Blogcritics Comments on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Comment by Victor Plenty on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Sun, 22 Jan 2006 14:15:59 EST

I wish Bing and Richard and their fellow-travelers whatever happiness they may be able to find in a world where people who don't share their religious beliefs enjoy just as much legal freedom as they do, where gays have the right to visit and protect a life-partner in the hospital, where women have the right to vote, and where black people are not anybody else's property.

Comment by zingzing on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Sun, 22 Jan 2006 00:59:48 EST

in response to allendrury's comment #181: not to be a downer, but just remember that the african-american's fight has gone on for over 140 years, and there are still pockets of hatred spread throughout this country. homosexual america is on the verge over their greatest victory yet in gaining true acceptance and equality. the last 50 years have built up to this moment, but this is not the end of your struggle. there will be plenty of tough moments in the future, and i only hope that you keep your strength and your wits (and sense of humor... you'll need it) about you. i hope that one day, we can all experience a society where we are all equals, but, i don't hold out much hope that day will be during my lifetime. i hope everyone taking part in this discussion finds happiness in their lives, despite any politics. i am feeling very humanitarian today... i even hope bing is happy. he's very interesting...

Comment by Victor Plenty on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Sat, 21 Jan 2006 05:48:13 EST

Whoops, spoke too soon. Still problems here too. Every once in a while, the page seems to be okay, but on the next visit it's back to hiding most of the text in the comments, just as you described. So I guess I won't get to stay up even later tonight on the merry task of exploding Richard Brodie's ludicrously oversimplified thinking (if one can even use that word to describe it) about what's best for women and black people.

Comment by Steve S on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Sat, 21 Jan 2006 03:20:42 EST

I dunno, I'm still having problems. When I click on the comment box, half the page above me goes white. If I click and drag the mouse (to highlight what's above me) then I can see the text fine, so I'm not sure why the page goes white. Flash ads are a problem too, but they've been a problem on most sites so that's not unique to here. I figure I'm in the 'less than 1% of surfers' category, so I just don't really point it out. I'm used to being the underdog. (awwwww)

Comment by Victor Plenty on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Sat, 21 Jan 2006 03:10:17 EST

Firefox has trouble with BC on WinXP and Win98, too. For awhile I thought it was because I was using an older version of Firefox, but tonight I upgraded to the latest release (version 1.5) and the problem persisted. Oddly enough, though, at the moment this page is displaying fine. I wonder whether there was a glitch somewhere in the Blogcritics site code that someone was able to catch and fix?

Comment by Steve S on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Sat, 21 Jan 2006 03:08:27 EST

Most gay men and women will stay here and fight I hope so. I do want to leave, but I think I did point out that it was mostly a rant/ a dream/ expressing fears. I would love to dedicate myself to 'the fight' but raising a child, I find it's hard to handle the stress and not bring it into the house. She's my first priority, if I have to fight from a distance, you all can count on my financial support!

Comment by Steve S on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Sat, 21 Jan 2006 03:05:02 EST

You too Victor? I'm on a mac on firefox and I mentioned to Aaman earlier (per a review of desicritics) about the problems that firefox has with this site. Just an FYI, trying to be helpful. Glad to know I'm not the only one. There are some posts that I can't even click on, it freezes the browser.

Comment by Victor Plenty on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Sat, 21 Jan 2006 02:39:29 EST

Congratulations on a successful post, allendrury. I'd try to help you stay at the top of the list for comment traffic, and point out a few more of the many reasons Richard is severely out of touch with reality. Unfortunately for some reason this is one of the posts that end up unable to display properly in Firefox after getting a large number of comments.

Comment by allendrury on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Sat, 21 Jan 2006 00:29:07 EST

Richard, I have read your rants from time to time this week and find you like a court jester. I posted something that I did not figure would get much attention. But you have helped keep it the most active post here this week!! Thanks. The more that read and hear about bigots the more the gay agenda moves forward. You and your type are in the trash bins of history. You do read history? You read?? There is a continual push towards modern thought and justice in any surviving society. Those that do not move forward cave and crumble. I do not see that happening in America. Most gay men and women will stay here and fight, for not only our rights, but the 'idea of America' which is at the core of so many civil right battles. On Saturday, I will take my little brother (I am a part of Big Brothers as is my partner)) out for a day of winter time fun as we have some snow here this evening. Then he and his mom will join my family here for dinner Saturday night. Church on Sunday and relaxing on Sunday afternoon. In other words we are here, in the mix of neighbors and community and making inroads everyday. So the next time you think baout taking away my rights know I am growing in numbers that support and understand me and my family. And together we will leave your ashes with those of slavery, Irish-Catholic bashing, and all the other ills which defeated your type. Again, thank you for making my gay rights post Number #1.

Comment by Richard Brodie on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:47:53 EST

Women's "Liberation" Movement leads to The Evisceration of Romance would be fine.

Comment by Bennett on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:47:47 EST

Thanks Christopher. That's what I suspected.

Comment by Christopher Rose on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:27:29 EST

Which of "implies" or "leads to" would you like me to place into your remarks, Mr Brodie? Or shall we let it stand as it is?

Comment by Richard Brodie on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:18:27 EST

Christopher, I accept your explanation, and apologize for not having been aware of the rule against using the arrowhead symbols. The combination with a hyphen is a mathematical shorthand for "implies" or, derivatively, "leads to", which in retrospect is what I wish I had simply said. Not sure how you came up with "beats" as a substitute. It makes for a kind of meaningless sentence, but seems at first glance to be saying something positive about the subject, whereas I should have thought it would have been clear from what preceded it that I would, rather, have been saying something negative. I appreciate the supportive responses of my adversaries in this debate. However I want to make it clear that even if the change had been made in a deliberate attempt to alter my meaning (which I am now sure was not the case), I would not have regarded it as a violation of some kind of "civil" or even constitutional right, to which I am somehow to be regarded as entitled. I recognize that my right to unrestricted freedom of speech ends where Blogcritics.com's property line begins. The owners here are entitled to establish any rules they like and "reserve their right to refuse sevice to anyone for any reason". The absolute individual right of property ownership is the sine qua non without which no other rights are possible, and should, btw, be a qualification for voting (putting hands over head to deflect barrage of verbal rocks about to descent on my head ;)

Comment by Christopher Rose on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:41:17 EST

When I edited Richard's comment, it was simply to remove the more than arrowhead which he, and several others, persist in using despite regular reminders that it can cause problems for the site as it is also used in html. The site can interpret arrowheads appearing in different comments together so they are routinely removed and replaced. I have already emailed Mr Brodie personally explaining that I simply did not see the hyphen or minus symbol in front of it nor would I have understood it if I had, as it is not an expression I am familiar with. I have apologised to him for my cognitive error and am awaiting his response. I thought we'd already established that comments on blogcritics are NOT edited for content, except in those cases where there is a conflict with legal or house guidelines. If not, please consider it duly re-iterated.

Comment by Bennett on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:01:43 EST

Richard's comment should not have been edited, particularly in a way that reversed his intended meaning. How did he violate the comment policy with what he wrote? Christopher? Hello?

Comment by KYS on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:58:39 EST

I don't agree with what Richard says, but I strongly support his right to say it!!!

Comment by RogerMDillon on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:46:27 EST

Richard's comments should not have been changed.

Comment by Andy Marsh on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:03:12 EST

Steve - I feel the same way about you! That really wasn't the primary reason I got married...it was a bonus...but I really did fall madly in love with my wife about a week after I met her. We actually went to Vegas to get married a week after we met...but we didn't have enough money to party AND get married, so, we partied that weekend and went back the next weekend to get married.

Comment by Steve S on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:00:45 EST

Can someone please explain why his comment was altered?

Comment by KYS on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:55:13 EST

"I'm just going to point out a couple more things, then I really do have to stop spending so much time on these boards and get back to concentrating on some important personal projects." Why am I not suprised that you would craft a long winded response, which in essence says nothing, then bail out? In comment #59 Richard says "Yes, I'm quite single-mindedly focused on inserting my penis into my wife's vagina. Near as I can tell, she's not at all unhappy about that particular obsession of mine!" Then in comment #169 he says: "The reason you see no wife in the family picture is because there was a divergence in these areas". Did you remarry? Does your ex-wife agree with your attitude towards women? You can run if you want to, but I think the answers will speak volumes about you.

Comment by Richard Brodie on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:39:50 EST

I can almost hear the great collective sucking gasp, followed by exclamations of "My God! he actually doesn't think women should vote, and believes "civil" rights are phoney, and that MLK did more harm than good for American Negroes." This kind of response is not unexpected on the part of people who fall into the logical fallacy I like to call "The Argument from Nowness", the belief that just because some social arrangement currently exists that didn't exist before, therefore it must represent a positive "advance". There have been various conflicting attempts to place me in a historical spectrum, ranging from "caveman days" to "1,500 B.C." to "medieval times". But you really only need to go back a dozen decades or so. I'm just going to point out a couple more things, then I really do have to stop spending so much time on these boards and get back to concentrating on some important personal projects. First, although I concentrated a lot on the importance of man/woman differences, I also understand that there also have to be strong similarities of focus, values, and interests in order to heighten the feelings of romantic attachment. The reason you see no wife in the family picture is because there was a divergence in these areas, starting from a base that was not very strong to begin with. I don't claim to be a perfect human being. I have my share of personal shortcomings, and am continuing to evolve from an immature beginning point. Suffice it to say that I now have a very positive relationship with my ex-wife from whom I have been separated for ten years, to whom I just gave a dozen long-stemmed roses for our 34th "anniversary", and with whom I amicably share the task of finishing raising our younger children. Second, I was partially raised by a woman who grew up on a plantation in Texas. She in turn was nursed and partially raised by a woman whom she affectionately referred to as her "Nigger Mammy". And she really did not mean any disrespect with the n-word. (My own mother had to explain to me the proper way to refer to blacks when they first began moving into our little desert town back in the fifties.) I learned that Negroses were generally treated quite well in the South, by plantation owners. Many had no desire to be "liberated". I think that a natural process of emancipation would have gradually occurred with having to have a war that took a hundred times as many young American lives as Iraq has, and that blacks would be a lot better off today without that No. 1 worst President of all time, Abraham Lincoln. Finally, I resent very much the editor of this site changing my post from: Women's "Liberation" Movement leads to The Evisceration of Romance [Approved edit with permission of Mr Brodie. Comments Editor] to Women's "Liberation" Movement beats The Evisceration of Romance I will not continue to participate on a discussion site where my words can be altered to mean the exact opposite of what I said. And I think the rest of you would be just as indignant if that happened to you. P.S. My favorite book is "The God of the Machine" by Isabel Paterson

Comment by Steve S on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:40:32 EST

allan, apologies for the seeming hijacking of the thread, but this has been most enlightening. It seems there are straight men out there who are intimidated by women who have voices, strong women. These men cannot get aroused by a woman who isn't barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen, so they, in a roundabout way, seek to deny women and other minority groups equality. Oppressing others and keeping all the power to yourself is what is romantic apparently. Someone pointed out that this completely fits the woman hater syndrome. This has been enlightening and informative as I try to understand those who would paint me as the monster while trying to trample on my civil liberties. I do not want to eradicate gender identities. I sincerely hope (and some of you will laugh, I know) that someone like Angelina Jolie becomes a role model for my daughter. This woman travels to impoverished countries and actually makes a difference for those less fortunate than her, all the while completely owning her own femininity. Might I point out for consideration that stripping an individual of all say over anything and completely making them nothing more than a submissive slave is not romantic to very many. And I think it stems from control issues during childhood, perhaps during aforementioned molestation. I hope the best for all individuals, and that those who need it get the therapy and counseling that is so sorely needed. -- Andy, I admire your honesty in your comment about the initial premise for getting married. You're not really a bad guy, just on the wrong side (of the political spectrum).

Comment by KYS on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:34:57 EST

His argument is highly flawed throughout. But, it should make him feel all warm and fuzzy inside to know that women might soon join heavy combat. =) Yes, Richard. There are women in the military (all proud volunteers) fighting for your freedom while you keep expanding your brood and champion a cause to reduce women to second class citizens. Shame on you.

Comment by zingzing on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:21:16 EST

ahh... JR... very nice.

Comment by zingzing on Allowing Civil Rights For All

Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:19:57 EST

richard says that voting has destroyed the traditional man-woman relationship. what isn't destroying the tradtional man-woman relationship? everyone but straight men it seems. yeah, they're blameless. he also says that homosexuality is on the rise. it's far more likely that homosexuals are less frightened to be who they are. he says that this is because "Gender distinctions are becoming regarded as less and less important." like, as in, it doesn't matter if you're a man or a woman? i'd say that this is true in a lot of ways. i don't think it's a bad thing. if i were to think, "who should i vote for?" or "who should i hire?," and my thoughts never drifted towards "man, or woman?," that wouldn't be a bad thing. that said, i would get a bit worried if i thought, "whom should i stick it in, him or her?" it's just a thing. Richard says, "Women have nothing to lose by not voting." like say, the power to vote? to have their voices heard? to not let men's issues trample all over their's? to alter the political landscape of this country to reflect the reality that women do, indeed, exist? they have "everything to gain?" like what? "the fullest possible intensity of romantic feeling?" yeah, i'm sure that keeping a woman in her place and denying her all the rights that you expect is going to make her love you, need you, want you. oh yeah. actually, i'm being sarcastic. do you think any woman, having had all the rights you do for her entire life, would want to be reduced again to a second-class citizen? if you can find such a woman, marry her and keep her in the kitchen and beat her to death one day. you're argument is full of non sequiturs. no, voting does not infringe on love. no, women won't make any gains from not voting. you know as well as i do that giving women what they want is a good way of keeping them happy. they want to vote. i've found plenty of romance in my day, and every one of the women i found it with was able to vote. we didn't break up because she wanted to vote. maybe it's early, maybe some people don't want to respond to such stupidity... but, fuck, people, why am i the one doing this? where's a woman to stand up for her own? christ...