frat boy go home

Cabanasprings · Post by **Cabanasprings** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 4:28 pm

It's "Bike Pride"

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 7:33 pm

lurker wrote:
I must have men hallucinating when I read the who-what-where.

Did it never occur to you that maybe, when they said 'for women' they meant that it was for women to ride in? Not that it was meant for women ONLY?

You don't throw a parade and expect no one to watch. Why is this concept so hard for you?

My opinion about CT is based on both what the Who-What-Where says and what I *think* CT is about based on what I've read: an event for women without male influences and distractions.

Regarding throwing a parade: Like I keep saying, the participants are ther for each other, not an audience. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Like I think I said earlier: can't we give women their own space and time to do their own thing? I don't understand why so many of you men who are supposed to be somewhat more enlightened insist on attending. I just keep thinking that if you understood why it's important for men to not be at CT that you would understand my opinion that it's for women only. You understand if your wife or girlfriend wants to have a "girls' night out" but not that some women at Burning Man might want to have an event without male distractions. Maybe I'm wrong about my opinion. I wish someone who knew more about the purpose of CT would clear this up (I mean an organizer, not a participant).

Cabanasprings · Post by **Cabanasprings** » Fri Oct 14, 2005 8:45 am

Dallas wrote - Maybe I'm wrong about my opinion.

Brother - Your opinion may not be shared but it can't be wrong.

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Fri Oct 14, 2005 9:18 am

Cabanasprings wrote:Zaphod - you are so correct I am happy to admit that I don't know that much about the marines. But apparently I know more than you do.

I was a Marine. My brother is a Marine. He just came home from Iraq this week.

You're simply clueless. What you think you know is meaningless. Now, shoo! Begone!

-zb

Cabanasprings · Post by **Cabanasprings** » Fri Oct 14, 2005 9:24 am

Z - I owe your brother gratitude but you sir have no honor and therefor do not deserve my respect.

lurker · Post by **lurker** » Fri Oct 14, 2005 9:29 am

Dallas, the whole purpose is the flaunting--and flouting. If it were not, why have it in public? Why not have it in a place where they can be guaranteed no male distraction? If it were to be a women-only private celebration, then why ride into an area where there are sure to be men--and oglers--and cameras? Why not keep it from the merest chance of men interfering?

But they don't--and they haven't. They ride through, among and around men. Naked and painted and glorious. They don't hide away---as society demands they do. They are there, in your face, poised and proud. Delightful and defiant.

The CT you think of does not happen. It does not forcibly exclude men. It does not exist for the sole purpose of the participants. It does not.

So yes, your opinion is wrong. Not that there might not be women in CT who share your feelings, nor that those feelings are, in and of themselves, wrong. Your opinion is wrong because it runs contrary to the observed phenomena of CT each year. It does not accept the actual occurence--instead in is based on what you think CT should be.

And that leads me to....why?

Why should men avert their eyes? Or stay away? Why should men be excluded?

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:49 pm

Cabanasprings wrote:Dallas wrote - Maybe I'm wrong about my opinion.

Brother - Your opinion may not be shared but it can't be wrong.

Sorry. I meant "in how my opinion was formed".

Thanks for calling me "brother". That gives me a warm fuzzy when I hear it and when I say it to other burners (the only people I call brother or sister). :)

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:53 pm

Cabanasprings wrote:Z - I owe your brother gratitude but you sir have no honor and therefor do not deserve my respect.

You know nothing of my honor and I've not asked for your respect. It means absolutely nothing to me.

-c
(Tip: If you don't respect me, don't refer to me as "sir.")

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:55 pm

lurker wrote:Why should men avert their eyes? Or stay away? Why should men be excluded?

Why should there be girls'-only schools?

[rant]Damn my mother for being a feminist.[/rant]

joel the ornery · Post by **joel the ornery** » Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:10 pm

DallasPlaya wrote:
lurker wrote:Why should men avert their eyes? Or stay away? Why should men be excluded?
Why should there be girls'-only schools?

[rant]Damn my mother for being a feminist.[/rant]

does he have nice tits?

Cabanasprings · Post by **Cabanasprings** » Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:59 pm

ZaphodBurner wrote:
Cabanasprings wrote:Z - I owe your brother gratitude but you sir have no honor and therefor do not deserve my respect.
You know nothing of my honor and I've not asked for your respect. It means absolutely nothing to me.

-c
(Tip: If you don't respect me, don't refer to me as "sir.")

Thanks for the tip.

No honorable person would proclaim to have the right to rape my wife.

montana wildhack · Post by **montana wildhack** » Sat Oct 15, 2005 6:54 am

i'm not interested in getting involved in this discussion again...i just wanted to add an interesting aside...i attended catholic school from k-12. it was boys and girls from k-6, and girls only from 7-12.

and if the history of my school serves me correctly, it was all girls because the upper grades were initially a boarding school, and in many cases a training academy for the benedictine sisters.

in the 25 odd years since i graduated, they have dropped 9-12 and made the all k-8 co-ed. the all boy's school down the street has now become coed 7-12.

i think by the time i got there, it was still all girl's because of tradition, chi-chi factor, and control. it was the de rigueur threat for acting out girls (boys got the military school threat) to be sent there.

if our uniform skirts were thought to be too short, they were measured with a tape by the gym teacher! she actually carried around a seam ripper to drop the hems.

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Sat Oct 15, 2005 6:59 am

Hey all I know is that my female children (when I have them -- anyone interested?) will be going to all-girls schools for at least some years of their education. Having been in the military, I know what it's like to have single-sex cameraderie without distractions and what I've heard and read is that it's good for girls (stronger personalities, different learning styles, etc.).

montana wildhack · Post by **montana wildhack** » Sat Oct 15, 2005 7:08 am

is hockaday still all girls?

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Sat Oct 15, 2005 10:00 am

Montana, you went to catholic school??? K---12 ??
I only made it 1--9. then we had a parting of the ways. It might have been because I was selling firecrackers to get my lunch money. Or it might have been because I wrote something disparaging on the blackboard about the religion teacher,,Father Maurice Oflyn. He later got the head cheerleader knocked up and married her.

Catholic school is a great place,,,,a major in guilt and a minor in stupidity.
Man can't create, only god can create. It's a mortal sin to touch yourself.
There were innumerable things that could send you irrevocably to the arms of Beelzebub. Eat meat on friday and you're in deep shit.

Many years ago, the greatest theological argument was,,,how many angels could dance on the head of a pin. It lasted 50 years.
They're still arguing wether or not jesus had a navel. [immaculate conception].
George Carlin did a hilarious routine about "Sister Mary Joseph of the Holy Agony". Kid can't write because the nuns whack his fingers with their rulers. I still have my old report cards. I got 98 on the Iowa tests and a D- in handwriting. I got many a whack for that.
I think that the rationale for separate sex classes was,,,,boys are a lot more likely to act up if there are girls around. Obviously that would disrupt the classroom. I believe it's true.
Dan

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Sat Oct 15, 2005 10:20 am

montana wildhack wrote:is hockaday still all girls?

As far as I know. I hope to NOT be in Dallas when I start having kids. In fact, I'm thinking that the time is right (within a year) for me to move west; hoping to do that before Burning Man '06.

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Mon Oct 17, 2005 11:36 am

Cabanasprings wrote: No honorable person would proclaim to have the right to rape my wife.

I didn't say anything about raping your wife or having any right to do so, making the claim a product of your imagination. Stop making stuff up.

I'd seduce her fair and square.

-c

EvilDustBooger · Post by **EvilDustBooger** » Mon Oct 17, 2005 12:29 pm

ZaphodBurner wrote:
Cabanasprings wrote: No honorable person would proclaim to have the right to rape my wife.
I didn't say anything about raping your wife or having any right to do so, making the claim a product of your imagination. Stop making stuff up.

I'd seduce her fair and square.

-c

I am so regretful.
My guess is that the thrill is gone and
the romance is over between you two.

So sorry to hear about the continuing problems.

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 8:54 am

EvilDustBooger wrote:
ZaphodBurner wrote: I'd seduce her fair and square.

-c
I am so regretful.
My guess is that the thrill is gone and
the romance is over between you two.

We tried counseling but I tortured/seduced the therapists.

...it's what you call radically inclusive.
-c

EvilDustBooger · Post by **EvilDustBooger** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:05 am

Buy yer books, send ya to school..
Whadda ya do?
Fuck the teacher....

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 4:27 pm

EvilDustBooger wrote:Buy yer books, send ya to school..
Whadda ya do?
Fuck the teacher....

LOL!
A friend of mine hooked up with his math instructor in college. She was a bona fide hottie.

Sad thing is, she only gave him a B. We still haven't let him live that down.

-c

theCryptofishist · Post by **theCryptofishist** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 4:35 pm

Just not a whizz at curvilinear geometry I guess.

lurker · Post by **lurker** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 10:43 am

I got really stuck on 'why are there all-girl schools?'

I tried to figure out what, if anything, this had to do with the conversation

Then, Dallas comments about Catholic school made me wonder if this whole thing isn't seated in Dallas perceptions--that Dallas can't accept the prurience of his own thoughts during CT and thus feels that all men should just stay away. That it is Dallas own inability to deal with the fact that we are all sexual objects in some way, at some times, that brings him to the conclusion that the women who participate in CT want to be--and must be--ignored by men.

Of course, my analysis could be wrong, but you have to question the thought process that can look at an all girls school and decide that it is the equvalent of a half-naked bike ride in the desert

joel the ornery · Post by **joel the ornery** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 10:52 am

i am all for an all school girl half naked bike ride!

ok, ok, ok ok... it should read.... half naked school girl bike ride!

EvilDustBooger · Post by **EvilDustBooger** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 11:14 am

I`m with cheese dick on that one.
100 % .

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 12:32 pm

lurker wrote:I got really stuck on 'why are there all-girl schools?'

I tried to figure out what, if anything, this had to do with the conversation

Then, Dallas comments about Catholic school made me wonder if this whole thing isn't seated in Dallas perceptions--that Dallas can't accept the prurience of his own thoughts during CT and thus feels that all men should just stay away. That it is Dallas own inability to deal with the fact that we are all sexual objects in some way, at some times, that brings him to the conclusion that the women who participate in CT want to be--and must be--ignored by men.

Of course, my analysis could be wrong, but you have to question the thought process that can look at an all girls school and decide that it is the equvalent of a half-naked bike ride in the desert

Did you actually read my post about why all-girls' schools are so good for girls? I don't remember saying anything about religion, either (if it was a Catholic girls' school, that's incidental).

My "inability to deal with the fact" that you are all sexual objects in some way? Too funny. My point is that there are many valid reasons for women to have women-only functions just as it's good for girls to go to all-girls' schools (to a point of course).

If you really want to understand what I'm saying instead of trying to find some fault in my argument, try reading what I've written.

lurker · Post by **lurker** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 1:47 pm

y'know, joel, I knew that was going to happen. You may have just named a manga

Dallas, we're not talking about whether it's good or bad for women to have all female things--we're talking about whather CT is meant to be a male-exclusionary female event.

I have read your argument. I found your conclusions regarding CT to be erroneous--and your method of reaching them at odds with observed reality.

Right now you are subtly shifting the discussion--to the issue of whather all-female enviroments are good for women/young girls. Said topic is irrelevent to the discussion and is clearly an attempt to avoid admitting that your conclusions are at odds with any observable reality.

Which, I must admit, is not always a bad thing. But getting pompous about it is.

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 2:33 pm

lurker wrote:y'know, joel, I knew that was going to happen. You may have just named a manga

Dallas, we're not talking about whether it's good or bad for women to have all female things--we're talking about whather CT is meant to be a male-exclusionary female event.

I have read your argument. I found your conclusions regarding CT to be erroneous--and your method of reaching them at odds with observed reality.

Right now you are subtly shifting the discussion--to the issue of whather all-female enviroments are good for women/young girls. Said topic is irrelevent to the discussion and is clearly an attempt to avoid admitting that your conclusions are at odds with any observable reality.

Which, I must admit, is not always a bad thing. But getting pompous about it is.

Um, no; I'm not shifting the discussion. I posted about girls' schools and women-only events to point out why it's important for women to have their own events free of male influences. I said that because I *think* CT is supposed to be an event for women only. Maybe I'm wrong. All I was trying to do is point out my reasoning for my opinion.

"Observable reality" has nothing to do with how things should be. Just because men are going to CT doesn't mean that they should be. That'd be like saying, "Well, there are lots of picture-taking perverts at CT who will be masturbating to these pictures at home later so that must be how it should be." Is that how it should be?

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:02 pm

lurker wrote:I got really stuck on 'why are there all-girl schools?'

You saw those Kiss videos too? Dude, that was, like, 1988.

lurker wrote:you have to question the thought process that can look at an all girls school and decide that it is the equvalent of a half-naked bike ride in the desert

Friend, there isn't a heterosexual ex-teenage boy in the United States of America who hasn't gone somewhere near there. I'm just sayin'...

-c
It's Wendy O. Williams' fault!

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 6:33 pm

[quote="DallasPlaya"]

[rant]Damn my mother for being a feminist.[/rant][/quote]

"Maybe I'm wrong. All I was trying to do is point out my reasoning for my opinion."

Dallas, everyone's opinion is colored by their upbringing. I'm sure that your opinion is correct for some of the participants in CT.

At the other end of the spectrum; I've been to a strip joint on "talent night" There are many women who can't wait to take off their clothes in front of a crowd. The participants at CT run the gamut, I'm sure.
One opinion or one rule can't be right all the time. Agree to disagree.