Well, I can't sleep, so I go surfing around, and find a link to this article on Peter Briffa's site (main link to the site -- permalinks are wonky). I knew better, but I followed the link.
MY EYES. AUGHHHH!!!
I dare anyone to go past the very first sentence without being overcome by acute nausea:
Allow me, please, to go all womanly on you: emotional, weepy, unable to stomach one more lie, threat, excuse or justification being put out by our Machiavellian leaders who want this war against Iraq and are damn well going to get it.As I left in Mr. Briffa's comments, ::barf::. It used to be that men joined the French Foreign Legion to get away from women like this. Lucky males. I don't often wish I were a man, but this is one of those times. I frankly admit I don't understand women like this, nor do I really want to. Posted by Andrea Harris at February 11, 2003 02:35 AM
Mrs. Esmay believes that the 19th amendment should be repealed.
Perhaps the two of you could get a movement started. :-)
Posted by: Dean Esmay at February 11, 2003 at 03:24 AMWell, I don't want to get the 19th amendment repealed, and Alibhai-Brown isn't American anyway, she's British, so keeping women from voting here won't have any effect on her or her spewings.
Besides, without the 19th amendment, I wouldn't be allowed to vote. I kind of call that cutting off my nose to spite my face.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at February 11, 2003 at 04:06 AMThat was grumpy. I realize that was said in jest. I get grumpy when I can't sleep. (Can't resist a last dig, though: what are we gonna do with stupid y-chromosome people? You know, the ones who write in "Mumia" in the write-in candidate line, and drive ancient VW buses covered in anti-SUV stickers.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at February 11, 2003 at 04:21 AMAllow me, please, to go all womanly in your comments: strong, intransigent, having more fury than hell after being scorned, unable to stomach one more stereotype, poorly written essay, or gratuitous overuse of Machiavelli when it's abundantly apparent that the writer hasn't read The Prince.
Gah. Just, gah.
Posted by: Tracey at February 11, 2003 at 09:31 AMAhhh, The Lifetime Channel. AKA, The "All Men Are Assholes Channel." Don't miss the Monday Night Rapist Movie, or the Thursday Matinee Featuring Victory Over Abusive Alcoholic Husband. Love that channel. Much more informative than Oprah.
Posted by: sharkman at February 11, 2003 at 09:43 AMThe people who are most upset about sanctions are largely the same people who, ten years ago, called for sanctions as an alternative to finishing the war.
Posted by: david foster at February 11, 2003 at 12:11 PMAndrea, you should have kept reading. This column is a laff riot. Margo Kingston meets Barbara Kingsolver, and they slam hormone pills like there's no tomorrow.
Which there won't be, if the men have their way! Waaaaaa!
Poor dear, she's probably pregnant.
At least now I know I need never take Alibhai-Brown seriously again.
Posted by: Angie Schultz at February 11, 2003 at 02:23 PMGood grief, you're right, it's like seeing Princess Di's ghost being channelled through Oprah, only even ickier. I was tired last night, and really did stop reading after her description of George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld as "brawny" men. Guh, are all English men really so weedy that those two look "brawny" in comparison? (I would call them "in good shape for their respective ages" at most.)
Posted by: Andrea Harris at February 11, 2003 at 02:35 PMAnother one from the "if women ran things, there'd be no violence, just peace, love and free ice cream" crowd. Not only do some people actually believe such idiocy, some of them are actually professors of international relations. Methinks Margaret Thatcher might disagree. Along with nearly all the other real female leaders in history, many of whom led their countries into war.
Posted by: David Jaroslav at February 11, 2003 at 03:10 PMOh lord, and I just ate....
I am so sick and tired of everyone from the nekkid women anti-warniks, to this columnist, acting as if they speak for women. Every time I hear them open their big mouths and make some sort of "listen to the women/if women ran things" statment, I want to leap through the TV screen and bang their heads against the wall! (can someone work on a way for me to do that?)
Yeah, you can see just how loving and peaceful I am, huh?
Posted by: Ith at February 11, 2003 at 04:09 PMI would like to know where some women get off on how 'women are far more peaceful than men.'
While it's true men are generally more capable of inflicting physical violence (due to their generally greater strength) men and women are about equally suited mentally for violence.
My own personal experience confirms this. I used to be involved in martial arts (not self-defense classes---real in depth hand-to-hand combat training). Most of the students were men but there was a significant percentage of women (about 40% I would guess). When watching someone sparring with an opponent, you can usually gauge their mind's propensity and ability to use violent force, and from what I saw there was no difference there between men and women. Women seem to be as capable of using violence as men from a mental standpoint. At least that's my observation.
Posted by: James P at February 11, 2003 at 11:27 PMGOD puts negatives in our lifes so that we can turn these negatives around and make positives out of what we have learned so that others can be taught that we can make a better difference.
Life is all about learning and teaching, teaching and learning.