Re: Pig comment.(was Many selves (was Diaries (was: Re:

From: KPJ (
Date: Mon Jun 12 2000 - 23:56:55 MDT

It appears as if <> wrote:
|In a message dated 6/12/2000 9:05:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time, QueeneMUSE
|> What, we should be looking for ugly dumb lesbian tree-huggers?
|It is none of my business who you looek for but I will tell you this:
|I find this so statement so EMPTY headed, nasty, sexist, bigoted,
|unenlightened, uninformed, abusive, crude, harsh ...inferior of thought and
|mind.... not to mention horrible... that I am actually going to killfile
|you. I have never EVER killfiled anyone on this list, since I believe that
|even offensive, bigoted and stupid people have something I can learn from.
|You obviously own not one shred of respect for women, men, for the list, or
|for yourself.
|If I meet you at an event that Max and Natasha put on, I will be embarrased.

Interesting how the belief that the body and its cravings must be repressed
has so permeated the Western societies, even among the Extropians. To equate
the support of the ancient urges with stupidity form part of this. (Actually,
one should follow these urges since the species needs all the intelligence
it can get.)

Biologically speaking, the whole species of humans apparently share the
notion of beauty (and thus of ugliness), as shown by scientific research.

Since the current state of technology does not allow for cloning, or other
cheap non-sex alternatives, one may well need to use ``sexist'' techniques
in the area of reproduction until such time when the technology level has
increased sufficiently.

I don't find the ancient reproduction techniques offensive. Thus I see no
reason to suppress this information.

Your mileage may vary.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:13:12 MDT