From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #30
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume99/30
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------"
To: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
Reply-To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se

------------------------------

Content-Type: text/plain

blakes7-d Digest				Volume 99 : Issue 30

Today's Topics:
	 RE: [B7L] The Woman in B7
	 Re: [B7L] B7 characters and dustbin lids
	 [B7L] Some random thoughts on Avon
	 Re: [B7L] Trolling 301: Comparative Anatomy
	 Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas and stuff
	 Re: [B7L]
	 Re: [B7L] Trolling 301: Comparative Anatomy
	 Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
	 Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
	 Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
	 Re: [B7L] Re:Deutsch/English Ubersetzung
	 Re: [B7L] Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids
	 Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
	 RE:[B7L] Trolling 101
	 Re: [B7L]
	 Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
	 [B7L] Re: b7spin: Re: sloganeering
	 Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
	 Re: [B7L] Trolling 301: Comparative Anatomy
	 [B7L] re:remember me?
	 Re: [B7L] B7 characters and dustbin lids
	 Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
	 Re: [B7L] re:remember me?
	 Re: [B7L] Re: Horizon competition
	 RE: [B7L] The Woman in B7
	 Re: [B7L] re:remember me?
	 Re: RE:[B7L] Trolling 101

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:21:09 -0000
From: Louise Rutter <Louise.Rutter@btinternet.com>
To: "'B7 Lysator'" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L] The Woman in B7
Message-ID: <01BE40C4.D2134B00@host5-99-48-11.btinternet.com>

I'm a day or so late, but that's hardly unusual:

>At some point, especially following a great catastrophe like the one 
hinted at
>in B7, social scientists and engineers will realize that society has 
degraded
>because of the disintegration of the family unit, brought on by the 
failure of
>women to remain home with their chiudren and maintain the family unit (ie-
>cook, clean, etc.)  As a result, women would be required by the 
Fewderation to
><return to the "Leave It To Beaver" mode of doing things.  Servalan would 
be
>barefoot and pregnant, Soolin would be vacuming the rug, Dayna would be
>dusting etc.  Of course, malcontents like Avon would not exist because a 
happy
>home would have made him a happy productive individual.

The problem with this arguement, of course, is that not all women are by 
nature of the nurturing type. Children whose mothers are alcoholics are 
probably traumatised by her presence rather than nurtured, to take an 
extreme example. If your theory holds any merit, of course, then these poor 
mothers are themselves the victims of poor parenting. Personally, I don't 
think  that's true in anything like all cases, but I'll run with it for a 
while.
So, assuming your band of social engineers manages to gain sufficient power 
to enforce major sociological change, what are they going to do with these 
non-nurturing types? To achieve their dream society, they not only have to 
ensure that all mothers stay at home with the kids, they have to ensure 
that poor nurturers don't breed at all - their kids would be too likely to 
be dysfunctional. We're now into the realms of enforced sterilisation, but 
who do you know who to sterilise? How can you predict who will make good, 
nurturing mothers? Some terribly professional career women suddenly go all 
mushy when they have a child. Others want to continue their lives just as 
they did before the kid was born. You could give young people a dry run by 
testing their nurturing reaction to a pet, but that's not foolproof - 
personally, I go all soggy at the sight of a kitten, but I don't want 
babies anywhere near me.

I think your social engineers would be in for a rough ride and a good deal 
of disillusionment.

Louise

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 13:13:47 PST
From: "Penny Dreadful" <pdreadful@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] B7 characters and dustbin lids
Message-ID: <19990115211347.15885.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain

Iain said:

>What about the others?  Blake would be about the only other character 
>I'd trust to bring up kids...

...Penny opens her mouth to make some *extremely* tasteless joke 
concerning Blake's alleged crimes...then forcibly stifles herself. Awk! 
Awk!

-- Penny "Even I'm Not That Dreadful" Dreadful 

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 23:06:58 -0000
From: "+ +" <blakean@my-dejanews.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Some random thoughts on Avon
Message-ID: <PHCIGFPMJMDIAAAA@my-dejanews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I always thought it was interesting how the series shifted from being a story "about" Blake to be a story "about" Avon, and when you watch it from the beginning it almost seems like it was intended that way all along.  Especially in Avon's first episode where they're being held prisoner, with Avon sitting in front and Blake and Jenna are behind him.  But at first he's presented as the outsider, and the one who most closely represents what Blake is fighting against, since he would be willing to sell them out the Federation if it benefited him.  If I recall, he was there for reasons similar to Vila, except it was the white-collar version, which makes him the most unsympathetic character in the eyes of the viewers.  If Blake was a symbol for idealism and hope, Avon was a symbol of cynicism and destructive negativity.  Of course, Avon didn't see it this way; he thought his views were pragmatic, and Blake was a foolish, extremist dreamer.  Never mind the fact that he was willing to let Blake and the others rot on Cygnus Alpha while he and Jenna took off with the riches in the Liberator.  However, in later episodes he does save Blake's life, even when there's nothing to gain from it, which shows us his character is more complex than we're initially shown.  He denies Blake's views have any validity, because his experience has always shown him otherwise, but there is small part of him that, like Jenna, wants to believe in Blake, and more specifically what he stands for.  Thus, Avon's split personality.  Part of him is jealous of Blake, because he's the leader and has complete control over his own destiny, and part of him secretly admired Blake and sees him as a salvation from a cruel and meaningless universe.  After Blake left, Avon, and his world, slowly began to degenerate.  Even though he searched for Blake, his dark side didn't want to let go once it got control.  After Warlord, he didn't really have much choice, and went to rejoin Blake.  By this time, he clearly knows that he's a psychopath, and even says so.  Now Blake was the only hope he had left before going over the edge, and it appeared he may have sold them out to the Federation.  I think Avon understood what Blake said, but there was too much doubt in his mind and he was already slipping, because Tarrant telling him that Blake betrayed him was the pebble that started an avalanche.  He tried to battle against it, but it was futile, and before he knew it Blake was shot, along with all of _his_ "foolish" dreams and hopes.

Well, that's just my opinion.

"It is sometimes an appropriate response to reality to go insane."
       - Philip K. Dick



-----== Sent via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/  Easy access to 50,000+ discussion forums

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 20:43:37 -0800
From: Pat Patera <pussnboots@geocities.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 301: Comparative Anatomy
Message-ID: <369EC779.4C4A@geocities.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Penny Dreadful wrote:

> Of course the true measure of a troll's success is the sheer amount of
> vitrolic verbiage incited: I invite anyone with even less of a life than
> me to do a comparative study on followups to the two posts in
> question... 
> -- Penny "Religion Immigration Vivisection Abortion" Dreadful

How dare you champion the vivisection of immigrant Deltas who fled Earth
to avoid religious prosecution, only to find themselves aborted of their
vital organs? The practice of selling Delta testicles and placentas as
lucky rabbit foot type charms and trendy water bottle holders ranks
right up there with the practice of using andromedean slime to make
"pretty" lava lamps for the amusement of jaded federation fleet
officers. I am appalled at your lack of sensitivity with regard to those
poor, homeless deltas who were forced to immigrate rather than camp out
on the steps of the Washington State public library when the federation
refused to provide the lazy drones with tv dinners, heated apartments,
color virtual reality devices and limitless cranks of soma. You are a
heartless, boorish TROLL!

>I do, I do! I was hiding in it the other day (for reasons which need not 
>concern you, youngster) and I kept pushing further and further back 
>through layer upon layer of fur coats (hmm-hmm) and then suddenly I fell 
>out into this magical land which was ruled by this *evil* White Queen... 

hehehehehehehehe - bewitching wardrobe jolly :-D
Pat P

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 20:59:40 -0800
From: Pat Patera <pussnboots@geocities.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas and stuff
Message-ID: <369ECB3C.33BB@geocities.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Neil Faulkner wrote:
> Edith wrote
>>... Many poor people in the past also had a role in their
> >society, and felt worthy in their society. You would find this be the
> >case in many non western societies as well. However, many western poor
> >people do not have feelings of worth in our societies.

I certainly feel subordinate to machines, especially cars, which seem to
be valued, petted and polished, put up on pedestals, and generally
worshipped far more than are people - or even gods - these days.

> > I think, in a way, this is what Blakes 7 addressed in a way- how people
> >are turned into nothing more than mass consumers of commodities, 

Most insightful. This is exactly how mass media / advertising makes me
feel. I despise the term consumer. Whatever happened to citizen? It
implied some responsibility to existence besides infantile in-sucking.
>
> ... The current
> affliction of self-worthlessness in society arises from five converging
> factors. ... <BIG snip>
> I think the crisis facing the oxymoron of Western Civilisation is our
> inability to come to terms with our own supreme unimportance.

Neil, your analysis is stunning in its clarity and completeness. I agree
absolutely. Now, having spent this entire evening in-sucking 130 posts
(whew! skip a day and suffer the deluge!) I wonder: what do you do in
real life that allows you to write these amazingly intelligent and in
depth essays? PhD in psychology? Is this your version of publish or
perish?
Curious Pat

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:54:33 EST
From: Tigerm1019@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L]
Message-ID: <28f30a24.369fe349@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 99-01-15 06:52:04 EST, Stephen wrote:

<< Space Command Headquarters. Servalan is sitting on a comfy chair with a 
 glass of that green stuff. A handsome young lieutenant is feeding her 
 Ferrero Rocher chocolates. Two mutoids (male) enter bringing Supestud 
 bound and gagged. They ungag him, tie his hands to the hook of a crane 
 which lifts him up and dangles him over a tank filled with piranhas.
  >>

But isn't this cruel to the poor piranhas?  He might give them indigestion.  

Tiger M

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 18:49:59 -0600
From: Lisa Williams <lcw@dallas.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 301: Comparative Anatomy
Message-Id: <199901160051.SAA15547@mail.dallas.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Penny Dreadful wrote:

>Of course the true measure of a troll's success is the sheer amount of 
>vitrolic verbiage incited: I invite anyone with even less of a life than 
>me to do a comparative study on followups to the two posts in 
>question...

Ah, but the incitement of vitriol is more associated with flamebaiting than
with trolling. As flamebait, I readily admit that SupeStud00 carried the
day -- it was quite a classic example, misspellings and all. The vitriol
count was a bit low, but that's because most of the folks here aren't too
easily baited. That sort of thing works better on some of the more keyed-up
Usenet groups.

Now, with a proper troll, the objective is to get people to "fall for it"
-- to think you're seriously stating something when in fact you weren't
serious at all. Neil's little offhand remark evidently had several people
trying to figure out how to derive fascism from the works of Tanith Lee,
and getting all confused over it. That makes it a successful troll. (I even
gave it a bit of thought myself: "What, it was *fascist* green vampire
sand...? Nah, gotta be a troll.") Unlike flamebait, producing noisy
emotional responses is not usually the primary objective of trolling
(though there is a certain amount of overlap, and heated discussions
certainly can occur in either case.)

	- Lisa
_____________________________________________________________
Lisa Williams: lcw@dallas.net or lwilliams@rsc.raytheon.com

Lisa's Video Frame Capture Library: http://lcw.simplenet.com/
New Riders of the Golden Age: http://www.warhorse.com/

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:10:10 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
Message-ID: <dc9d02db.369fe6f2@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 1/14/99 3:53:37 AM EST, N.Faulkner@tesco.net writes:

<<  How absolutely true.  At last I've seen the light,>>

Glad that I could be of service.


<< How right you are to point out that working mothers are a recent social
 development with no historical precedent whatsoever, and that there is no
 other substitute for maintaining the family unit>>

There is no substitute for the mother who remains at home.  IMHO she is more
valuable than the woman who squanders her family and ruins her children by
trying to play in man's world.

<< (given that men are biologically incapable of cooking, cleaning, and
etcetering,>>

Not so much incapable as not efficient for the task.  Men should be the
hunters, gatherers, and women the home managers.  Its a force of nature.

<< and that even
 if they were there would be no prospect in both parents sharing domestic
 responsibilities).>>

Better than both parents working and neglecting those responsibilities, which
is what usually happens.

<<  It's nice to know I'm not the only one who believes that
 the division of labour along gender lines is genetically determined, rather
 than the product of so-called economic forces, and it's so reassuring to
 realise that the nuclear family having to cope alone without assistance from
 an extended community has nothing to do with urbanisation and the need for
 social mobility in the wake of the Industrial Revolution.  And how
 refreshing to know that our lives willl one day be structured for us by
 social scientists and engineers (social or otherwise) rather than the
 self-serving decisions of politicians and the commercial interests that put
 and keep them in power.>>

Glad to see I am not the only one cursed with genius.  Welcome to the club.

<<  Then, as you say, we will see an end to
 malcontented men, because any mother that raises a malcontented child has
 failed in her task,>>

YES!!!  YES!!!!  You understand!!!!!!

<< and once women are put in their proper natural place
 they can never fail because it is proper and natural for them and there will
 be no distractions like work to upset their hormones and stop them rearing
 children properly without any need for instruction or experience
whatsoever.>>

Yes....we agree.

<< Just one small picky point, if I may: wouldn't Dayna vacuum the rug while
 Soolin did the dusting?>>

Does it matter?

  Neil the Enlightened >>


Yes, I believe so.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:13:21 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Message-ID: <6695c167.369fe7b1@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 1/14/99 9:41:34 AM EST, N.Faulkner@tesco.net writes:

<< >In my scenario, the all male dominated government would probably pass a
law
 >requiring women to wear stiletto heels, so as to improve their figures
 (from
 >the male prespective.)  Servalan would be allowed to wear the heels, she
 just
 >wouldn't be allowed access to the throne.  Perhaps she, Jenna, Cally, Dayna
 >and Soolin would form their own resistance of supports..........
 >
 I'm just wondering how long you can keep this up.  For as long as you want,
 I suspect. >>

Keep what up?

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:16:56 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: lcw@dallas.net, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Message-ID: <5d1e2eaa.369fe888@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 1/14/99 7:48:15 PM EST, lcw@dallas.net writes:

<< 
 (Is this the same person who opined some time back that the reason so many
 female B7 fans like Avon is because he was a real macho male instead of
 some sensitive wimpy type? I seem to recall the style.) >>

Nope, not me.  Though it does make sense.  Avon was "macho", for lack of a
better word....and its the real reason women like him, whether they admit it
or not.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:18:10 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: N.Faulkner@tesco.net, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re:Deutsch/English Ubersetzung
Message-ID: <375cf642.369fe8d2@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 1/14/99 7:52:12 PM EST, N.Faulkner@tesco.net writes:

<< 
 It is a statement to the effect that the opinions proffered by StupeSud00
 might have market potential as quality fertiliser. >>

Then don't read them, but my opinion is just as valuable as anyone's opinion.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:25:28 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids
Message-ID: <c2804018.369fea88@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 1/14/99 9:58:19 PM EST, avona@jps.net writes:

<<  Re: The Idiot's theory that is women stayed home with kids, there'd be
 no social troubles.>>

Referring to me?  Have we met?
 
 <<What about fathers? They can be so emotionally abusive no amount of
 motherly nurturing could counteract damage to a child's psyche.>>

A good father would never be this way.  What does it have to do with my
argument?

<< I'm dealing right now with a friend with a father from Hell.>>

Sorry about your friend.

<< Furthermore, stay-at-home mothers would be less able to counteract the
 damage done.>>

Stay at home mothers are stronger becuase of their connection to their family,
than mothers who have thrown themselves into the world of man's work.

 << Invalid theory even within it's internal logic, regardless of any other
 competing theories about personality, child development, sexual
 politics, etc. >>

Very valid thoery because it is so.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:22:35 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
Message-ID: <db1f6555.369fe9db@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 1/14/99 9:58:15 PM EST, avona@jps.net writes:

<<  If people are still breeding in the future at the rate that demands
 women stay home to look after kids, we are doomed. We are going to
 stabilize the population. Women who want kids will have them, and
 hopefully economically be able to stay home-->>

The way it should be IMHO.

<< or allow the father to
 stay home and nurture them. Men ARE capable of that, you know.>>

Men are capable of nurturing emotionally but not physically.  They don't have
breast, and therefore can not nurse.

<< Other women will have no children whatsoever and therefore have no
 reason to stay home.>>

IMHO, an incomplete woman.  Having a husband and children are two necessary
elements to creating a complete woman.....even in B7 times it seems.

<< Soolin had her parents killed, and would hunt the writer of this
 mindless drivel down and shoot him. >>

Soolin (though physically very attractive) is not truly representative of a
real woman.....or at least my definition of a real woman.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:39:16 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: RE:[B7L] Trolling 101
Message-ID: <b596e491.369fedc4@aol.com>
Content-type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="part0_916450757_boundary"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--part0_916450757_boundary
Content-ID: <0_916450757@inet_out.mail.aol.com.1>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

In a message dated 1/15/99 8:37:53 PM EST, SupeStud00 writes:

<< 
 In a message dated 1/15/99 7:04:04 PM EST, Spudgun@dial.pipex.com writes:
 
 <<  I think SuperStew's point is very well thought out.>>
 
 That's S-T-U-D, SuperS-T-U-D as in a highly intelligent guy, who is extremely
good looking and gets all of the women......not unlike Avon.  A guy that women
hat to love but love anyway.  That is I.  Any AOL members out there should
check my profile for the ultimate truth.
 
 << I personally keep Jenni
  on a length of chain between the kitchen and the bedroom and whip her
  mercilessly when she speaks 'out of turn'. >>
 
 I can relate.
 
 <>
 
 It's not stereotyping.....its the truth.
 
 << It's a long time since a child of five knew the real meaning of the word
  work and this is basically down to the degradation of the family unit >>
 
 Yes....YES.....by golly you have it.  Welcome to the ranks of the geniuses.
 
  


--part0_916450757_boundary
Content-ID: <0_916450757@inet_out.mail.aol.com.2>
Content-type: message/rfc822
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-disposition: inline

From: SupeStud00@aol.com
Return-path: <SupeStud00@aol.com>
To: Spudgun@dial.pipex.com
Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:37:53 EST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 1/15/99 7:04:04 PM EST, Spudgun@dial.pipex.com writes:

<<  I think SuperStew's point is very well thought out.>>

That's S-T-U-D, SuperS-T-U-D as in a highly intelligent guy, who is extremely
good looking and gets all of the women......not unlike Avon.  A guy that women
hat to love but love anyway.  That is I.  Any AOL members out there should
check my profile for the ultimate truth.

<< I personally keep Jenni
 on a length of chain between the kitchen and the bedroom and whip her
 mercilessly when she speaks 'out of turn'. >>

I can relate.

<>

It's not stereotyping.....its the truth.

<< It's a long time since a child of five knew the real meaning of the word
 work and this is basically down to the degradation of the family unit >>

Yes....YES.....by golly you have it.  Welcome to the ranks of the geniuses.


--part0_916450757_boundary--

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:41:07 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: Tigerm1019@aol.com, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L]
Message-ID: <252117a1.369fee33@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 1/15/99 7:58:34 PM EST, Tigerm1019@aol.com writes:

<< 
 But isn't this cruel to the poor piranhas?  He might give them indigestion.
>>

Jealousy will get you nowhere.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:33:40 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
Message-ID: <462db4d2.369fec74@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 1/15/99 3:32:24 PM EST, Louise.Rutter@btinternet.com
writes:

<< The problem with this arguement, of course, is that not all women are by 
 nature of the nurturing type.>>

My belief is that they should be.  Those who are not end up raising children
with serious deficiencies.

<< Children whose mothers are alcoholics are 
 probably traumatised by her presence rather than nurtured, to take an 
 extreme example.>>

Agreed.

<< If your theory holds any merit, of course, then these poor 
 mothers are themselves the victims of poor parenting. Personally, I don't 
 think  that's true in anything like all cases, but I'll run with it for a 
 while.
 So, assuming your band of social engineers manages to gain sufficient power 
 to enforce major sociological change, what are they going to do with these 
 non-nurturing types?>>

Make them nurturing through some unknown process or eliminate them....the
Federation appears to be quite capable of both....brainwashing and
ruthlessness.

<< To achieve their dream society, they not only have to 
 ensure that all mothers stay at home with the kids, they have to ensure 
 that poor nurturers don't breed at all - their kids would be too likely to 
 be dysfunctional.>>

Agreed.

<< We're now into the realms of enforced sterilisation, but 
 who do you know who to sterilise? How can you predict who will make good, 
 nurturing mothers? Some terribly professional career women suddenly go all 
 mushy when they have a child.>>

Indications they have what it takes to be good mothers.

<< Others want to continue their lives just as 
 they did before the kid was born.>>

One possible reason Avon exists......or John Hinckley.....or Saddam
Hussein.......or Hitler........or Bill Clinton........

<< You could give young people a dry run by 
 testing their nurturing reaction to a pet, but that's not foolproof - 
 personally, I go all soggy at the sight of a kitten, but I don't want 
 babies anywhere near me.>>

I think the Federation would do more than a dry run.

 << I think your social engineers would be in for a rough ride and a good deal
 of disillusionment. >>


Not unlike the Federation.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 16:40:12 -0800
From: Pat Patera <pussnboots@geocities.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se, b7spin@metva.com.au
Subject: [B7L] Re: b7spin: Re: sloganeering
Message-ID: <369FDFEC.5C75@geocities.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

vera@c031.aone.net.au wrote:
> Hi Pat,
> >jumped this from the lysator list
> >(I hope you're on the spin list, Malissa)
> Yes I am.
A tv report from the beef council re: microwavable pot roast product: 
> >"The busy consumer can now enjoy an exceptional beef experience."
> 
> Shouldn't this be on Spacecity??
> 
> Blake: an exceptional beef experience.
> 
> Ah huh. Mm hmm.

<snort! choke! sputter! spew!> Malissa, you nearly made me spray coffee
all over the keyboard. baaad grrrl!
I love it!
Which naturally, leads me to:
Avon: the other white meat
Pat P

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:23:51 -0800
From: Pat Patera <pussnboots@geocities.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Message-ID: <36A00647.41D3@geocities.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Spudgum? Supersuds?
dodododo dodododo - You have just entered -- The Twilight Zone!
Surely this is not the familiar analytic INTJ lysator territory to which
I have become accustomed? 
I expect that like Liberator, I have been sucked into a black hole and
fallen into the hands of the Tharn's Grand Caliph - ouch! who is zapping
me with his evil shock stick. Stop! I'll talk! Orac is that little bald
dwarf still wearing last month's christmas tree lights. (scroll to
bottom of post, please, for more)
re:
SupeStud00@aol.com wrote: 
> Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:37:53 EST
> From: SupeStud00@aol.com
> To: Spudgun@dial.pipex.com
> In a message dated 1/15/99 7:04:04 PM EST, Spudgun@dial.pipex.com writes: 
> <<  I think SuperStew's point is very well thought out.>>
> That's S-T-U-D, SuperS-T-U-D as in a highly intelligent guy, who is extremely
> good looking and gets all of the women......not unlike Avon.  A guy that women
> hat to love but love anyway.  That is I.  Any AOL members out there should
> check my profile for the ultimate truth.
> << I personally keep Jenni
>  on a length of chain between the kitchen and the bedroom and whip her
>  mercilessly when she speaks 'out of turn'. >>
> I can relate. 
> It's not stereotyping.....its the truth.
> << It's a long time since a child of five knew the real meaning of the word
>  work and this is basically down to the degradation of the family unit >>
> Yes....YES.....by golly you have it.  Welcome to the ranks of the geniuses.

SS's original post has certainly stirred up a storm of controversy, but
I have been having an off-list email discussion of Margaret Atwood's
novel (I had rented the video version) "A Handmaiden's Tale"  This book
is about a conservative backlash that basically put women in their
place: barefoot and pregnant. The Handmaidens. The Marthas. The Wives. 

So I did not find SS's original post outlandish at all. In case you've
forgotten, he postulated that the Federation, post apocolypse, had
restricted women to a realm of home and nurturing children to be non
violent, in an effort to forestall another such apocolypse. In times of
economic recession, or war, or environmental collapse, women have
traditionally been blamed for the trouble, and told to "go to your room
and stay there until I say you can come out." i.e. restricted to kinder,
kitchen, kitch (forget the german word for church) The Handmaiden's Tale
was written in the 1980s when the US religious right, led by
anti-feminist Phyllis Shafly, was crusading to send women back to the
home. Away from "the world of men's work," as SS put it. And without the
"permission" to work, how are women supposed to survive? Eat the babies
men put upon them?

Mens work: That is a quaint notion in itself: what, exactly, is men's
work? From the dim dawn of pre-history, women grew the food,
manufactured the clothes, ranched the animals, created the home
furnishings - dishes, bedding, even walls and floors of straw. What
"work" have men historically done? 1) make spears and strut about trying
to look important while stabbing at animals, including one another 2)
ferment brews and get drunk 3) chase women and fuck them and make babies
- which the women then "nurture" in their "spare" time.

My conclusion: if women didn't do "men's work" the human race would
still be - individually - poking sticks into anthills and eating the
resultant delicacies - just like our animal siblings, the chimps.
Pat P

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:35:04 -0800
From: Pat Patera <pussnboots@geocities.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 301: Comparative Anatomy
Message-ID: <36A008E8.1886@geocities.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Lisa Williams wrote:
> Ah, but the incitement of vitriol is more associated with flamebaiting than
> with trolling... Unlike flamebait, producing noisy
> emotional responses is not usually the primary objective of trolling ...

And anyone in the mood for either activity will have far greater success
over on the 'other' list, where the more emotional types hang out. This
pod of mostly INTJ/P's is a tough audience to fluster. Now, head on over
'there' and throw darts at pretty-buns and watch the bait be flamed!
slightly singed and still snickering, Pat P

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 19:28:13 -0800
From: Pat Patera <pussnboots@geocities.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] re:remember me?
Message-ID: <36A0074D.5D0B@geocities.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Avona,
I sent this to your personal address, but it bounced back to me as non
deliverable, so shall re-post to the list.
Helen Krummenacker wrote:
> Re-subbed and safe.
> Tramila, are you awake? ;^/
> Avona has returned.
Hooray! You and my old pal Tramila had me list lafing non stop. Welcome
back. Perhaps you can lure Tramila back onto the list for some frothy
Vila blather. She is very funny on line, and so are you! :-D
Pat P

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 21:54:03 -0700
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] B7 characters and dustbin lids
Message-ID: <36A01B6A.175D@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Rob Clother wrote:
(snippity) re: child-rearing
 
> I'm not so sure about Servalan, though.  Her meticulous nature might
> well make her an excellent parent.  If she decided she was going to
> apply herself to the upbringing of her child (big if), I can see her
> doing a far better job than any other character in B7.  She would know
> instinctively how much or how little time to devote to her offspring --
> being a great admirer of strength, she would foster that quality above
> all else, but she'd be too much of a perfectionist to neglect other
> aspects of her kids' development.  What's more, she'd be great with kids
> of either sex.  A male would be brought up to embody all the qualities
> she admires in men (and our Servie doesn't lack experience in that
> department); a female would be taught all of the cunning and
> ruthlessness she used to get to the top.
But they would be pushed to do this, and that could result in the child
rebelling. <g> Then they would try to be the exact opposite of what she
wants them to be. Thus, we discover Servalan is Vila's mommy.
(snip)

> What about the others?  Blake would be about the only other character
> I'd trust to bring up kids -- in the right circumstances, I can see his
> kiddies turning out to be historians or artists or Radio 3 presenters.
> There seems to be quite a bit of the Renaissance man lurking in our Roj.

I think Gan seems like a good poppa type. He'd be patient; great at
roughousing with the little ones; a good listener; he seems to like work
ing with his hands, and would spend time on activities with the kid. 
> 
> Avon: forget it.  He wouldn't know one end of a child from the other.
Agreed; he wouldn't be interested until the child was old enough to
speak complete sentences, at which point he might decide actually
teaching the child would be a worthy experiment. But his perfectionist
demands would be rough on the child, who would want his approval and get
it rarely and grudgingly.

Vila would come home late and drunk, but when he was around, the
children would think he was fun.

Tarrant, would, I think, quite likely make a good father. This does NOT
mean I am joining the Tarrant Nostra.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 22:22:21 -0700
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
Message-ID: <36A0220C.4462@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> << or allow the father to
>  stay home and nurture them. Men ARE capable of that, you know.>>

> 
> Men are capable of nurturing emotionally but not physically.  They don't have
> breast, and therefore can not nurse.

You may have been breast fed until you were 18, but most of us stopped
before age 2. Even in natural communities, women only breast feed for 4
years. After that, why isn't the emotional capability to nurture all
that important?
> 
> << Other women will have no children whatsoever and therefore have no
>  reason to stay home.>>
> 
> IMHO, an incomplete woman.  Having a husband and children are two necessary
> elements to creating a complete woman.....even in B7 times it seems.

That DOES it! Where's my highly complicated toothpick?!  I know I
shouldn't bother respoonding to this man's gibberish but-- I DON'T want
kids!!! It will not make me complete! It might kill me. I have enough
health problems without having to worry about a pregnancy, and then the
months of insomnia. I have a husband. I have a cat. I have beautiful
books to read, artwork in the process of creation, a garden to nurture.
I have many ways to express my creative and life-giving side without
adding to overpopulation, burdening my wonderful husband with the
financial weight of having to earn enough for 3 people to live on, all
for the sake of creating a creature that will contribute nothing but
drool to my life for several months before it even begins to be a
rational creature.
> 
> << Soolin had her parents killed, and would hunt the writer of this
>  mindless drivel down and shoot him. >>
> 
> Soolin (though physically very attractive) is not truly representative of a
> real woman.....or at least my definition of a real woman.
I cannot imagine that there is one female on this list who would like to
fit your idea of a real woman. Anyone?

Thought not.

--Avona

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 22:31:23 -0700
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] re:remember me?
Message-ID: <36A0242A.2CF9@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> > Tramila, are you awake? ;^/
> > Avona has returned.
> Hooray! You and my old pal Tramila had me list lafing non stop. Welcome
> back. Perhaps you can lure Tramila back onto the list for some frothy
> Vila blather. She is very funny on line, and so are you! :-D
> Pat P


Hhhmmm. ::slow, lopsided smile:: I'm ready. Tramila, care for some
Andrenaline and Soma? Perhaps we can drown out the sexist rantings of
SupeDud with a glass of the green and a bit of chat. 
Stole anything nice for Christmas?

--Avona

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 18:59:44 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Horizon competition
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0115175944-3efRr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII

On Fri 15 Jan, Harriet Monkhouse wrote:
> Judith Proctor writes:
> >I suspect most people would want a story actually 
> >set in the first or second season, but I'm not sure that 
> >this is what Brian Lighthill wants (though I do hope I'm wrong).
> 
> Yes, but if everyone dutifully writes fourth season because Brian Lighthill
> wants it, then he'll be able to say "Look!  That's what everyone's been
> interested in all along!"  The more second season goes in, the more chance
> someone might notice that that was actually rather popular.

Well, I'm inclined to agree.  I'm just terrified that he's so wedded to the 4th
season that he'll ignore anything that won't shoe horn into it.  The implication
is that 4th season plots were wanted, though it didn't say so outright.

Let's hope people submit lots of both.  Once Redemption is over, I shall set pen
to paper and try my best.  Note that it is plot outlines rather than complete
scripts that are wanted.  Probably for copyright reasons.  (I daresay somebody
else will end up actually writing the story if a winning entry is used)

Judith
-- 
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7

Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention  
26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent
http://www.smof.com/redemption/

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 10:38:38 +-100
From: Jacqueline Thijsen <jacqueline.thijsen@cmg.nl>
To: "blakes7@lysator.liu.se" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L] The Woman in B7
Message-ID: <01BE413C.63FB2840@nl-arn-lap0063>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Avona said:

>You may have been breast fed until you were 18, but most of us stopped
>before age 2. Even in natural communities, women only breast feed for 4
>years. After that, why isn't the emotional capability to nurture all
>that important?

<g> good one, Avona!

>> IMHO, an incomplete woman.  Having a husband and children are two necessary
>> elements to creating a complete woman.....even in B7 times it seems.

>That DOES it! Where's my highly complicated toothpick?!  I know I
>shouldn't bother respoonding to this man's gibberish but-- I DON'T want
>kids!!! It will not make me complete! It might kill me. I have enough
>health problems without having to worry about a pregnancy, and then the
>months of insomnia.

<snipping lots of stuff I agree with>
I seem to recall reading something to the effect that genetically, it didn't really matter wether someone got any kids of their own or left it to their siblings. In that case, doing your best to make the world a little better so that other kids can have a good life is in fact the same as doing your best to raise your own kids.
I don't want to have children either, not because of any physical reasons, but because I think there is just a little too much of Avon in me: I am impatient, not very understanding and just wouldn't be a very good mother. I no longer feel ashamed of that: other people who would be good mothers, maybe wouldn't be a very good programmer, which I am. I'll leave the nurturing to my sister, who wants it and is much better at it than I am, anyway.
> >
> ><< Soolin had her parents killed, and would hunt the writer of this
> > mindless drivel down and shoot him. >>
> >
>> Soolin (though physically very attractive) is not truly representative of a
>> real woman.....or at least my definition of a real woman.
>I cannot imagine that there is one female on this list who would like to
>fit your idea of a real woman. Anyone?

>Thought not.

Not only that, but I no longer read any of Stupesud's postings. I find it difficult and basically a waste of time to pay attention to someone who in effect tells me (and any other woman) that he does not respect me and that I should have no rights whatsoever. I have just deleted all of Studdies postings without bothering to read them and will continue to do so.

Jacqueline Thijsen

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 01:47:25 -0800
From: Tramila <cdmunoz@earthlink.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] re:remember me?
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990116014725.0082a940@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Helen Krummenacker wrote:
>> > Tramila, are you awake? ;^/
>> > Avona has returned.
>> Hooray! You and my old pal Tramila had me list lafing non stop. Welcome
>> back. Perhaps you can lure Tramila back onto the list for some frothy
>> Vila blather. She is very funny on line, and so are you! :-D
>> Pat P

Tramila laughs.  Oh Pat.  You are so funny.  Hugs.

>Huummm. ::slow, lopsided smile:: I'm ready. Tramila, care for some
>Andrenaline and Soma? 

Tramila passes her cup for a refill.

>Perhaps we can drown out the sexist rantings of
>SupeDud with a glass of the green and a bit of chat. 
>Stole anything nice for Christmas?

Steal?  Why Avona, you know that I would NEVER steal <takes a long sip of
soma> then looks as angelic as possible.

Tramila looks both ways before explaining her latest scheme to Avona in a
low voice.
"So what do you think, huh?"

Tramila
who is soooooo stupid that she just realized that her name rhymes with Vila.
Believe me, it was just a coincidence.....but I like it.  :)

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 11:25:03 -0000
From: "Spudgun" <Spudgun@dial.pipex.com>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: RE:[B7L] Trolling 101
Message-Id: <199901161138.MAA18874@samantha.lysator.liu.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Get to the point SuperStew. All this blatant misogynism and you haven't
once mentioned shagging. The number of times I've come home pissed as a
fart, spent 10 minutes just trying to get through the front door and then
made some pretty romantic advances on my girlfriend only to be turned down
flat are uncountable. I wouldn't so much but I do a bloody good impression
of being sober when I'm incapable of speech.
What I want to know is what the federation intends to do about all the
shags I will still be owed in the 25th century. Maybe I should have several
girfriends on a strict rota basis so if my wily charms didn't work on one
of them I could move on to the next.


----------
> From: SupeStud00@aol.com
> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
> Subject: RE:[B7L] Trolling 101
> Date: 16 January 1999 01:39
> 
> In a message dated 1/15/99 8:37:53 PM EST, SupeStud00 writes:
> 
> << 
>  In a message dated 1/15/99 7:04:04 PM EST, Spudgun@dial.pipex.com
writes:
>  
>  <<  I think SuperStew's point is very well thought out.>>
>  
>  That's S-T-U-D, SuperS-T-U-D as in a highly intelligent guy, who is
extremely
> good looking and gets all of the women......not unlike Avon.  A guy that
women
> hat to love but love anyway.  That is I.  Any AOL members out there
should
> check my profile for the ultimate truth.
>  
>  << I personally keep Jenni
>   on a length of chain between the kitchen and the bedroom and whip her
>   mercilessly when she speaks 'out of turn'. >>
>  
>  I can relate.
>  
>  <>
>  
>  It's not stereotyping.....its the truth.
>  
>  << It's a long time since a child of five knew the real meaning of the
word
>   work and this is basically down to the degradation of the family unit
>>
>  
>  Yes....YES.....by golly you have it.  Welcome to the ranks of the
geniuses.
>  
>   
> 
> 

--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #30
*************************************