[eDebate] if we're an indicator, yes, women get up early, it seems.
Your Boys Moschiach & Muhammed
Fri Apr 4 08:04:47 CDT 2008
If the winner is the one who tricks the other the most times, I win.
FooledYa#1: you assume i'm a man. i'm a woman, as well. maybe when i talked
about 'the ladies' i was roleplaying a male debater. or maybe i'm a
homosexual woman. who knows? you don't.
FooledYa#2:: you assume i assume you're a man. when did i assume you were a
man? i use 'guy' as a gender inclusive term. in my post and in life.
FooledYa#3: you assume i assume you're not Jewish. when did i say you're not
Jewish? Jews can be anti-Semites too (or justify anti-Semitism) -- in fact
this is at least 1/3 of the old self-loathing Jews joke.
FooledYa #4: racking up Fooled Ya tallies does not make one a winner of
anything remotely dialogical; to be redundant, dialogue is not about Fooled
Yas. Parody might have demonstrative currency. But parody is not
dialogue. Our exchange (which includes your argument that you fooled
me) proves it. Dialogue is key to answers/ change/ anything positive to the
community that could result from edebate conversations.
If the winner is the one who tricks the other the most times, no one wins.
Peace, Jesus. Word.
(Pssst I'm not Jewish)
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 8:38 AM, jesus christ <omritarded at gmail.com> wrote:
> wow, someone gets up very early in the morning to flame some "guy" for
> some alleged "anti-semitic" postings.
> firstly, that was hysterical, kudos and cheers to you for getting at
> least part of the joke.
> secondly, do you know how parody functions? most of what makes it a
> compelling strategy is that it is often its own best answer.
> in the instance of the post in question: the hyperbolic and crude
> nature of the descriptions therein along with the subsequent overly
> specific disclaimers provide a backdoor(id make another crude joke
> here about your familiarity with alternate entrances but i hardly
> think its vital to my position) through which the reader is invited to
> pass or not pass, these features of the parodic gesture make it
> difficult to tell if the writer means exactly what they say or if they
> are indeed mocking earlier posts about jack stroube calling omri a
> nazi, the very notion of writing without authorship, or even the
> deadly serious nature that these discussions, be they banal or
> otherwise, take on...
> the reader, in this case, you, is invited to take an interpretive
> leap and in someways reading becomes the very process of writing
> telling us more about you than you could ever discern about me...
> it is in this way you have fallen for a trap. you poor dumb fuck.
> for the record i dont have balls at all, i am a womyn(i know spelling
> it with a Y doesn't solve but i sure do like it) way to make that
> assumption tho(is that a link turn, i think it is) and oddly enough im
> a jew(ashkenazi to be precise) another dumb ass assumption you made.
> when given the option to interpret you assumed id be another dumb ass
> fat wasp dude like the rest of this community, its a wonder this place
> doesn't attract more people from diverse walks of life with brilliant
> scholars like your selves assuming a generic identity and ascribing it
> to speakers with which they have no contact or knowledge of---i have
> to say this doesn't look good for you... might be game over.. either
> way it doesn't matter as i have finished my little experiment and will
> disappear from whence i came.
> thanks for playing and really that reply while it wasnt the "right"
> was really really funny and i hope you spend the rest of the day
> patting yourself on the back for it.
> yours truly,
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman