tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2837001751311078781.post43819479500640049..comments2024-03-28T05:23:01.707-05:00Comments on A MOMENT OF CEREBUS: Jeff Seiler: Dave Sim & MeA Moment Of Cerebushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02718525538144698138noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2837001751311078781.post-24070389336438454012015-11-17T01:19:35.572-06:002015-11-17T01:19:35.572-06:00"I'm just saying that equality is a myth ..."I'm just saying that equality is a myth STRUCTURALLY. Men are men and can't get pregnant. Women are women and are the only ones who can get pregnant."<br /><br />The second and third sentences don't follow from the first, unless "equality" is being used here as a synonym for "interchangeability". Which is, I guess, valid, but I don't know too many people who use it that way.<br /><br />"The JAKA'S STORY conundrum: what if you impregnate your wife and she decides to abort your child? Equal TREATMENT under the law would dictate the father having EQUAL rights in the discussion."<br /><br />Well, I think equality under the law would <i>actually</i> dictate that fathers be allowed to abort their own fetuses as well, but y'know...<br /><br />And speaking as someone who isn't necessarily pro-choice - when you have a situation that primarily only affects one portion of the population, I don't think it's inequality in any meaningful sense to give more weight to the opinions of that group. <br /><br />"But don't claim that you're talking about equality when what you are actually creating and imposing on everyone is a Feminist Theocracy/Dictatorship."<br /><br />That depends on your definition of "dictatorship". Voicing, say, racist views about black people tends to damage one's credibility - does that mean we're living in a "(Pro-)Black dictatorship"? Maybe it does, though I wouldn't have thought so.<br /><br />And as for a Feminist Theocracy, though it <i>is</i> theoretically possible, I don't think we're <i>quite</i> there yet - I could be wrong, but I suspect that if we were, most of this site's readership would be in jail for hate speech.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2837001751311078781.post-35010878300253654872015-11-16T15:31:39.314-06:002015-11-16T15:31:39.314-06:00I'm just saying that equality is a myth STRUCT...I'm just saying that equality is a myth STRUCTURALLY. Men are men and can't get pregnant. Women are women and are the only ones who can get pregnant. Even the ideal I support: equal TREATMENT under the law is a myth. The JAKA'S STORY conundrum: what if you impregnate your wife and she decides to abort your child? Equal TREATMENT under the law would dictate the father having EQUAL rights in the discussion. In our Feminist Theocracy that's "off the table". Women own fetuses and babies period.<br /><br />Fair enough. It's a democracy. We can make it into whatever we want to make it. <br /><br />But don't claim that you're talking about equality when what you are actually creating and imposing on everyone is a Feminist Theocracy/Dictatorship.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06502294606395720342noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2837001751311078781.post-49996173260312316322015-11-14T13:48:29.069-06:002015-11-14T13:48:29.069-06:00A quick Google search reveals that Ms. Morrison se...A quick Google search reveals that Ms. Morrison seems to still live in Kitchener as a massage therapist. Good for her!<br /><br />What Dave is saying about population and immigration is I think part of the larger discussion I've heard on the way the Developed countries of the world treat the Underdeveloped. 3rd (and 4th)Wave Feminists have launched this criticism of 2nd Wave (60's/70's Women Lib). It's all fine and good for western women to be free and liberated, but they where silent or uninterested in the plight of women around the world. Worse even was the 1st Wave, who made pamphlets complaining that Irish Catholics and Blacks could vote, but Protestant Woman couldn't.<br /><br /><br />When I see feminism in the west today, I can't help but think that all of their major goals have been accomplished. Voting, Access to Education, Control over their bodies. All of the major battles have been won, so I tend to see a splintering and fracturing of the feminist cause into smaller subgroups. LGBT Feminists, Black Feminists, Asian Feminists, Male Feminists (which is a term I really don't get, if your a man and support feminism wouldn't you just be an egalitarian).<br /><br />In many of these issues I actually agree with the feminists, on others I disagree. This is the reason I wound never call myself a feminist. It's not enough to agree to the basics of voting, work you have to acknowledge volumes of feminist theory and concepts such as "The Patriarchy" and "Rape Culture". And if you don't agree with these very specific concepts and in the way the scholars say they are happening it's "mansplaining" and my opinion as a male is invalidated. Anthony Kucharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16362054090556688907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2837001751311078781.post-92198617225382519092015-11-14T13:11:37.295-06:002015-11-14T13:11:37.295-06:00"The schism, it seems to me, is who do you wa..."The schism, it seems to me, is who do you want [to be] playing the cards you’ve been dealt in that game? Someone who believes in God and fervently wants God to guide his actions? Or, an atheist who is trying to figure out how to play the hand so [that] everyone ends up feeling good about themselves?"<br /><br />Am I the only one who sees this as kind of a false dilemma? I mean, yes, those <i>are</i> options, but I can't help but wonder, what about people who believe in God, but have deluded themselves into mistaking their will for His? Or an atheist who's not afraid of people feeling bad about themselves as long as it;s the right thing to do? Or do those people simply not exist (or alternately: DO they exist, but simple have a tendency not to wind up in government)? <br /><br />With regards to the birthrate thing: the assumption here seems to me to be that any downward trend will continue until the number reached is zero - i.e., if the feminists have their way, the birthrate will continue downward until no more babies are being made. Which I don't think is accurate - it seems to me to be akin to saying that a man going on a diet is committing suicide because, if he doesn't stop, he'll eventually lose ALL of his pounds and he'll simply waste away into nothingness.<br /><br />People who actually go on diets tend to express frustration at the inability for anything like this to happen.<br /><br />(As an aside, is there any precedent whatsoever for the thing Dave is claiming as possible? That is, a society going extinct through simple failure to reproduce? That's not a rhetorical question, I'd seriously like to know.)<br /><br />But I think there's another thing to consider here: if we're trying to maximise the number of babies made, then you're going to forcing a LARGE number of men and women into it who simply aren't qualified for the tasks at hand: men who don't have what it takes to be good husbands and fathers, women who don't have what it takes to be good wives and mothers. Just because two people can have sex and make a child doesn't make they can actually RAISE that child worth anything. When you saddle somebody with a task they simply aren't qualified for and which they do not want, chances are they'll screw it up - whether that means abusive, overly permissive, or simply making too many mistakes critical moments. And people who weren't raised well tend not to be the most...<i>functional</i>, shall we say, of adults.<br /><br />What feminists actually want, <i>as I understand it</i>, is for women (<i>and</i> men) to have the options to do whatever they want -and are qualified to do- in life - which , of course, means that if woman WANTS to be primarily a wife and/or mother (and such women <i>do</i> exist) then they'll be able to do that. Which seems advantageous to me, if only for one simple reason: a person who's actually enthusiastic about the task of parenthood is going to be more likely to <i>actually know what they're doing</i>, and therefore raise a healthy human being.<br /><br />Smaller population, but in exchange a healthier one? Seems like a fair trade to me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2837001751311078781.post-34540698742777633372015-11-14T10:58:13.686-06:002015-11-14T10:58:13.686-06:00Hey Dave,
Janis varies from being excited to SUPE...Hey Dave,<br /><br />Janis varies from being excited to SUPERexcited about getting a sibling. (There were a few weeks before we knew the sex where she was SUPERexcited for a brother and merely excited for a sister, she's since changed her mind and is SUPERexcited for a sister.)<br /><br />Kid two's working name is Natasha Bea Dow. Unless we decide we like some other name better...<br /><br />Re: Feminism dwindling births, there was just an article in Time magazine about China's official abandonment of the One Child Policy. It seems limiting your offspring AND preferring boys has lead to an estimated deficit of 30 million women. And a phenomenon known as 4,2,1. Whereby 1 adult has to support 2 parents, and 4 grandparents on their limited income. Which would suggest that even if you COULD find a girl and marry her you'd need to support yourself, her, your parents, your grandparents, her parents and her grandparents AND your (now allowed and encouraged,) two offspring.<br /><br />In an economy that, despite the best efforts of the Communist Party, is slowing down with the drag of it's aging population.<br /><br />The article made it sound like the new policy was a long shot. A real long shot.<br /><br />Happy Birthday Proto-Jaka! I hope Ms. Morrison (or Star) is doing well and has found happiness somewhere in this crazy old world.<br /><br />Matt DowMouse Skull Entertainmenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05844784361859568863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2837001751311078781.post-69388145820564088472015-11-14T09:13:57.211-06:002015-11-14T09:13:57.211-06:00So you *do* change your mind about stuff! Years ag...So you *do* change your mind about stuff! Years ago you said you'd never tell who(m?) Jaka was based on.Tony Dunlopnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2837001751311078781.post-87235231277953081442015-11-14T08:56:16.383-06:002015-11-14T08:56:16.383-06:00Tomorrow is the 60th birthday of Lynn (Louise) Mor...Tomorrow is the 60th birthday of Lynn (Louise) Morrison the "girl" Jaka is based on, born 111555 -- 11/15/55 the one who became a stripper AFTER I created Jaka. She danced under the name "Amber Star". She's six months older than I am, to the day. Pictures exist of her, presumably, in the yearbooks for Forest Hill Public School (1962 to 1966), Queensmount Senior Public School (1967 to 1968) and Forest Heights Collegiate (1969 to 1973). There was also a nude pictorial of her in a motorcycling magazine but I'm not sure what year and/or if she was called "Amber Star" in there or a made-up name. <br /><br />I wouldn't say that my opinions of feminism haven't changed over the years, but I do think that I've refined my opinions and arrived at a few conclusions that merit society's SERIOUS consideration, foremost among them: that you can't STRUCTURALLY have 86% of women out in the workforce because of what that does to your replacement birth rate. I'm pretty sure that's not a "Well, whatever..." or "Well, BESIDES that..." kind of observation. <br /><br />AND I'm pretty sure that was "trigger" for the ad hominem attacks of the last week. "We can't deny the reality of what he's saying so we have to frame him as being crazy and evil and hope that works." Which it always does -- so far, anyway -- with the Feminist Theocracy. <br /><br />Even the self-confessed extreme-left Brit anarchist who posted about his concerns with David Cameron's Conservatives and the U.K.'s "lurch towards Naziism" (as he saw it) would, I hope, admit that that exists WITHIN the context of the Feminist Theocracy. Across the entire political spectrum from Communist to Conservative no one is allowed to voice any criticism of feminism when running for office or when governing. This is particularly pronounced on campus. <br /><br />A society ignores STRUCTURALLY irrational societal foundations at its own peril. As one of the few people on the planet not STRUCTURALLY under direct or indirect threat from feminists I do think I'm obligated to speak out on the STRUCTURAL problems that I see -- as I did with the 15 Impossible Things To Believe Before Breakfast back in 2002 and as I do now with the "86% and still climbing" statistic. <br /><br />Matt Dow: So what does the lovely and talented Janis Pearl think of the idea of having a little sister? <br /><br /> Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06502294606395720342noreply@blogger.com