Re: virus: [Fwd: Philosophical True Confessions]

Rhonda Chapman (
Fri, 28 May 1999 16:15:54 -0700

Friday, May 28, 1999 12:08 PM Brett Robertson wrote:

>When discussing philosophy reminds one of their girlfriend/ boyfriend
>and elicits fear of fighting, loss of sexual privileges, and public
>humiliation regarding one's masculinity-- and assuming a dependence on
>the relationship, prior public humiliation, and concerns about one's
>masculinity; then, the argument professed regarding one's logic is
>subverted by one's need to restore one's manhood, one's relationship,
>and one's public image... such "philosophy" will become mere
>justification and reveal only such "philosophers" attempts to condone
>the perspective of the one who controls the sexual purse-strings (often
>feminine rhetoric espoused by macho eunics). No wonder the
>philosophical content of this list so often devolves into popularity
>contests and "female" (subjective/ relativistic) interpersonal drivel!

Have you ever seen a Jerry Springer show? If not, that is nothing to be embarrased about. However, I do think that you badly missed the point. What you are fretting about in the above is just the typical Jerry Springer format. You might not want to take it too seriously.

As for ""female" (subjective/ relativistic) interpersonal drivel", why don't you just say, "I feel really threatened in my sexuality so I am going to lead by slamming all females as lacking in credibility". If it wasn't your intent to question the credibility of females, you might want to consider your wording more carefully.

Roni (feeling more cocky than "pissy")