Armina@cris.com wrote:
>No, I'm saying that following the (satirical) Church of the
>Sub-Genius or any other group that determines itself in any way
>superior is conformity of the highest order... I prefer to think
>for myself.
You still aren't getting it, Armina, and it's not my job to draw you a
picture.
> Are you trying to say that "discrimination" of any sort is
>>wrong? If so, I must say you are incorrect. We discriminate every day
>>by choosing certain people to become our friends and rejecting the
>>friendship of others.
>Choosing who your friends are has nothing to do with the type of
>discrimination that we are discussing here.
Of course it does, some of my best friends are....(fill in the blank).
I discriminate on a regular basis when it comes to work. Some people I
will not work for, some I will. The choice is made on the basis of a
number of factors, none of which have anything to do with superfluous
physical details.
>>Stupidity and conformity are
>>internal qualities which can be changed by personal will.
>Sorry but stupidity cannot be changed - it is a lack of
>intelligence. Ignorance is an internal quality that can be
>changed by an act of personal will.
You're just being picky about terminology here. Stupid could mean
ignorant or just being deliberately obtuse for the sake of not seeing
something which could change your mind. A person can be not terribly
intelligent and still not be stupid.
>As to conformity, I would be no less a conformist if I chose to
>follow *your* way of thinking than if I chose the racist's or the
>Baptist's.
Which is why the Church of the SubGenius encourages its members to
schizm from the Mother Church as soon as they can.
> People
>>CHOOSE to conform, therefore we are perfectly valid to repudiate those
>>whose choices are at odds with our philosophy.
>It is your philosophy that requires the conformity!
I doubt you actually know MY philosophy. Do you even own a copy of the
Book of the SubGenius?
--
Reverend Mutha Tarla, Little Sisters of the Perpetually Juicy,
A Proud Jism Schism of the Church of the SubGenius, Worshipping
"Connie" Dobbs and Juicy Retardo since 1986
http://www.ionet.net/~bmyers/homepage.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar)
Newsgroups: alt.slack
Armina@cris.com wrote:
>bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar) wrote:
>>Lou (et al)...remember when I told you about the people who didn't get
>>the real meaning of the song, "Short People"? Well, baby they're still
>>out there.
>ROFL! I understand what you SAY yet then I see what you DO (as a
>group, I mean, not you personally). So what makes you so sure you
>understand what I am saying? :-)
What have we done, Armina? We've responded to blatent ugly racism with
a version of our own which SHOULD (in a reasonably competant person)
highlight just how ridiculous and ugly racism IS. Have we ever
discriminated on the basis of ANY quality other than stupidity or
unthinking conformity? I don't believe so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: meursault@delphi.com
<Armina@cris.com> writes:
>>Aprilfish (imber@scf.usc.edu) wrote:
> But why, may I ask, why are you still talking
>>: about what Pinks do? Why, and I still ask why????
>
>And I say any group that puts down another group whether they
>call themselves White Supremicists, Black Panthers, Baptists or
>Yeti are all carved out of the same piece of wood.
>
>'Mina
>I love you all but I'm pink and proud :-D
Ooooohh boy! There you have it. Doesn't understand. Gives an opinion
anyway. Armina-burgers anyone?
Rev. Dr. Mario
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Timothy Verry <verryta@taft.law.uc.edu>
On 25 Oct 1995 Armina@cris.com wrote:
> I love you all but I'm pink and proud :-D
You may just *be* pink after all, since you posted this blatant lie.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Armina@cris.com
Which is the blatant part?
------------------------------------------------------------
From: DMASSON@indiana.edu
>: > My theory is that it's not nice guys who finish last, it's nebbishes (I
>: used to be one). You can be a gentleman without being a doormat.
>As for "what Pinks do", exactly how many recognized Uberfemmes are there
>on this planet? Two dozen, tops ... and I think they're all taken. So
>all the other males have to look for Uberfemmes among the pool of
>species-indeterminate females. To say nothing of Uberfemmes who have
>just been fucked over so bad they behave a little Pink around the gills.
>It's not quite as simple as "just go out and find yourself an Overwoman",
>because the Con makes damn sure they're in short supply.
Ah, but the important point is that, (unless you are actually holding out
for the rare and exciting Uberfemme) it simply does not pay to be a
gentleman even if you can manage to be one without being a doormat.
Most, if not all, (it may be a definitional difference) are so intensely
rock stupid that they can't manage to discern politeness from wimpy,
uncool, lack of testosterone. Then they act suprised when they do such
things as waving tits in our faces to sell us a shirt or some other form
of CON sanctioned prostitution (I say sanction all of it, let's just pay
for sex instead of being encouraged to pay for it in private, barter for
it in the open, and be ashamed of it always), which results in some
fringe, can't-take-it-anymore-sexually-bombarded-but-gettin'-none wimp
finally snaps and beats them over the head to have sex (when he would
really be better served jerkin' off).
I know we've all heard the when I'm nice I get screwed and when I'm a
jerk I can't keep them away stories, but here's one more:
I was drunk as hell and then asked some silly bitch to do something
stupid like slow dance with me in a bar where NOBODY was even remotely
close to dancing and, quite properly, she declines...so, quite
unreasonably, I decide to vent years of frustration and anger on her, I
give her "THE HIGH DIS" (TM); saying something to the effect of, "you
know, I really only have lukewarm feelings toward you and, to be honest,
you're not all that attractive, and let's face it you're NOT gonna do any
better than me tonight..." and so on, (my friends tell me my rant went on
for a good 3 or 4 minutes solid). So, naturally she's the only woman who
shows any overt signs of interest in me.
Well gang, should I try to close the deal; maybe try to drop her
self-esteem to the such a level where she allows me anal penetration just
to keep my interest (after which I would of course cut her loose, because
who wants a girl who only likes you because you hate her anyway?)
Ah yes, I feel much better now.
Later,
Doktor Law
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ljduchez@en.com (Lou Duchez)
My two cents, since it's been at least a week since anyone has accused
me of being a wife-beater:
In article <46qmm1$40r@spectator.cris.com>, Armina@cris.com wrote:
> bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar) wrote:
> >What have we done, Armina? We've responded to blatent ugly racism with
> >a version of our own which SHOULD (in a reasonably competant person)
> >highlight just how ridiculous and ugly racism IS.
>
> It is blatent and ugly to judge anyone according to their
> blackness OR their pinkness.
> Or one's percieved pinkness :-)
Well, bear in mind that "Pinkness" isn't a skin color; it's a term
lifted from Black culture to describe the heartless unthinking materialist
the Con wants us all to become.
Racism is a matter of assuming character traits in individuals on the
basis of skin color or some other stupid criterion. Pinkness is
identified by behavior itself. Would you be willing to say that you
don't like jerks? That's not racism on your part, that's a matter of
evaluating individuals' character and reacting accordingly. So it goes
with Subs vs. Pinks. Even alleged Subs can be Pinker than Pink, and
apparent Pinks can actually be Subs in stealth mode. It doth get messy,
but ultimately we go for character and creativity, not for the irrelevant
traits that racists focus on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar)
thecharlie@aol.com (TheCharlie) wrote:
>In article <47121j$aij@news1.radix.net>, revjack@radix.net (Reverend Jack)
>writes:
>It's really good. Pull up a stool at the bar in my kitchen or that of 'The
>Bearded Guy' (if Tarla says it's OK) and we'll talk/taste beer.
Aprilfish already knows the Bearded Guy, she's spent the night with
him. He'd give her anything she wanted.
>Heh heh.. I knew I could pull a thread back to Home Brew if i tried..
Sister Do-me came by Sunday and dropped off 80 Grolsch bottles (some
of them were the brown colored ones) That means we can have one batch
brewing, one batch in bottles fermenting, and one batch that's ready
for drinking all the time.
Thanks for directing us to the homebrew newsgroups, now we have terms
for all the stuff we've been calling "your big brewing chamber" and
"that bubbling thing on top", not to mention learning the difference
between lager and ale.
We're bringing some to the Tulsa SubG/GWAR thingy so that Stanky and
Rev. Leo can have a taste or two.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ljduchez@en.com (Lou Duchez)
Armina@cris.com wrote:
And bmyers@ionet.net wrote:
And a bunch of other people wrote:
And now I write:
Armina, you do raise some valid points here: even an organization of
non-organizables runs the risk of adherents who shut off their minds and
follow the pack. And you're right, there's a danger in seeing any great
gulf between Yetis and Pinks: it's all a matter of degree, and even then
the criteria are subjective. That you feel itchy with such a dichotomy
only shows that you have your head screwed on straight.
All the same, you shouldn't underestimate the intended irony of the
dichotomy, and that it serves as an ever-present reminder to SubGenii
that it's dangerous to categorize. In particular, the very act of
categorizing is one giant step to Pinkness ... and when a Sub says
something like that last clause of mine, you can bet (or hope, anyway)
that he feels uneasy putting it into such easy us vs. them terms.
By eschewing the dogma altogether, you are on an excellent track to
devising a system that works. At the same time, you run the risk of not
understanding what we're talking about, resulting in some confusion. For
example, Pinks are "defined" by behavior and not by physical
characteristics, and I think you would agree that there are a lot of
people you just don't want to have anything to do with.
Are Yetis superior to Pinks? By definition, yes. Who's Yeti and who's
Pink? THAT'S the slippery part. Send me yer address and I'll send you
pamphlet #1 and you'll be on your way.
Hoping I can iron out some inflammatory dialogue,
Lou
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: imber@scf.usc.edu (Aprilfish)
bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar) wrote:
> "Pinks:(colloq) Stang corruption of the formal SubGenius derogatory
> term PINK BOYS, meaning any sheeplike status-quo normalcy dupe, living
> in terror of making his or her own decisions, usually possessed of an
> unusually 'blank' facial expression, characterized by mental temerity
> masked by physical self-assurance. Term does not refer to skin color,
> sexual identity or proclivities or age, though it does derive from
> black slang for 'suburban white man." What is "pink" in the SubGenius
> definition is their outlook." (BOSG pg. 14)
How disfranchised do you have to feel before you understand this? I think
this may be part of the problem. No one wants to identify Mommy and Daddy and good ol' home and Puppy Dog as sheeplike, fearful, and weak. I'm
shocked that Armina finds this stuff appalling - it's really very simple.
(Hell, I'm new, and I think I got a handle on this part.)
Ask yourself who you would be if you had to give up your things. (Home,
car, clothes, friends) And then ask yourself if you know anyone who has.
The timid, the following, and the weak get eaten really fast without a
well-done disguise. I don't mean that the strong (or Yeti, as I squish
myself into Armina-state) eat the weak, it's the weak that eat the weak.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Timothy Verry <verryta@taft.law.uc.edu>
On 31 Oct 1995, Angela wrote:
> Angela (angela@infi.net) wrote:
>
> : Armina pointed out that if the Church of the SubGenius looks down on a group
> : of people and claims to 'hate' them, that that is racism like it would be in
> : any other form. I would have to agree.
>
> I just want to take that comment back. Racism wasn't the right term. But it
> does sound bad to say that other people are beneath you and you hate
> them if they choose to be a different way than you choose to be, even if you
> believe your way is better.
Damn straight!! I would *never* be so presumptious as to judge another
person's genetic ancestry! How the hell can you know?
Tim Verry verryta@mentos.com | "There's a world going on underground"
2L at University of Cincinnati | --Tom Waits
$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$??$$?
"It shall be a world without Slack, except that thou follow my profits".
"Prophecy of the Subgenius, the Prescriptures - the Economicon of Dobbs
0__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O__ O_/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jamie@moncomm.clark.net (Jamie Schrumpf)
Armina@cris.com says...
>
>meursault@delphi.com wrote:
>
>>Ooooohh boy! There you have it. Doesn't understand.
>
>In YOUR opinion :-)
>
> Gives an opinion
>>anyway. Armina-burgers anyone?
>
>So enlighten me. How are you different? Honestly? You keep
>pointing out how intellectually superior you are (Yeti vs Pinks)
>Since you are so incredibly smart you should be able to put
>things into terms that we sadly innefficient pinklings can
>understand. Or you can be like the Baptists and hold a cross out
>at me (or a dead cat or whatever symbol good ole "BOB" prefers)
>and tell me to leave! :-)
>
>I was told to come over here to see how the Slack folk were
>different and good. Tarla came to my newsgroup and posted some of
>her writings to show us the sort of things that supposedly went
>on over here. And that looked good to me, but I haven't seen much
>of it.
>
>Was told that on Alt.Slack everyone could put forth their
>writings and opinions without the childish flaming that was going
>on over on my newsgroup ... I've seen some of that but not a
>whole lot. There are certainly those here that seem to enjoy
>taking potshots too.
>
>So... instead of making Armina-burgers ... Show me YOUR wares!
>:-)
>
>Or if you prefer to shoot me down, go ahead... at least something
>would be going on here.
>
>
I'd join in this pointless debate, but it would cost too much Slack to be
worthwhile.
Besides, to paraphrase "Bob," we don't practice what we preach because we're not the kind of people we preach to. And a good Rant is considered far
superior to rational discourse for getting our point across.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ljduchez@en.com (Lou Duchez)
pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty) wrote:
> Lou Duchez (ljduchez@en.com) wrote:
> : > am I stupid if you say bunnyman and I see a man iin
> : > a pink bunnysuit and you see a flaming carrot? I think not - just
> : > a different view.
>
> : Would SOMEONE please tell me which view lets you see Flaming Carrot? And
> : is it the single objective viewpoint that the Zonheads claim exists?
>
> No. The Zonnist view would be that the bunny is a bunny and the man is a
> man, and the two cannot be what they are not, so the concept of
> 'bunnyman' is irrational and subjective, and therefore destructive from
> the viewpoint of fully-integrated honesty.
>
> (THANK YOU, Lou, for giving me an excuse to Zonbabble again...ghod how I
> love doing that...)
Well, tell me how I can see Flaming Carrot please! Yes, he's silly but
he generates values.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty)
Armina@cris.com wrote:
: pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty) wrote:
: >Personally, I believe that Man A is better than Man B, because he hates
: >the person for WHO he is and what he DID, while Man B hates the person
: >for WHAT is is...the color of his skin.
: thats what I said...
Um...oh yeah. After reading a few more of your posts (AFTER writing this
reply), I see that I got your view backwards. My mistake.
: I realize that you mean 'pinks' as a group of people that behave
: a certain way, not as a race or 'color'. However, a certain
: number of your .. er.. brethren? seem to address anyone who steps
: in from outside of your 'church' as 'pink' without knowing how
: they behave or why they behave that way and thus are no better
: than the racists who hate blacks simply because they are black,
: not because they know anything about them individually. This is
: not to say that every one who considers themself 'sub-genius'
: thinks this way, only that this is the danger inherent in a group
: such as this.
: There are always the fanatics in every group that take the tenets
: of said organization to heart and elevate themselves to the
: position of judge. In fact I would take it a step further and say
: that those who behave this way are not *true* sub-genius, but
: actually sub-genius wannabes. BUT because the group is formed and
: they present themselves AS the group, this is how the group
: comes to be percieved...
Dead-on right about everything, you are, right here. There are a lot of
people running around, calling themselves SubGenius, and acting in ways
totally contrary to the way SubGenii are supposed to act. [Actually, that
last sentence carries the wrong connotation--there's no specific way
SubGenii are EVER 'supposed' to act, but there are certain ways that we
aren't...like being prejudiced or racist.] We call those people
"Bobbies", which means 'wannabe subgenius'.
Also, sometimes, a true Yeti (i.e., true SubGenius, through and through),
will jump the gun on labelling someone Pink. It happens...we all make
mistakes. We're glad that we make mistakes. And that true Yeti will
almost always reverse their judgement if they see that they were wrong.
Some are stubborn, but they mean well. In short, the MOST important part
of the Pink/SubGenius distinction is KNOWING who's, who...not just
pointing fingers and guessing.
: >Are you implying that our gospel is anything but fact?
: :-) Most gospel is anything BUT fact. What is gospel but a
: recitation of how one WISHES the world would be? The word is
: supposed to denote truth but more often it denotes fantasy.
: unfortunately...
Nah, not unfortunately...not if it's fun to read (and to live)...
: >It IS real. And we do point fingers at people and call them Pinks, WHEN
: >they prove themselves to BE Pinks.
: And if they are pink, you would do them and the world a lot more
: good if you would take them by the hand and attempt to teach
: them to think more freely, rather that point a finger at them and
: call them names.
C'mon, don't take me so literally! We "point fingers" in the sense that
we size them up and decide that they're Pink. It doesn't mean we chase
'em around town laughing at them!
What one DOES with a Pink, though, is something that varies from clench
to clench, person to person. Some feel that we should pity them and try
to help them "evolve" out of their sorry state. Some feel that we should
kill them off, usually with slow torture. Some feel we should just learn
to live with them. Some feel we should try to live apart from them,
staying in the cracks of their system. Some feel etc. etc. etc...
Here are some of MY views. Don't assume for a second that ANY other
SubGenius shares them, though: Some pinks have potential; some are
willing to open their minds a bit, some have the right sense of humor,
some aren't that far gone. They might not be able to pull themselves
TOTALLY out of their life-rut, but they can at least learn something. If
so, I try to help 'em out, if it's not too much of a pain for me.
"Working on" more than one such person at a time is very hard for me.
Most Pinks are unsavable, though. Most are just glad to be in whatever
sinkhole they're in, and will fight you tooth and nail if you try to give
them a hand up. So fuck 'em. And some Pinks need to be killed. Not most,
but some. Those are my views. (C)Copyright Pee Kitty 1995.
: The problem, as I see it, is that the democrat KNOWS he is a
: democrat... The 'pink' (as described above) - at least it seems
: to me - is only trying to put into words what her life is like.
: If you want her to be a free-thinker then help her to become one.
: I work with people and their personalities and not everyone has
: the ability to stand against the crowd. Some people have to be
: helped... AND it might surprise you to know that the ones who are
: helped and encouraged to learn to take that stand often become
: some of the most out-spoken and forward thinking in the long run.
Like I said...if I feel that the person is worth it, and it doesn't
totally drain my time, I will try to help. Most of the time, I don't feel
it's worth it. A lot of people will NEVER understand why it's not a good
thing to just blindly follow society...maybe after YEARS of help they
will, but I don't have years to waste. I can't be that much of an
idealist...not when I'm still mortal.
: Some "subgenii" do run around calling everyone else
: >Pink. We call them Bobbies, and we hate THEM more than we hate the Pinks,
: >cuz they're FUCKING UP THE WHOLE RELIGION! But what can we do, eh?
: If I knew the answer to THAT question I would be one very rich
: woman! :-D
And much loved by everyone on here, believe me! Stick around, though, and
I'm sure you'll be loved more than enough by the general populace...we
respect and value a good brain (and not just as an after dinner snack)!
--
Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian
Meow!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: corleyj@lpl.arizona.edu (Jason Corley)
Armina@cris.com wrote:
: If the person is not truely stupid, only
: misled or held down by the powers-that-be (the Con as you call
: them) then SHOW them the way.
NOT until they PAY, dammit. This isn't a FUCKING charity, what
are you, some kind of COMMIE?
If you get salvation for nothing, then by definition, THAT'S EXACTLY
WHAT IT'S WORTH.
--
"One Senator threatened to read the Bible into the record, and I
guess he would have, too, if anyone at the Capitol had a Bible."
-------------- Will Rogers
Jason "corleyj@tau.lpl.arizona.edu" Corley is wanted by the Reality Police.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: petehip@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Peter Hipwell)
thecharlie@aol.com (TheCharlie) writes:
>bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar)writes:
>>not to mention learning the difference
>>between lager and ale.
>PPS. biggest difference between lager and ale is "How soon can I drink
>it?" ;-)
Contracy to popular Australian and American opinion, beer does not
have to be icy, gassy and yellow. The range of beers is
incredible. Wine lovers whine and whine about the subtle distinctions
and flavourings of their most beloved beverage. I don't know, I never
touch the filthy stuff myself. But it certainly is true of beers. Ah,
the differences between lager, bitter, porter, stout... If you ever
get a chance, try Theakston's Old Peculier, Younger's No. 3, or Samuel
Smith's Taddy Porter to see what a rich, dark beer that doesn't make
you belch like a bullfrog in mating season should taste like. I rarely
drink lager. It's mostly insipid (although I'd make honorable
exceptions for Budwar Budweiser - where the Bud boys ripped their name
off from - and a couple of other European specialities.)
Then go back to home brewing. Trust me on this one.
--
Factotum Maximus of the Zero Point Knowledge Unit.
http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~petehip/het.html for The One True Theory.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: sylvia@monitor.net
thecharlie@aol.com (TheCharlie) wrote:. Or maybe it was Charlie..
> If the last bottles were yeasty, try a secondary fermenter. You siphon the
> beer off of the sediment (yeast) into another vessel. This eliminates the
> yeast bite and helps produce a much clearer beer.
Screw the beer, I just like the yeast...lots and lots of yeast crammed
down my gullet with a wooden paddle.. Makes yer innards belch like a steam
engine, makes yer skin break out in funny fungus that resembles advanced
leprosy..Then you know what I do? I sit on a street corner and people
throw money at me, just so I'll stay away from their kids. Gotta love
America.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: scar@liberty.liberty.com (Captain Walker)
Pee Kitty (pkitty@netcom.com) wrote:
: Armina@cris.com wrote:
: : Tarla, if you can't see the difference between disliking one
: : particular person for a particular reason, and disliking a
: : person of a particular race/religion/creed/color for no reason
: : other than they belonging to that race/religion/creed/color then
: : there is no hope for you
: Man A: "I dislike John Smith because he set fire to an orphanage, killing
: 37 children and 4 adults."
: Man B: "I dislike John Doe because he's black."
I dislike John Smith because he didn't kill enough kids.
Black kids, white kids, who cares? Kill 'em all.
Yours in Eternal Ka-ka,
Capt. Walker, 1st Orthodox Church of Genital Warts
(we change the name once every week or so, depending on how much booze
we've had.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: imber@scf.usc.edu (Aprilfish)
In article <y+0lwgiGkkwO084yn@en.com>, ljduchez@en.com (Lou Duchez) wrote:
> I gotta say, I'm finding myself siding with damn near everything
> Armina is saying here. To wit:
> > If you want her to be a free-thinker then help her to become one.
> > I work with people and their personalities and not everyone has
> > the ability to stand against the crowd. Some people have to be
> > helped... AND it might surprise you to know that the ones who are
> > helped and encouraged to learn to take that stand often become
> > some of the most out-spoken and forward thinking in the long run.
>
> HALLELUJAH AND PRAISE ARMINA!
Lou, man, but then don't fuck them until they're sure they know what they
stand for. This is how we got on this in the first place. So, you want to
help some filly realize her potential, I've been there, but you keep your
sexual/personal life out of it until they're potential reaches yours. You
don't fuck your students, you don't fuck your patients, you don't fuck
your converts. It's all in the bylaws.
Armina may want me to hold hands with people and try to make them freer
thinkers, and I do, in fact I've been suffering a little lately trying to
pull that latency to surface in someone. But after a while, it's either
pull it out or I gotta go. That's fine. But she needs to get some of her
facts straight about what a SubGenius is...that evolution thing isn't
right. And brains aren't key. I just got me the book, and got some one
else to pay for it!!, get one. It's actually worth it if you want to
figure this stuff out.
But hey, if that student becomes a teacher too, that patient recovers and
sits you down on the sofa, or you lose your religion....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: sylvia@monitor.net
jduchez@en.com (Lou Duchez) wrote:
> Anyway, I don't care what Pinks think. The trick is in telling them
> apart from latent Uberfemmes. The only distinguishing marks are
> behavioral, and even then there are no tried-and-true methods for
> sorting out latents. Find the most Uber of Uberwomen on this planet,
> and I bet you can find a period in her past when she was Pink as all-
> get-out ... in other words, it's damn tough to know which ones have
> that spark in them. (The fullbloods are always easy to tell: they
> already have more than enough mates and suitors.)
Although I may not qualify as a Uberfemme, I think I get the idea. But
hey, it's hard walking around the planet in the wacked out, power state I
am comfortable in. People run from me, refuse eye contact in grocery
stores, basically I MAKE PEOPLE UNCOMFORTABLE when I'm firing my weird
energy and pointing out the absurd. Sure, you might blame it on hygene or
the way I smoke cigarettes, or the fact that I do not tolerate fools
well. But ya gotta adapt to survive.
I share your frustration when it comes to women and jerks. How often I
have heard a single woman say when I ask her about a date, "Well he's
really cute.." I give 'em my lecture on why intellect is the best aphrodisiac...it lasts and lasts...
But I think a lot of women *and* men, consider their companion/lover too
much of a social reflection of *themselves*. They want a certain picture
to present to society..this is dull, stupid and limiting but let's just
blame TV for our obsession with appearances and ability to be "cool." God
I hate that word "cool"-- it's like a coating of lard icing on a stale
piece of fruit cake. No thanks, don't wanna try that!
I've ranted enough. thank you for your patience.
Sylvia
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: angela@infi.net (Angela)
meursault@delphi.com wrote:
: A SubGenius can usually be identified by Hir refusal
: to submit to the Conspiracy. S/He is not
: swayed by slogans or ideological macros.
:
: Hating Pinks is not the same as hating a group
: of people because of their race, creed or sexual
: orientation.
Armina pointed out that if the Church of the SubGenius looks down on a group of people and claims to 'hate' them, that that is racism like it would be in any other form. I would have to agree. Even though it's hating a group of
people because of their actions and thoughts as opposed to their appearance.
I know that people say alot of things here that are just for fun that they
don't really mean. And wouldn't saying that you 'hate' pinks be one of them?
Isn't the whole idea to get anyone that logs onto this group (that's not
already doing it) to think for themselves and encourage them to not follow
the pack but be who they really are, as opposed to saying you hate them and
sending them away. When someone is new online and they hear 'we hate pinks' that's the impression they're bound to get, even though I know that's not the intention.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: blackmer@course1.harvard.edu (John Blackmer)
: ROFL! I understand what you SAY yet then I see what you DO (as a
: group, I mean, not you personally). So what makes you so sure you
: understand what I am saying? :-)
Armina. Not everyone in the Church or on this newsgroup is really
Yeti-spawn. The vast majority of us just _think_ we are.
-Agsts Q "Keyboard Desk" Frust QPM
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Armina@cris.com
mbeaudoin@fdant.nctr.fda.gov (future Monsignor) wrote:
>imber@scf.usc.edu (Aprilfish) writes:
>>Ask yourself who you would be if you had to give up your things. (Home,
>>car, clothes, friends)
>
>I would be reliving the period of my first divorce.
Been there, done that, no thanks. I was still me... just a poorer
me (materially, not spiritually) All I had was two children (one
sick) and sixty seven cents. BUT I'm here to tell the tale and am
a lot stronger for having done it (not a recommended
strengthening program however :-D)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Armina@cris.com
Timothy Verry <verryta@taft.law.uc.edu> wrote:
>Oops, you made three statements, I am calling the pink part the lie. It
>is supposed to be a witty paradox.
Ah I just love a witty paradox - it usually takes two to make a
good diagnosis :-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Armina@cris.com
Tarla, if you can't see the difference between disliking one
particular person for a particular reason, and disliking a
person of a particular race/religion/creed/color for no reason
other than they belonging to that race/religion/creed/color then
there is no hope for you ... I think we both know better than
that. If you dislike a person because they are loud and
obnoxious, and they happen to be black, that does not make you a
racist. I understand the satirical side of the Sub-Genius sect
but I also see it has attracted 'members' who have adopted its
gospel as fact. You have created another scale of acceptance.
Yeti vs Pinks. Tongue-in-cheek though it may have been created,
it is only another "I am better than you" scale that builds walls
between people. And to what purpose? As you have pointed out, we
can all choose our friends based on whatever criteria we hold
dear - we don't need a group to help us there. Thus there are
only two possible purposes - 1)the original purpose to show the
idiocy of the real churches and like groups that feed on people's
emotions and 2) another group to join the ranks of the
afore-mentioned groups in order to stroke the 'superiority' of
its members. As a satire it was great, but when it becomes a
weapon toward people it automatically becomes one of those groups
it supposedly despises... when the 'Yeti' begin pointing fingers
at others and calling them 'pinks' it loses its satire and
becomes real.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: angela@infi.net (Angela)
Angela (angela@infi.net) wrote:
: Armina pointed out that if the Church of the SubGenius looks down on a group
: of people and claims to 'hate' them, that that is racism like it would be in
: any other form. I would have to agree.
I just want to take that comment back. Racism wasn't the right term. But it
does sound bad to say that other people are beneath you and you hate
them if they choose to be a different way than you choose to be, even if you
believe your way is better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Robert/Lisa Garland <rlgarland@why.net>
angela@infi.net (Angela) wrote:
> I know that people say alot of things here that are just for fun
> that they don't really mean. And wouldn't saying that you 'hate'
> pinks be one of them? Isn't the whole idea to get anyone that
> logs onto this group (that's not already doing it) to think for
> themselves and encourage them to not follow the pack but be who
> they really are, as opposed to saying you hate them and sending
> them away. When someone is new online and they hear 'we hate pinks'
> that's the impression they're bound to get, even though I know
> that's not the intention.
Somewhere in the above paragraph lies the secret to inner peace as
well as mutual understanding upon all "Bob's" creatures, be they
great or small. However, I can't find it.
I think "the whole idea to get anyone that logs onto this group...
to think for themselves..." is incredibly nobel, but idealistic.
Truth is, each individual who logs onto alt.slack does so for
different reasons, and more often than not they are selfish ones.
I log onto alt.slack because I'm weird. I know I'm weird and I'm
damn proud of it, and it's nice to find others who are also weird
and not ashamed of their abnormalities in comparison to the rest
of what is fervently and subjectively determined to be "normal".
I log onto alt.slack to communicate with other weirdos. Plain and
simple. Or at the very least, give them an opportunity to talk to
me by making my presence known.
The mistake some make is TRYING to fit in. That's where the Conspiracy
grabs ya. I could TRY to be weirder than I am in an attempt to out
weird and therefore theoretically impress people in here, but that
would illicit the opposite effect, because by the very nature of
SubGeniusness, most purveyors of alt.slack KNOW the difference
between a weirdo and someone pretending to be one.
So when someone is blacklisted as a Pink Boy, it is done in love,
and True SubGeniuses will also pluck the rectum from one's inner
carbunkle if they believe it will allow the ukelele of insurrection
to thrive among the laser penguins.
Someone who BELIEVES himself to be SubGenius but attacks others who
also believe themselves to be SubGenius but are actually acting
more like Pink Boys, may actually be a Pink Boy himself, and is
attacking the other Pink Boy in an attempt to draw attention away
from his or her own pinkness. This is done out of fear, and out of
an inner need to belong, which is distinctly unSubGeniuslike.
I KNOW I belong, for example, at least to myself, and if someone
comes along and calls me pink, my knowledge of who and what I am
overshines the label that is placed upon me. That is the mark of
confidence in one's SubGeniusness.
Now if you don't understand a single word I just said, that means
you must be Pink and should report to the nearest Population
Control facility for Standard Procedures. Thank you for playing.
Slackfully Yours,
Doktor Zachary Carleton
One and only official clone for Bob
Thirteenth Apostle of the Dobbsian Earlobe
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Robert/Lisa Garland <rlgarland@why.net>
meursault@delphi.com wrote:
> I do not speak for the SubGenii.
> That would rob them of precious slack.
Oh what the heck. Go ahead and speak for me. My tongue is tired.
> The SubGenius Foundation
> P.O Box 140306
> Dallas, Tx 75214
I felt that the address needed repeating again, so others who
would like to speak for me would send one dollar to Stang and
then I would give them the privilege.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Berin_Kinsman@abq-ros.com
armina@cris.com ranted at Tarla:
>I understand the satirical side of the Sub-Genius sect
You think this is satire? You think this is a joke?
>but I also see it has attracted 'members' who have adopted its
>gospel as fact. You have created another scale of acceptance.
>Yeti vs Pinks. Tongue-in-cheek though it may have been created,
>it is only another "I am better than you" scale that builds walls
My tongue isn't in my cheek. I won't say where it's been.
>... when the 'Yeti' begin pointing fingers
>at others and calling them 'pinks' it loses its satire and
>becomes real.
You're soooooo Pink if you actually beleive this. It SAYS right in the
book, "Are you abnormal? Then you're probably BETTER than most people!".
If it's in a book, it must be true. And "Bob" wouldn't lie about
something like that. Unless he was lying.
If you are SO blind that you can't see that the _Book of the SubGenius_
et. al. are GOSPEL TRUTH, are ABSOLUTE FACT, and should only be
interpreted LITERALLY, then you probably also fail to grasp that every
"member" (I have a member of my own right here) ALSO means EXACTLY what he or she says EVERY TIME, and you should take what WE say literally,
too.
B.E.M. Kinsman
Rabbi-Without-Portfolio
I'm a Yeti & You're Not, nyeh nyeh nyeh, ttthhhhhhhpppppptptptptptp!
--
The Albuquerque ROS - (505) 296-3000
========================= !!! Automated Notice !!! =======================
E-mail replies to this user should have the following on the first line
of message text: TO: Berin Kinsman
====================================================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Armina@cris.com
pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty) wrote:
>Timothy Verry (verryta@taft.law.uc.edu) wrote:
>: You may just *be* pink after all, since you posted this blatant lie.
>
>And we all know that only Pinks lie...
:-D another witty paradox!!! I do love them in twos - specially
the interns :-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Armina@cris.com
Robert/Lisa Garland <rlgarland@why.net> wrote:
>angela@infi.net (Angela) wrote:
>I log onto alt.slack because I'm weird.
Major point being, your weirdness should be welcomed not shunned
or feared - If I start answering your posts with things like
'you're too weird for us here, get away' heh... then I would be
no better than our dear friend Racial Theorist. :-)
I might try to sway your point of view, might cajole, plead, rant
and rave, but I will never attack you unless you attack me or
attack someone else in a bullying fashion. So be weird... be
wired... and have fun!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Timothy Verry <verryta@taft.law.uc.edu>
On 31 Oct 1995, Lou Duchez wrote:
> TarlaStar (bmyers@ionet.net) wrote:
> : Armina@cris.com wrote:
<<much energy expended in seemingly disagreeing>>
>
> Tarla, I'm not sure that Armina understands what we mean by Pink. I know
> you're out for blood, ma chere, but I don't sense the cluelessness or
> shallowness that would earn her your wrath ... only a misunderstanding as
> to the concepts. Yeti vs. Pink: That she finds such easy dichotomies
> problematic only suggests that she has the right instincts.
>
> Please, there's only so many UberFemmes out there, and I suspect Armina
> is one. Don't make the male : female any more lopsided than it already is!
are yeti-cunt territorial? Could be problematic. But I don't think that
is what is happening here. It is just misunderstanding of what we do
with those who are tried and convicted of pinkness. And why.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Timothy Verry <verryta@taft.law.uc.edu>
On 1 Nov 1995 Armina@cris.com wrote:
> pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty) wrote:
>
> >Armina@cris.com wrote:
>
> >Personally, I believe that Man A is better than Man B, because he hates
> >the person for WHO he is and what he DID, while Man B hates the person
> >for WHAT is is...the color of his skin.
>
> thats what I said...
So far so good. Is pinkness really state of being, or a choice of
action? (question open to all)
> I realize that you mean 'pinks' as a group of people that behave
> a certain way, not as a race or 'color'. However, a certain
> number of your .. er.. brethren? seem to address anyone who steps
> in from outside of your 'church' as 'pink' without knowing how
> they behave or why they behave that way and thus are no better
> than the racists who hate blacks simply because they are black,
> not because they know anything about them individually. This is
> not to say that every one who considers themself 'sub-genius'
> thinks this way, only that this is the danger inherent in a group
> such as this.
You are very correct. THis shit scared me off a while back, and I had to
realize for myself that I yam what I yam. One of the things that makes
the church effective is that it is its own screening device. Everyone is
free to think what they want, so there is of course massive
contradictions in the appearance of the group. Those who judge the
members by the actions of some other members are not ready.
> There are always the fanatics in every group that take the tenets
> of said organization to heart and elevate themselves to the
> position of judge. In fact I would take it a step further and say
> that those who behave this way are not *true* sub-genius, but
> actually sub-genius wannabes. BUT because the group is formed and
> they present themselves AS the group, this is how the group
> comes to be percieved...
We don't present ourselves as a group. But you are right again. Those
who need to judge are doing it out of some internal reason. THere is
absolutely no way calling someone pink benefits the church. If you
can't try to change the rest of the church to support your image of what
you think it should be (except that I'm trying to do that right now ;)
you have to schism and make a new church of your own. THe mother church
must be allowed unlimited fecundity. Squelching input is rarely
beneficial, we need all the compost we can get.
alt.slack is a little different though, because it is part of usenet it
is necessary to behave as a usenet group, and it is necessary to get the
irrelevant shit that always happens on usenet out of our corner of it.
> And if they are pink, you would do them and the world a lot more
> good if you would take them by the hand and attempt to teach
> them to think more freely, rather that point a finger at them and
> call them names.
It can't hurt. I think you are needed around here.
<<righteous peace love and harmony snipped>>
>
> Some "subgenii" do run around calling everyone else
> >Pink. We call them Bobbies, and we hate THEM more than we hate the Pinks,
> >cuz they're FUCKING UP THE WHOLE RELIGION! But what can we do, eh?
>
> If I knew the answer to THAT question I would be one very rich
> woman! :-D
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Timothy Verry <verryta@taft.law.uc.edu>
On Wed, 1 Nov 1995, Peter Munson wrote:
> >THe cool thing was how it kept changing, every day it would taste a
> >little different until the last few bottles were just foamy and yeasty.
> >WHat did I do wrong so that it just kept fermenting?
>
> How long did you ferment it before you bottled it? Did you do a
> single fermentation or a double? Did you add the sugar to the
> bottles (the old way) or mix it into the brew before bottling
> (the new way)?
Fermented about a week, until the specific gravity was wherever it should
have been. I guess single. Added sugar to mix before bottling.
The trouble was that there was too much added sugar, I suspect.
> Perhaps a SubG Bewing Association should be formed. "Bob"'s Evil Amber.
> NHGH Pale Ale. SubGenius Stout.
Oh my "Bob", I would be in heaven. Not to mention it could be used to
subvert.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: petehip@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Peter Hipwell)
In article <4770ep$kls@spectator.cris.com> Armina@cris.com writes:
>As I see it,(and I hope you will correct me if I'm wrong), Yeti's
>are evolved from Pinks. Evolution can go in several directions.
>Some are good and some are not. If your intellect evolves but
>your compassion whithers and dies then have you gained? Are you
>better then those whose lives and actions you would eschew?
>Or are you more evolved if you can use your higher intellect to
>look back and help those who haven't yet evolved to your level?
As I see it, there's no evolution of intellect involved. Hence
SubGenius. There doesn't have to be any evolution of anything. You
don't have to be superior to anyone - cause, if anyone wants to claim
that, they can go right ahead, but they'd better be RIGHT, or they're
going to get a nasty knockdown - and the only person who truly helps
you sort out a better life for you is YOU.
BECOME PHYSICALLY ATTRACTIVE - OVERNIGHT.
That's one of the slogans from the pamphlet. What does it mean? It
means that once you stop worrying about conforming to other people's
standards and go right ahead with your own, COME WHAT MAY, then you're
well on the way to having a healthy dose of Slack. Once you "get it"
you realize you ARE physically attractive - however ugly, twisted and
deformed you may be from the viewpoint of people who BELIEVE in that
kind of shit. Or it may mean something totally different.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: thecharlie@aol.com (TheCharlie)
In article <476v8b$kls@spectator.cris.com>, Armina@cris.com writes:
>Have you ever noticed that? People who have to point out to you
>how good they are are usually not really so hot, are they?
Thank you for pointing that out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: thecharlie@aol.com (TheCharlie)
Timothy Verry <verryta@taft.law.uc.edu> writes:
>My best batch so far was ale. I made it from a kit that comes in a
>cardboard box about 6x6x14. It was absolutely the best beer I have ever
>had. THe cool thing was how it kept changing, every day it would taste a
>little different until the last few bottles were just foamy and yeasty.
>WHat did I do wrong so that it just kept fermenting? Is there a way to
>stop the process and "freeze" the whole batch just at the peak of
ripeness?
When there are no more fermentable sugars left in the solution
fermentation stops. This is when it's ready to bottle. Then you add a
little priming sugar (because the beer is flat) and bottle. The sugar will
feed the yeast again, just enough to carbonate, but the amount of alcohol
produced is negligible. The alcohol comes from the initial fermentation
which was already completed. It sounds like you bottled a little too
early.
If the last bottles were yeasty, try a secondary fermenter. You siphon the
beer off of the sediment (yeast) into another vessel. This eliminates the
yeast bite and helps produce a much clearer beer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Armina@cris.com
sylvia@monitor.net wrote:
> Screw the beer, I just like the yeast...lots and lots of yeast crammed
>down my gullet with a wooden paddle.. Makes yer innards belch like a steam
>engine, makes yer skin break out in funny fungus that resembles advanced
>leprosy..Then you know what I do? I sit on a street corner and people
>throw money at me, just so I'll stay away from their kids. Gotta love
>America.
Sounds like a great money maker, Sylvia! You shouldn't give it
away like this - try spamming all the newsgroups! "AMAZING NEW
MONEYMAKER - GET RICH WITH ABSOLUTELY NO EFFORT - PEOPLE WILL
JUST THROW THEIR MONEY AT YOU!!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Armina@cris.com
imber@scf.usc.edu (Aprilfish) wrote:
It's all in the bylaws.
Bylaws, In-laws - these are all things you listen to with a smile
, then go on and do your own thing...
>
>Armina may want me to hold hands with people and try to make them freer
>thinkers,
Kum-Bah-Yah :-)
and I do, in fact I've been suffering a little lately trying to
>pull that latency to surface in someone. But after a while, it's either
>pull it out or I gotta go.
Here is truth at its finest! Everyone has the potential for
free-thinking but not all have the ability to let it out. Some
people are just too uptight to allow their thoughts to stray from
the accepted. If you aren't careful in trying to draw them out
they can begin to drag you down. There does come a point where
you have to pull back and leave them in their own little mud
puddle. And thats fine too - maybe their own form of 'slack' -
after all, its easier to just accept society's lines and let it
flow over you.
That's fine. But she needs to get some of her
>facts straight about what a SubGenius is...that evolution thing isn't
>right. And brains aren't key.
I'm getting lots of help on that and I appreciate it - Thanks to
all who have offered their views! :-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Armina@cris.com
Going way back to the original subject of women and the men they
choose:
Just remember one thing! If you are waiting for your Knight in
Shining Armor to come along, you will have to clean up after his
horse!
(Well... you just gotta KNOW that a Knight in Shining Armor would
HAVE to be a chauvinist - so be careful what you wish for... you
just might get it!)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty)
Peter Hipwell (petehip@cogsci.ed.ac.uk) wrote:
: pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty) writes:
: >No. The Zonnist view would be that the bunny is a bunny and the man is a
: >man, and the two cannot be what they are not, so the concept of
: >'bunnyman' is irrational and subjective, and therefore destructive from
: >the viewpoint of fully-integrated honesty.
: A television is a television and cannot therefore be fully integrated
: with the concept of screen which is a screen and therefore not a
: television and therefore...
: TELEVISION SCREENS CANNOT OBJECTIVELY EXIST.
: Hoo-fucking-rah.
All hail Zon.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: FAQ for Armina (and EVERYONE) (Was Re: Women hate this)
From: bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar)
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 1995 14:32:33 GMT
angela@infi.net (Angela) wrote:
> Lou says this group is about tolerance, creativity and humor. I definitely
>see humor and some creativity, but as far as tolerance goes, I've never seen
>another religion or group claim so blatantly to be superior to others and to
>hate them, like I've seen on here. There might be people out there who LIKE
>to follow the pack. Maybe they find comfort it that. Can't you
>allow THEM the right to be what they want to be too?
Only if they choose to follow the pack consciously. If they just
follow along because they're too afraid to speak their own mind, then
I'm sorry, but the church of the SubGenius is not for them.
>The original idea is
>great..follow your own star..wherever that might take you. But you need to
>leave it at that. When you start hating or feeling superior to others who
>don't feel or do as you wish, you become what you started out disliking in
>others, in the first place.
Somehow along the way you've absorbed the idea that being "superior"
is wrong. Let us take another example: two men come to a village. In
the village a woman is being called a "witch" and the crowd of
villagers is preparing to kill her. One man seeing which way the crowd
is going, decides that he doesn't want to face their wrath, he starts
yellling right along with them "Burn her!" The other guy wants to know
what's going on, he questions the authority of those who are in
charge, he goes against the crowd and by showing them how absolutely
stupid and wrong they are, he stops the burning. (The fact that the
witch later shows him her gratitude in ways that put zing in his
thing, has little or nothing to do with this). Can you not say that
that morals of the man who goes against the crowd are superior to
those of the man who unthinkingly conforms? I can.
This idea that all people are equal is a part and parcel of the CON.
It's simply not true. There are those with superior intelligence,
there are those with superior work skills, and there are those with
superior social/ethical/skills. Everyone may have equal rights under
the law (supposedly) but Nature isn't controlled by the law, and the
longer we continue to put forth the idea that everyone is as good as
everyone else, we deny those who ARE superior the chance to make
things better for the rest.
I don't hate those that I consider inferior, I simply do not associate
with them. I don't promote them for no good reason or give them grades
which are equal to those who show superior skills. Why? Because when
you reward mediocrity, you encourage it. When you reward inferior
behavior and substandard skills you get shoddy, shitty workmanship and
bad art. Yes, I AM a superior mutant, and I'm not about to apologize
for it. I've apologized all my fucking life for being good at whatever
I do, and I'm fed up to HERE (pointing at the top of my head) with it.
I've suffered incompetance in silence for much of my life, but by
Dobbs, I'm not doing it anymore! Kindness is reserved for those who
deserve it. Unthinking conformists do not deserve my kindness, it will
only make them think they're fine.
Sometimes you have to kick a mule in the head just to get its
attention.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: blackmer@course1.harvard.edu (John Blackmer)
Angela (angela@infi.net) wrote:
: wouldn't that be more in the lines of some type of phobia? I just don't get
: the part where you would hate them instead of feel sorry for them. I'm sure
: you don't hate people who are sick or crippled in some other way, right?
If this is referring to me, which of course it IS, I don't hate Pinks
unless they try to hammer nails into two-by-fours or wear black socks,
which makes me SHRIEK and STAB STAB MURDER ON SIGHT! Right now this very wrong second!
"Crippled," my ass! (or not really my ASS, but you know what I mean)
Actually, right now I sort of feel like...
MICROSOFT WORD: The Proposal. THAT is what I feel about Pinks, "angela",
In the beginning, there was the Tao, and the Tao gave birth to the Word,
and the word became the Ten Thousand Things. And much gooshing of pickle cake on faces was made that day I tell you. But then came the Micro/soft "word" which gave birth to "safety tips for teens". Need I say more?
NO, I don't think so, I think you ALL understand. In this sea of faces
insipid as cows and words as banal as Please Bring Valid ID if you would
like to drink at our SOULLESS COCKTAIL PARTY THAT MUST DIE ... okay.
Okay, AMEN.
Amen again,
Agsts "shit-lick lackey" QPM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Zachie and Lisanne <rlgarland@why.net>
pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty) wrote:
>I know a lot of people think it's repugnant to find something 'immoral'
>in doing drugs. But that's probably because I sound like a Xtian when I
>say it...it sounds like I feel that way because of some strange code of
>honor handed down from an old book. In truth, I find recreational drug
>use repugnant (personally), because I have a serious moral code against
>destroying your own mind.
Personally, I don't know if repugnant is the right word. I mean it may be
for you and that's fine, but I mean I usually think of repugnant as foul
smelling and has the potential to instigate from me the holy Spewing of
Chunks.
I prefer to think of it as sad that a person is incapable of finding new
and more original ways to destroy their own mind. I mean I've destroyed
my mind several times over, and then rebuilt it over the occasional
summer like a 1967 green VW Bug!
My brain is probably due for an overhaul actually, and I did all this
without any need for drugs! Who needs drugs!?
Try listening to an old scratchy 45 record of a Partridge Family song
playing backwards at high speed, and you'll NEVER NEED LAME PINKO
CONSPIRACY DRUGS AGAIN!! Try getting a whole pile of old scratch 45s and
repeatedly throw them at a wall in a monotonous, barbaric fashion while
saying "Bob" over and over and over again like a broken record and you
will achieve a trance-like state much more encompassing and pure than
ANY psychedelic weirdo hallucinogen. You will see Great Indian Chiefs
floating in the air playing poker with dogs and cats in velvet paintings.
It's not "Just Say NO!"
It's more like "Why Say Yes?" There's so many OTHER things out there
which you can use to make yourself a life threatening danger around heavy
machinery! USE SOME CREATIVITY FOR DOBBS' SAKE YOU PATHETIC CRETINS!!
Drugs! Pshaw! Been there. Done that. Bought the book. Rented the movie.
Made fun of Clinton. etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Zachie and Lisanne <rlgarland@why.net>
->pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty) wrote:
->>Zachie and Lisanne (rlgarland@why.net) wrote:
->: There are many schools of thought in the Church regarding how to treat
->: Pinks.
[blah blah blah]
->: HATE PINKS!!
[blah blah blah]
->: CONVERT PINKS!!!
[blah blah blah]
->: IGNORE PINKS!!!
[blah blah blah]
->: There is a Fourth Option,
[blah blah blah]
->All hail Zachary, for elegantly, concisely, and beautifully summarizing
->the point that this thread was truly revolving around. You got the motts,
->Zach... There was no clearer way to put it; she's gotta get it now.
->Rev. Pee Kitty, of the order Malkavian-Dobbsian
No clearer way to put it? You mean I actually made sense? And to think, I was trying to describe a recipe for a pink flamingo omelette with hinky saurkraut and green M&Ms!
Guess it's time to go back to the drawing board. (sigh)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar)
angela@infi.net (Angela) wrote:
> I feel a little silly cause I thought everyone was talking about something
>a little different. I'm sure I don't look at things exactly like Armina
>does and no we're not clones ;) I can see how you all things it's a bad thing
>to be pink. From what you said it's more of state of fear or lack of
>guts..not to sound mean, but that's what it boils down to. So in a sense
>you ARE 'doing' better than them...as far having your head together. But then
>wouldn't that be more in the lines of some type of phobia? I just don't get
>the part where you would hate them instead of feel sorry for them. I'm sure
>you don't hate people who are sick or crippled in some other way, right?
Only if they want to make me sick and crippled too...and
unfortunately, many Pinks want just that. They want us all to be as
sick and crippled as they are.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dode <dode@dolmen.demon.co.uk>
blackmer@course1.harvard.edu "John Blackmer" writes:
> If this is referring to me, which of course it IS, I don't hate Pinks
> unless they try to hammer nails into two-by-fours or wear black socks,
Surely you can make an exception for Pinks in cases where a limb of the
hippie Jesus is placed between the sharp point of those nails and the
rough face of those two-by-fours.
BANG! BANG! AUURGGGHHHH BANG! BANG! AUUURRGGGHH!
Dode (Sorry, I feel Better Now).
--
Enjoy The Spectacle Of Jesus On A Rubber Cross
Courtesy Of
Vulcan's Christian Joinery Workshop
__ __
|| dode@dolmen.demon.co.uk ||
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Zachie and Lisanne <rlgarland@why.net>
SOMETHING INCREDIBLY MEANINGFUL WHICH WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS LONGWINDED, QUOTED DOCUMENT ABOUT TWO WOMEN WHO HATE THIS, WHATEVER THIS IS. SO KEEP READING, MY STALWART FELLOW! READ ON!!!!
m.kildow@infi.net (Michael Kildow ) wrote:
>Armina@cris.com wrote:
>: bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar) wrote:
>: >angela@infi.net (Angela) wrote:
>
>: Angela wrote:
>: There might be people out there who LIKE
>: >>to follow the pack. Maybe they find comfort it that. Can't you
>: >>allow THEM the right to be what they want to be too?
>:
>: Tarla answered:
>: >Only if they choose to follow the pack consciously. If they just
>: >follow along because they're too afraid to speak their own mind, then
>: >I'm sorry, but the church of the SubGenius is not for them.
>
>: Angela wrote:
>: >
>: >>The original idea is
>: >>great..follow your own star..wherever that might take you. But you need to
>: >>leave it at that. When you start hating or feeling superior to others who
>: >>don't feel or do as you wish, you become what you started out disliking in
>: >>others, in the first place.
>
>: Tarla answered:
>: >
>: >Somehow along the way you've absorbed the idea that being "superior"
>: >is wrong.
>
>: Armina interjects:
>: Being superior is not wrong. Shoving your superiority in
>: someone's face who didn't have the good fortune to inherit some
>: wonderful skill or talent is. There are poeple in this world who
>: are not great at any particular thing. Not everyone has the
>: ability to be great. And without the followers what good would it
>: do to have leaders?
>
>: Tarla tells a story:
>: Let us take another example: two men come to a village. In
>: >the village a woman is being called a "witch" and the crowd of
>: >villagers is preparing to kill her. One man seeing which way the crowd
>: >is going, decides that he doesn't want to face their wrath, he starts
>: >yellling right along with them "Burn her!" The other guy wants to know
>: >what's going on, he questions the authority of those who are in
>: >charge, he goes against the crowd and by showing them how absolutely
>: >stupid and wrong they are, he stops the burning.
>
>: Armina says:
>: Thats a good little story, but the honest story would be that he
>: would be grabbed by the crowd and burnt along with the woman. And
>: THAT is the danger of group conformity. No one thinks for him/her
>: self - for anyone to stop and even LISTEN to that man would be
>: group heresy!
>
>
>: Tarla elaborates:
>: Can you not say that
>: >that morals of the man who goes against the crowd are superior to
>: >those of the man who unthinkingly conforms? I can.
>
>: Armina agrees:
>: Absolutely, the man that goes against the crowd has the superior
>: morals, but if he is intelligent he will find another way to
>: divert the crowd until he can sway the group thinking that
>: brought them to this point to begin with.
>
>: Tarla writes:
>
>: >This idea that all people are equal is a part and parcel of the CON.
>: >It's simply not true. There are those with superior intelligence,
>: >there are those with superior work skills, and there are those with
>: >superior social/ethical/skills. Everyone may have equal rights under
>: >the law (supposedly) but Nature isn't controlled by the law, and the
>: >longer we continue to put forth the idea that everyone is as good as
>: >everyone else, we deny those who ARE superior the chance to make
>: >things better for the rest.
>
>: Armina answers:
>
>: I think that the idea that all people are equal has long been
>: misunderstood. People are equal in their BASIC worth as human
>: beings, NOT in regard to their skills, intelligence, etc. Take a
>: family with a number of children as an example. Little sis(6 yrs
>: old) cries: 'Mom its not FAIR Billy (age 12) gets to stay up til
>: 11 o'clock and I have to go to bed at 8!!'
>: These children are equal in worth but unequal in age and
>: abilities. The six year old doesn't understand that.
>: Just as people who don't have the skills, talents,
>: intelligence(sometimes)can't understand the (sometimes) radical
>: ideas of those who possess those things. In dealing with those
>: people we have to have some understanding in order to deal with
>: their feelings which often include anger and hostility and which
>: stem from feelings of inadequacy and inferiority. If we can lift
>: them above those feelings we will have used superiority in a
>: positive way.
>: If we react like 12 year old Billy (ha ha, I'm better'n you, too
>: bad) then we need to work on our maturity level.
>
>: Tarla wrote:
>
>: >I don't hate those that I consider inferior, I simply do not associate
>: >with them.
>
>: Armina says:
>: You don't have to associate with anyone you don't want to just
>: don't put them down for something that they have no control over.
>: For instance: If they are espousing an idea that is ludicrous,
>: talk to them, offer them the better idea, give them the
>: opportunity to learn and if they don't have the ability to listen
>: or learn THEN turn away from them.
>: Tarla wrote:
>: I don't promote them for no good reason or give them grades
>: >which are equal to those who show superior skills. Why? Because when
>: >you reward mediocrity, you encourage it. When you reward inferior
>: >behavior and substandard skills you get shoddy, shitty workmanship and
>: >bad art.
>
>: Armina writes:
>: Absolutely! inferior behavior and substandard skills should not
>: be rewarded. However a person CAN and should be rewarded for
>: their EFFORT if it is an honest one - otherwise how can they
>: ever learn and progress? An art student doesn't usually produce a
>: Picasso on their first attempt. In fact, their first attempt
>: might be pretty pathetic. If you throw it on the ground and tell
>: 'em their effort isn't worth shit what have you accomplished? You
>: might have squelched a talent that could have blossomed into
>: something amazing. No, you tell them gently what is wrong with it
>: and let them try again, and again, and yet again if need be, to
>: see if they can learn and grow. And you realize that if they
>: aren't 'Picasso material' then maybe they might blossom as a
>: commercial artist or something in another line.
>
>: Tarla says:
>: Yes, I AM a superior mutant, and I'm not about to apologize
>: >for it. I've apologized all my fucking life for being good at whatever
>: >I do, and I'm fed up to HERE (pointing at the top of my head) with it.
>
>: Armina questions:
>: Why would you apologise for your talents? I haven't seen your
>: work... is it so controversial that it has been misunderstood?
>: (an honest question)
>
>: Tarla Wrote:
>: >I've suffered incompetance in silence for much of my life, but by
>: >Dobbs, I'm not doing it anymore! Kindness is reserved for those who
>: >deserve it.
>
>: Armina says:
>: Incompetence will always be around - you don't have to accept it.
>: only consider where it comes from and why.
>
>: Tarla wrote:
>: Unthinking conformists do not deserve my kindness, it will
>: >only make them think they're fine.
>
>: Armina says:
>: Its kinda like respect. Whats your philosophy? Most people will
>: tell you that they owe no one respect until that person shows
>: they deserve it. I think its just the opposite - you should give
>: everyone respect until they show you they DON'T deserve it. Then,
>: the Hell with 'em!
>
>: Tarla wrote:
>: >Sometimes you have to kick a mule in the head just to get its
>: >attention.
>
>: Armina says:
>: Yep, but remember mules kick too! :-)
"I'm sorry. I came in here for an Argument.
"No you didn't, you came here for an ARGUMENT.
"That's what I just said.
"No i'tizn't!
"Yes i'tiz!
"No i'tizn't!
"Yes i'tiz!
"No i'tizn't!
"Yes i'tiz!
"No i'tizn't!
"Yes i'tiz!
"No i'tizn't!
"Yes i'tiz!
"No i'tizn't!
"Yes i'tiz!
Somewhere up there, Armina was talking about how not all people are equal
AFTER they've been created. That we are created equal, but as we each
aquire skills, age, knowledge, third legs, occasional oral fixations and
glandular therapy, we grow into some state of unequalness.
She cites as evidence of her theory two young children, one of whom gets
to stay out later than the other, because the older one is older and
therefore superior to the younger one. She also conveniently made the
older one a MALE and the younger one a FEMALE furthering this difference,
indicating superfluously that a male is superior to a female.
This of course only happens during the Missionary Position.
I would just like to say that this entire argument would have been more
interesting had both debators been stripped to the waist and were
juggling grapes and lemons on their cleavage.
Other than that I have nothing else to say on the subject.
P.S.: OKAY SO I LIED! THRE IS NOTHING IMPORTANT AT THE END OF THIS
DOCUMENT. SO WHAT? YOU EXPECT THE SOLUTIONS TO ALL THE WORLD'S PROBLEMS TO BE SOMEWHERE ON THE INTERNET, AND IF YOU KEEP LOOKING, YOU'LL FIND IT??? WHAT PLANET ARE YOU FROM???
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty)
Angela (angela@infi.net) wrote:
: I feel a little silly cause I thought everyone was talking about something
: a little different. I'm sure I don't look at things exactly like Armina
: does and no we're not clones ;) I can see how you all things it's a bad thing
: to be pink. From what you said it's more of state of fear or lack of
: guts..not to sound mean, but that's what it boils down to. So in a sense
: you ARE 'doing' better than them...as far having your head together. But then
: wouldn't that be more in the lines of some type of phobia? I just don't get
: the part where you would hate them instead of feel sorry for them. I'm sure
: you don't hate people who are sick or crippled in some other way, right?
There's one hell of a difference between someone who can't use their
legs and someone who WON'T because they're too lazy to walk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar)
Armina@cris.com wrote:
>I presume no such thing. I only say I am against it when it is done
>in a stupid and rude fashion. If you don't think I fight that same
>battle daily then that only proves that you don't know me... which you
>don't :-). You know less about me then I know about you, in fact,
>simply from the fact that I have seen your web page, read your
>writings there, seen your art there, and read a few of the stories
>that you have printed here in this newsgroup (which I have enjoyed,
>thank you). Little that I have written here has been aimed
>specifically at you, in fact, most of it has simply been debate
>aimed at trying to understand your (as in all who post here, not you
>yourself) philosophy. And which many of your postings have helped to
>make clearer.
>Now if you have misgivings over me, that is your prerogative. I think
>I have absorbed enough of the sub-genious philosophy to say it doesn't
>much matter what you think of me, only what I know of me. :-).
Actually, I considered this thread finished as soon as you showed me
you were on the right track. I will admit to some measure of
defensiveness, if only because I am STILL in the dark about who you
were on INN and if I knew you then, but you've shown me that you are
actually willing to think, so I'm back at the neutral place where I
approach most people. If you are a SubGenius, we'll see it clearly
enough. If you aren't, we'll see that too.
'frop anyone?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Armina@cris.com
pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty) wrote:
>There's one hell of a difference between someone who can't use their
>legs and someone who WON'T because they're too lazy to walk.
Very true and well said, however there is one more catagory:
those who can't walk, not because there is anything wrong with
their legs, but because they THINK there is something wrong with
their legs. And they are the saddest of all because they have
allowed their 'perfect' society to demoralize them to that point.
They feel they can't measure up to what they *think* is right or
normal, so they cheat themselves out of living. They tell
themselves, 'I can't' until they believe it. Some of them can be
lifted out of their particular mudhole. Some will dive even
deeper into it if they even see one of us coming their way.
Some of these people have real emotional problems. And its
unfortunate that most people can't understand that. They see
someone in a wheelchair and understand that they can't help it,
but they see someone who is emotionally disabled and can't
understand them. And unfortunately it is difficult to tell who is
just being lazy and who really can't help their dilemma. Thats
why I feel it is so important to remember not to judge too
quickly and to take each person as an individual and try to
understand what they are really about. Sometimes you can be
really surprised at what you find... sometimes even delighted :-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty)
Dennis McClain-Furmanski (dynasor@infi.net) wrote:
: On Mon. Nov 13, 1995, pkitty@netcom.com told All:
:
: pc> : Nah, you'd have to diss Selina to get yelled at.
:
: pc> Sheeit, is THAT all it takes? "Selina, you fishmongering, whale
: > felching, bear guzzling, neener spanking daughter of a toadstool!"
:
: pc> <sitting back and waiting for the screams>
:
: Oh, great. I get to explain these to her.
Good luck with "neener spanking"...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty)
Armina@cris.com wrote:
: pkitty@netcom.com (Pee Kitty) wrote:
: >Actually...yes, maybe. I'd have to know the people better. But I will
: >tell you this. I see nothing great about being too nice...I look down on
: >people who are TOO nice; i.e., the ones who are nice to people who don't
: >deserve being nice to. If someone takes advantage of you and treats you
: >like shit, and you keep being nice and letting them do that, I think a
: >LOT less of you.
: Yes, Kitty, I agree with you here... but I think that people that
: continue being nice to people who threat them badly again and again
: ... well I think that has more to do with fear than with niceness.
: This is a person with such low self-esteem that they are afraid to
: stand up for themself ... someone, in fact, who actually believes that
: they deserve being treated like shit. These are the people who will
: run themselves ragged trying to conform to everyone's way of thinking,
: because they are afraid to think for themselves... Now thats sad.
: These people are much more handicapped than someone in a wheelchair.
: It is very difficult to overcome your own emotions.
This, more or less, is the pole that you and I have been twirling may day
streamers around: What do you do with a person who doesn't have the self
esteem, conviction, inner strength, ego, etc., to pull themselves out of
their life rut and into their potential?
Everyone on here has a different answer...it's why this thread hasn't
just ended with a nice, happy conclusion that we all nod at. It's why
this Church continues to exist.
I say: There IS a difference between someone in a wheelchair and someone
with no ego. The difference is that the person with no ego CAN reverse
that problem and rise out of their rut, if they just try. They can 'heal'
themselves. I know. I did it. I was one hell of a self-pitying, suicidal,
whining victim until I finally had to come face to face with reality. The
reality of what most people in this world are like. And the reality that,
despite my belief that I was one of the most pathetic people on earth, I
still had a shitload more common sense than these kine. And I began to
rise out of it...with the rise came other realizations, and others, and
soon I was at my full, Yeti-inheirent potential. Others CAN do it. Maybe
they need a boost, but they CAN do it without a boost. They can if they
just try. That's my belief.
And because of that belief, I cannot feel particularly sorry for them. I
do not. If I see a LOT of potential in one, I'll probably be their friend
by then (my third nostril is wide open--I'm good at surrounding myself
with people with strong, sometimes latent, Yeti genes), and I'll do what
I can to help pull them out of any ego rut they're in. If I don't sense a
ton of potential, I certainly won't bother. If they want it, they'll open
their eyes and TAKE it. If they don't, fuck 'em...it's not that they
couldn't. It's that they COULD'VE, and DIDN'T.
Big difference from the kid in a wheelchair.
Original file name: Women hate this
This file was converted with TextToHTML - (c) Logic n.v.