They include most intelligent people in the world. You have a choice whether or not to respond to my posts.
> No, I don't.

Right. I made you do it. Poor you.
> Nothing ever changes. Nothing ever happens. All of the images on the reel of film are static -- still photographs.

So there is no Internet?

> No, it's not unique to Christianity. But it's hardly found "in all sorts of belief systems." As I said, it's a slave mentality, common to enslaved peoples.
>
> Free thinking individuals will generally have none of it.

"Free-thinking individuals" most certainly include me. With you, I've seen some of that, as well as some attitudes you got from elsewhere that I could live without.

> > A good woman, like a good man, wants to be good to the person she loves.. If a woman doesn't like men, she should go without one. Similarly if a man thinks that women are bad, he should either be celibate or gay. In either case, a person who comes from position of ill will toward the other gender should not have involvements with them. So I advocate intercultural flux for intermarriage, bringing together men who are willing to be good to women with women who are willing to be good to men. That way the people involved in the mix will have good relationships, and the men who are not willing to be good to women and women who are not willing to be good to men will have to change their ways or see the other gender leave in large numbers to be with people who are willing to be good to them.
> >
> You seem to be saying that a happy marriage is a non-abusive marriage.
>
> Perhaps in Russia... in America, that alone would not cut it.

In American feminist culture, we see the world's worst women being ugly to some of the world's best men. In Middle East it's the opposite. Russia and Australia are somewhere in the middle.

What I've found with men in Russia and Australia is that they are spoiled. They have with them women who are beautiful, kind and willing to be good to their men. Yet they think that women are bad and treat them terribly. What would cure them is extensive exposure to American feminism. That way they will know what a bad woman actually is, and they would appreciate what they have at home.

For most women around the world, both you and I would both be an improvement over what they otherwise have to face. And I, at least, stand to be treated better by such women than I would be by feminists. So once again I advocate sizable flux for intermarriage between regions, bringing together men who are willing to be good to women with women who are willing to be good to men.

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 4:00:33 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 2:39:20 PM UTC+10, michaelmalef...@gmail..com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 10:40:03 PM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > That is not true. "Misogynist" literally means "hater of women."
> > > > Yes, that's what it literally means. However, it has been argued that men who believe women have a duty to serve their sexual needs see women as inferior to them -- an object -- a second class citizen -- chattel -- etc., do, in fact, hate women.
> > > So then, do women who believe that men have a duty to serve their material needs hate men?
> > I believe that they are victims of a patriarchal society that separates men and women economically, and keeps women financially dependent upon (and, therefore, subservient to) men for their survival.
> But there are any number of women who choose that kind of setting willingly. That is the case even with many women who've been exposed to feminism.
> > > > You're a passive misogynist. You don't beat women... you just attack (in essay form) women who fight against the subservient, patriarchal values that you love.
> > > I don't have patriarchal values. People with patriarchal values attack me a lot.
> > Really?
> >
> > Why are all these people always attacking you and your female lovers and friends?
> Why are you attacking me?
> > > > Nor is your new stance a rational one. Anyone who believes that human beings are capable of choice is extremely naive.
> > > They include most intelligent people in the world. You have a choice whether or not to respond to my posts.
> > No, I don't.
> Right. I made you do it. Poor you.
> > Nothing ever changes. Nothing ever happens. All of the images on the reel of film are static -- still photographs.
> So there is no Internet?
> > No, it's not unique to Christianity. But it's hardly found "in all sorts of belief systems." As I said, it's a slave mentality, common to enslaved peoples.
> >
> > Free thinking individuals will generally have none of it.
> "Free-thinking individuals" most certainly include me. With you, I've seen some of that, as well as some attitudes you got from elsewhere that I could live without.
> > > A good woman, like a good man, wants to be good to the person she loves. If a woman doesn't like men, she should go without one. Similarly if a man thinks that women are bad, he should either be celibate or gay. In either case, a person who comes from position of ill will toward the other gender should not have involvements with them. So I advocate intercultural flux for intermarriage, bringing together men who are willing to be good to women with women who are willing to be good to men. That way the people involved in the mix will have good relationships, and the men who are not willing to be good to women and women who are not willing to be good to men will have to change their ways or see the other gender leave in large numbers to be with people who are willing to be good to them.
> > >
> > You seem to be saying that a happy marriage is a non-abusive marriage.
> >
> > Perhaps in Russia... in America, that alone would not cut it.
> In American feminist culture, we see the world's worst women being ugly to some of the world's best men. In Middle East it's the opposite. Russia and Australia are somewhere in the middle.
>
> What I've found with men in Russia and Australia is that they are spoiled.. They have with them women who are beautiful, kind and willing to be good to their men. Yet they think that women are bad and treat them terribly. What would cure them is extensive exposure to American feminism. That way they will know what a bad woman actually is, and they would appreciate what they have at home.
>
> For most women around the world, both you and I would both be an improvement over what they otherwise have to face. And I, at least, stand to be treated better by such women than I would be by feminists. So once again I advocate sizable flux for intermarriage between regions, bringing together men who are willing to be good to women with women who are willing to be good to men.

You still have far to go-- you have yet to learn how to look at a woman as a human that happens to be female. May I suggest the path I've taken? Gouge out your eyes and then come, follow me...

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:03:21 AM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist.
> There are pretty good reasons for that to be happening. Go to Hell.

Troll much, Dink?

🙂

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 6:15:57 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:03:21 AM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist.
> > There are pretty good reasons for that to be happening. Go to Hell.
> Troll much, Dink?

Butt out, Donkey.

The grown ups are having a discussion.

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 6:15:57 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:03:21 AM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist.
> > There are pretty good reasons for that to be happening. Go to Hell.
> Troll much, Dink?
>
> 🙂

You do.
You should stop, but you obviously never will unless death or incarceration inteferes.
Try having an actual conversation not about yourself, or, or, here's an idea, stop trolling in AAPC.

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:02:42 PM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 6:15:57 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:03:21 AM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist.
> > > There are pretty good reasons for that to be happening. Go to Hell.
> > Troll much, Dink?
> >
> > 🙂
> You do.

Says Dink, one of the biggest trolls on Usenet.

> You should stop, but you obviously never will unless death

Your ongoing death fantasy is noted.

And so it goes.

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 2:14:25 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:02:42 PM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 6:15:57 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:03:21 AM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist.
> > > > There are pretty good reasons for that to be happening. Go to Hell.
> > > Troll much, Dink?
> > >
> > > 🙂
> > You do.
> Says Dink, one of the biggest trolls on Usenet.

You're bigger.

HtH & HAND

Now STFU and die.

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 2:14:25 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:02:42 PM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 6:15:57 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:03:21 AM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist.
> > > > There are pretty good reasons for that to be happening. Go to Hell.
> > > Troll much, Dink?
> > >
> > > 🙂
> > You do.
> Says Dink, one of the biggest trolls on Usenet.
> > You should stop, but you obviously never will unless death
> Your ongoing death fantasy is noted.
>
> And so it goes.

Yes it does, as the donkey always brays--
and all Ash has to say:

"Bitches' brood
Arka
We'll run you through
Bakrauf
We'll break your legs like twigs
And gut you all like pigs
We can't live side by side
There's no truce in sight"
Saxons and Vikings" ~~Amon Amrath & Saxon

Now that's death fantasy metal!1!

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 2:54:14 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 2:14:25 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:02:42 PM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 6:15:57 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:03:21 AM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist.
> > > > > There are pretty good reasons for that to be happening. Go to Hell.
> > > > Troll much, Dink?
> > > >
> > > > 🙂
> > > You do.
> > Says Dink, one of the biggest trolls on Usenet.
> > > You should stop, but you obviously never will unless death
> > Your ongoing death fantasy is noted.
> >
> > And so it goes.
> Yes it does, as the donkey always brays--
> and all Ash has to say:
>
> "Bitches' brood
> Arka
> We'll run you through
> Bakrauf
> We'll break your legs like twigs
> And gut you all like pigs
> We can't live side by side
> There's no truce in sight"
> Saxons and Vikings" ~~Amon Amrath & Saxon
>
> Now that's death fantasy metal!1!

When in doubt, quote a heavy metal band.

🙂

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 3:26:32 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 2:54:14 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 2:14:25 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:02:42 PM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 6:15:57 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:03:21 AM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist.
> > > > > > There are pretty good reasons for that to be happening. Go to Hell.
> > > > > Troll much, Dink?
> > > > >
> > > > > 🙂
> > > > You do.
> > > Says Dink, one of the biggest trolls on Usenet.
> > > > You should stop, but you obviously never will unless death
> > > Your ongoing death fantasy is noted.
> > >
> > > And so it goes.
> > Yes it does, as the donkey always brays--
> > and all Ash has to say:
> >
> > "Bitches' brood
> > Arka
> > We'll run you through
> > Bakrauf
> > We'll break your legs like twigs
> > And gut you all like pigs
> > We can't live side by side
> > There's no truce in sight"
> > Saxons and Vikings" ~~Amon Amrath & Saxon
> >
> > Now that's death fantasy metal!1!
> When in doubt, quote a heavy metal band.

Oh, there's no doubt about it-- it summed it up well-- there''s no truce in sight...

Ilya Shambat wrote:
>
> There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist. These people are crying wolf. If you call someone a racist or a misogynist who isn’t, you become not credible when a real racist or a real misogynist appears.

> Obviously these people haven’t dealt with real racists and real misogynists. I have. Real misogynists call me a p*ssy-whipped idiot. Real racists call me a dirty Jew. I haven’t seen these people confront either. Instead they attack someone who’s easy to attack while doing nothing to fight real wrongdoers.

> If I had been a racist or a misogynist, I wouldn’t care that I was called such things. I would have believed that being a racist or a misogynist was the way to go. Instead it bothers me that some people call me such things; so I am not a racist or a misogynist.

> The people who say such things aren’t better than real racists or real misogynists. They have been tearing families apart for unsubstantiated allegations. They have been getting people fired for looking at a female co-worker the wrong way. They have been teaching women to be horrible people and to be ugly to men. The two sides in this war deserve each other. The rest of us deserve to be free of both of them.

> I am not going to side with racists and misogynists. But don’t expect me to side with these people either.

Good day my friend I.S.

You have to keep correcting the record when need be, I have had similar situations, such as my four years in the Navy...

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 5:50:20 PM UTC-4, vhug...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ilya Shambat wrote:
> >
> > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist. These people are crying wolf. If you call someone a racist or a misogynist who isn’t, you become not credible when a real racist or a real misogynist appears.
>
> > Obviously these people haven’t dealt with real racists and real misogynists. I have. Real misogynists call me a p*ssy-whipped idiot. Real racists call me a dirty Jew. I haven’t seen these people confront either. Instead they attack someone who’s easy to attack while doing nothing to fight real wrongdoers.
>
> > If I had been a racist or a misogynist, I wouldn’t care that I was called such things. I would have believed that being a racist or a misogynist was the way to go. Instead it bothers me that some people call me such things; so I am not a racist or a misogynist.
>
> > The people who say such things aren’t better than real racists or real misogynists. They have been tearing families apart for unsubstantiated allegations. They have been getting people fired for looking at a female co-worker the wrong way. They have been teaching women to be horrible people and to be ugly to men. The two sides in this war deserve each other. The rest of us deserve to be free of both of them.
>
> > I am not going to side with racists and misogynists. But don’t expect me to side with these people either.
> Good day my friend I.S.
>
> You have to keep correcting the record when need be, I have had similar situations, such as my four years in the Navy...

Like this?

ibsh...@gmail.com
Dec 6, 2020, 9:45:44 PM
"Many people have tried different things to fix the inner city. I have given a lot of thought to the subject myself. I am now proposing something that I have not seen proposed by credible sources, and that is as follows:

Send gangsters to Africa."

You're all for sending those "troublesome" Blacks away aren't you?

Will Dockery wrote:

> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:02:42 PM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
>> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 6:15:57 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 1:03:21 AM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:
>> > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > There have been people calling me a racist and a misogynist.
>> > > There are pretty good reasons for that to be happening. Go to Hell.
>> > Troll much, Dink?
>> >
>> > 🙂
>> You do.

> Says Dink, one of the biggest trolls on Usenet.

>> You should stop, but you obviously never will unless death

> Your ongoing death fantasy is noted.

> And so it goes.

Dink is merely a troll... that is what trolls do...!

Lo7z!1!

"Bury them deep that's what i said
Time to play your dead man's hand
Dealin' bullets is like dealin' cards
When it all comes down to a draw"
"Bury Them Deep" ~~Ghoultown
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_kn2rtuc4o