drill, drill, drill,
Mon, 2008-09-15 16:56
#1
drill, drill, drill,
Mon, 2008-09-15 16:56
#2
Has everyone read Eve Ensler's piece Drill, Drill, Drill? it's on [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com]www.huffingtonpost.com[/url]
Eve wrote the vagina monologues and Drill is about Palin and Ensler's horror.
We're heading down this road in Canada now with the possibility of a Harper majority.
Mon, 2008-09-15 17:13
#3
remind
Had a look at the polls morningstar recently? Harper is dropping, no where close to being in majority territory. And I thought election politics were to stay in the political forum?
Say nothing of not being able to find the OP article.
Mon, 2008-09-15 17:21
#4
you have to enter Eve Ensler. All of her stuff comes up then.
If feminism isn't political, what is??
I've felt for a very long time that the only substantive change that our society hasn't tried is true gender balanced power.
I think that it would make our society unrecognizable and be a much more evolved way of governing ourselves. This would mean the designed dismantling of patriarchy while replacing the old structures with ones that have been run through the gender lens(not just having an equal number of women in the old designs).
This is absolutely political.
Mon, 2008-09-15 17:32
#5
I posted "Drill drill drill" yesterday morning. It's halfway down the [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=004251]P... VI [/url]thread.
Mon, 2008-09-15 18:12
#6
remind
quote:
Originally posted by morningstar:
[b]you have to enter Eve Ensler. All of her stuff comes up then.[/b]
Can't be bothered to load the site again, it is time intensive on dial up.
quote:
[b]If feminism isn't political, what is??[/b]
Well, sure enough it is, however, at this time I would love to say, that I would like to personally to discuss gender balanced power but sans Harper and sans election, as said article and issue is being used for partisan purposes.
I believe the issue of gender based power should be a topic that is non-partisan, or rather not be used for partisan purposes at election time. Others may see it differently, I however do not.
Maybe Kim Campbell was correct, when she said that election time is no time to discuss issues.
The elevation of partisanship is at its highest level, in any given 4 year cycle, or in our case 2 or less, at election time. As such, common ground, general consensus, motives for actioning, public exposure, all tend to disorientate, or distort, the subject/issue. In this instance, pertaining to something so important, there could be more ground lost, than gained, by individuals using it as an exploitive tool for partisan reasons. And with other people stepping in to argue from their partisan perspective, it could cause fractures that need not be there, and would not be at another time.
With something so important, IMV, a time frame that is not so highly partisan would be more condusive to thoughful and reasoned discussion with a consensus course of action developed.
Had you not stated your sole purpose is to get Dion elected, and that you will not consider any other avenue for "allgedly" stopping Harper, other than everyone "votiong for Dion", I would have loved to discuss it as non-partisan feminists, looking for ways to focus upon gender inequality at election time. However, any topic started, by you, at this point in time, with "Harper getting a majority" in the OP, automatically biases it to your politicking upon the issue.
And I do not want to partake in that, as I feel it would waste my time, what with being used as a prop for one long Dion advertisement, and all.
Having said that, I will go look in the Palin thread for what Martin put up there and perhaps post on it there.