Rick Stansberger (email@example.com)
Sun, 19 Nov 2000 18:28:47 -0700
The growling noises were my way of pointing out that you had left the neo-cortex
and had downshifted into the mammal brain, and that your attacks lacked
discipline and persuasive power in favor of push.
If you can say pig and cute in the same sentence, it's clear you haven't spent a
lot of time around those animals. Pigs are smart and curious. They also have a
self-possession that many humans should envy. And they're very difficult to
control. That's why they're de-tusked when young.
Truth be told, I'm glad you're going to work in the courts. I suspect that
they're more used to that kind of aggression than average folks. You'll
alienate most of those, as you seem to be doing here.
We need verbal bashers in any revolution. But maybe not as many as most people
And bringing the male-female thing into it is your baggage, not mine. The fact
that you're female and I'm male is way too little to hang that charge on. You
just appear to be reaching with that one.
When I see such a lack of discipline in an arguing partner I relax. I know I
can't persuade them, and I know they can't hurt me or my arguments. You wanna
be a warrior? Aim your shots.
"Dawn F. Harkness" wrote:
> Hmm. Interesting post Rick. I'm glad to know that on the substantive
> issues, we are on the same page. Of course, I just need to take exception
> with a few minor points. (Now there's a surprise! Head for the hills folks
> if you feel the need.) You have just got to snap out of leaping to
> incorrect assumptions. I am neither a city nor country kind of girl. My
> varied experiences have taught me that when a girl hears those noises it is
> more likely to be the sound of dogs than anything else. If that was your
> way of complimenting me by comparing me to wildlife, I am sorry I missed it.
> It sure seemed like an insult to me. I know I didn't have a cute little
> piggy in mind when I was talking about you. I definitely meant to convey the
> image of a good old fashioned chauvinist pig, in case you missed it. But
> you are amusing, and I don't want to stay annoyed with you, so I will reach
> out to accept the goodwill you have extended and hope we can move on to
> debating the issues and not the personalities. But as much as you feel my
> "warrior" approach fails in some situations, I would point out that your
> jokes can only work if they are funny and and appropriate for the time and
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Stansberger <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: email@example.com
> Date: Sunday, November 19, 2000 3:42 PM
> Subject: Re: DSM: I agree with Rick
> >I don't disagree with Dawn on what really matters. I just make gentle fun
> >those who put on the war paint where I would find it counterproductive.
> >Revolutions need all kinds of folks: tooth-grinding warriors, spies,
> >marketeers, mediators, traders and tricksters.
> >Btw, I can tell Dawn's a city girl. She assumed that dogs are the only
> >that growl. What about mountain lions and bears? (Birds in their own way
> >growl -- making deep sounds to warn enemies.) Would you be insulted to be
> >compared to a lion or a bear, Dawn? I myself would be honored.
> >Dawn called me a pig (another fine animal I don't mind being compared to)
> >then said something like if I wanted to waste my time trying to persuade
> >ignorant, that was fine with her. In her own way she was acknowledging
> >we're on the same side. We're expressing preferences. I couldn't do her
> job as
> >well as she, and likely vice versa. We're both passionate people. She's
> >passionately assertive, I'm passionately indirect. In the Chinese
> >system, she's metal and I'm water.
> >I never said her warrior ways were totally inappropriate. I just think
> >won't work with people of good will who might join up once they understood.
> >Tradschools are evil. They maim kids AND the adults who work in them. But
> as I
> >said before, if they all burned down tonight, tomorrow people would start
> >rebuilding them because the vast majority of them still don't know a thing
> >the Sudbury model, and of the ones who do, the vast majority (imho) don't
> >it. The idea's "out there" all right, and there's a lot of persuading yet
> to be
> >Evfocus@aol.com wrote:
> >> Dawn,
> >> I find little value in your tirades, its not a discussion when someone
> >> you their opinions and is not open to yours.
> >> Evelyn
> >"Weirdness abounds and shatters our illusion of order. Heh-heh. All the
> >dust is being blown out from under the carpet. Wonderful stuff!"
> > Wanda Hamilton-Quinn
-- "Weirdness abounds and shatters our illusion of order. Heh-heh. All the dust is being blown out from under the carpet. Wonderful stuff!"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sun Nov 19 2000 - 21:54:07 EST