It's Time to Boycott Arizona

[Kobi]

Again, just because you dont like my views, does not give you the right to be disagreeable.

Nor does disagreeing with you have anything to do with racism. It doesnt matter if you are brown, black, yellow, white or purple. There are laws in this country about immigration for a reason. To decide arbitrarily that one will circumvent those laws because it suits one does not make it acceptable. Just as it would not be acceptable to say murder is ok. You cannot pick and choose which laws you adhere to.

But then again, it is easier to just pull out the race card and feed on emotions than it is to deal with the people deliberately and willfully breaking the law.

H2 workers have nothing to do with medical residency students. H2 workers here in my area are supermarket workers, hotel workers, laborers etc. And thats a fact.

Just because I see things differently doesnt mean I am not uneducated or ill informed. Again, that is liberal rhetoric to divert attention from the matter at hand by knitpicking every detail for which there is evidence for both points of view. But then again, it serves your purpose to claim superior knowledge without having a clue about what my history or experience might be. Self serving I guess.

And that is what a knee jerk liberal is. Saying you have the only truth and your views, being more compassionate must be right, and you must quell anyone who dares to speak a different truth because it doesnt fit the program.

One can have compassion and also be reasonable and logical. But, again, it doesnt fit the liberal agenda to have such people speak out.

Originally Posted by MsDemeanor

Can you explain how the expression "knee jerk" applies to this conversation? The people posting here have done their homework, they've researched the facts, and some of them have lived the topic. If having compassion makes us bleeding hearts, so be it. That's so very preferable to being heartless.

Migrant workers are a backbone of our economy. Businesses hire them and pay them less because those workers have no protection. They can be subjected to harsh conditions and underpaid (or not paid at all), while the business can either keep prices down or pocket the additional money that they're not paying in wages and benefits and for safe working conditions. If you're bothered by immigrant workers, you should be talking to your representatives about cracking down on the businesses that hire them.

Those folks are probably doing the work under the table, not paying taxes on their earnings and illegally subsidizing their unemployment benefits. If they get sick, they're likely using the emergency room for health care, since unemployment benefits aren't enough to pay COBRA. Are you angry that these people aren't paying in to the system while they are using expensive medical services, or is it okay since they're, you know, white and all.

I also gotta point out how racist your comment is. You see "more Americans"? I think you mean "more folks who's skin ain't brown". You can't tell from driving by a work site who is and isn't an American. You'd be the kind of person who would assume that the guy doing my yard work is "illegal" because he's brown. Wrong. He's got a blue passport.
What does the work done by medical residency students have to do with the conversation.?

We're all still eagerly awaiting your injection of facts in to the conversation.

[SuperFemme]

the law in AZ is unconstitutional. that means it affects us all. it is the chipping away of our rights little by little.

at the end of the day, i feel safer knowing who doesn't like my people than having them hide in the shadows.

wink wink.

[The_Lady_Snow]

Last time I checked no laws were being passed to target and single out the purple people of Crayola land...

A law DID PASS targeting one specific type of looking kind of peoples...

It's not irish undocumented workers

It's not the Canadian undocumented workers

It's not the Russian undocumented workers

It's those pesky gosh darn latinos, who keep crossing over taking all those Wall Street jobs and sending their kids to those gosh darn Ivy League Schools..

All my people, (who do not identify with the purple people who DON'T EXIST) are wet backs, I am, my kids are first generation Americanos...

I was an undocumented problem for this country taking your jobs till the age of 13 when I got my green card...


I am still taking your jobs.

Now you tell me why the fuck I get to have a big target on my fucking back?

I bet I know more about your History than you (general btw).


So you see this isn't a liberal knee jerk reaction, YOU HAVE NO CLUE WHAT WE GO THROUGH.. HOW WE HIDE... HOW SCARED WE GROW UP...

So yeah

[MsDemeanor]

Kobi, you've made lots of attack statements, but have yet to provide thoughtful arguments. Is there any chance that you'll quit spewing hate and rage and tossing around red herring sound bites and instead start engaging in productive discourse, or shall we just move on without you?

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Again, just because you dont like my views, does not give you the right to be disagreeable.

Nor does disagreeing with you have anything to do with racism. It doesnt matter if you are brown, black, yellow, white or purple. There are laws in this country about immigration for a reason. To decide arbitrarily that one will circumvent those laws because it suits one does not make it acceptable. Just as it would not be acceptable to say murder is ok. You cannot pick and choose which laws you adhere to.

But then again, it is easier to just pull out the race card and feed on emotions than it is to deal with the people deliberately and willfully breaking the law.

H2 workers have nothing to do with medical residency students. H2 workers here in my area are supermarket workers, hotel workers, laborers etc. And thats a fact.

Just because I see things differently doesnt mean I am not uneducated or ill informed. Again, that is liberal rhetoric to divert attention from the matter at hand by knitpicking every detail for which there is evidence for both points of view. But then again, it serves your purpose to claim superior knowledge without having a clue about what my history or experience might be. Self serving I guess.

And that is what a knee jerk liberal is. Saying you have the only truth and your views, being more compassionate must be right, and you must quell anyone who dares to speak a different truth because it doesnt fit the program.

One can have compassion and also be reasonable and logical. But, again, it doesnt fit the liberal agenda to have such people speak out.

So I just thanked your post for you being the second person to tell me on this site that I am using my race card

Congratfuckinglations


I did not realize speaking about my experience was me throwing my fucking race like it's a god damn Pokemon Card......

[SuperFemme]

it's a circular conversation at this point.

[SuperFemme]

[MsDemeanor]

Perhaps I was a little hasty and made an assumption. I'll restate. My question is in regards to this comment:
Funny, how our economy is in the tank and I see more Americans doing landscaping and general labor work this year then ever.
Would you please tell us exactly how you know that the people doing these jobs are Americans?

[apretty]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Again, just because you dont like my views, does not give you the right to be disagreeable.

what you consider 'disagreeable' most everyone else (in this conversation) considers 'logical, linear thought' --that's about perception.

Originally Posted by Kobi

Nor does disagreeing with you have anything to do with racism. It doesnt matter if you are brown, black, yellow, white or purple. There are laws in this country about immigration for a reason. To decide arbitrarily that one will circumvent those laws because it suits one does not make it acceptable. Just as it would not be acceptable to say murder is ok. You cannot pick and choose which laws you adhere to.

before there were 'immigration laws' there was scapegoating--for the bible tells me so: leviticus chapter 16

link: http://scriptures.lds.org/en/lev/16/21-22#21

from reference.com:

scapegoat


In the Old Testament, a goat that was symbolically burdened with the sins of the people and then killed on Yom Kippur to rid Jerusalem of its iniquities. Similar rituals were held elsewhere in the ancient world to transfer guilt or blame. In ancient Greece, human scapegoats were beaten and driven out of cities to mitigate calamities. In early Roman law, an innocent person was allowed to assume the penalty of another; Christianity reflects this notion in its belief that Jesus died to atone for the sins of mankind.

Originally Posted by Kobi

But then again, it is easier to just pull out the race card and feed on emotions than it is to deal with the people deliberately and willfully breaking the law.

it's been proven and i can find a source if you'd like that racists are frequent users of the term, 'race card'. additionally, hitler was also within the law when he began to (and continued to) exterminate Jews in nazi germany. which brings up an interesting related bit of information: you do realize that the man (russell pearce) behind much of the wording and passage of the bill has neo-nazi ties, right? does that make you uncomfortable? that makes me uncomfortable.

(below) that guy on the right is pearce, the one on the left is locally known neo-nazi, JT ready.



JT Ready at a Nazi rally: (2nd from right)

Originally Posted by Kobi

Just because I see things differently doesnt mean I am not uneducated or ill informed. Again, that is liberal rhetoric to divert attention from the matter at hand by knitpicking every detail for which there is evidence for both points of view. But then again, it serves your purpose to claim superior knowledge without having a clue about what my history or experience might be. Self serving I guess.

you can see things differently, or you could also invest some time in discovering what is really going on. (and not every person that disagrees with you is a "liberal")

Originally Posted by Kobi

And that is what a knee jerk liberal is. Saying you have the only truth and your views, being more compassionate must be right, and you must quell anyone who dares to speak a different truth because it doesnt fit the program.

self-examination is rad.

Originally Posted by Kobi

One can have compassion and also be reasonable and logical. But, again, it doesnt fit the liberal agenda to have such people speak out.

who's a liberal?

i can have compassion for people and still think they're ignorant, intolerant racists:

i see more people pro SB1070 and pro a ban on ethnic studies (which you don't even mention) as a vehicle to further their racist agenda--these aren't people that were "against" racism in any way, prior to the bill--they're just now able to pretend that they hate brown people because they're "illegal" and they're now able to thinly veil their racism behind a totally fascist law that once-again targets brown people. (read: racists have been empowered by this law which totally sucks. and by racists in arizona i mean gun-carrying, no license-requiring guns allowed in bars, RACISTS.)

[firie]

Originally Posted by Kobi

There are laws in this country about immigration for a reason. To decide arbitrarily that one will circumvent those laws because it suits one does not make it acceptable. Just as it would not be acceptable to say murder is ok. You cannot pick and choose which laws you adhere to.

Kobi,

With all due respect, I have to note that I am befuddled by this line of reasoning, and because it is so often used in arguments about immigration. There was a conversation about this in this thread pages below, and so I must say what I said to that poster (was it you? I apologize if it was and so am therefore repeating myself to you again) was this:

Some laws are stupid. Some laws are quite racist. Some laws are quite oppressive (down right evil, really), and so therefore are absolutely meant to be challenged and broken.

And with all due respect, some of us very much do pick and choose the laws we adhere to, and even further, sometimes, even our own lawmakers and law "enforcers," if you will, pay no mind to them either.

I am not going to argue what others have said very well already, and really have a feeling, you could care quite less what I have to say on the matter of immigration and racism anyway.

But I just can't, in my anally neurotic way, see any logic to the above, and even more so when it's used to defend oppressing one's human rights. And lastly, I happen to actually quite love the fact that those who come here, to the US, from where ever, come here, because they make the country more interesting, and well, a little bit more enjoyable, in the beauty of neat and diverse people that it is. I will pay taxes gleefully (hell, if I had ten billion I would pay that up front for completely open borders free from harassment and overzealous INS agents toting egos and guns) for the serenity and peace of people passing peacefully to and fro from nation to nation, because I don't want any one to suffer, I like a global party, and think there is enough here on the planet to easily go around, if rationed a little less selfishly.

The "we must follow the law" argument just doesn't fly in any way to me; however, because we break/ignore laws all the goddamn time:


In Ohio the following laws exist:

if you ignore an orator on Decoration Day to such an extent as to publicly play croquet or pitch horseshoes within one mile of the speakers stand, you can be fined $25.

it is illegal to get a fish drunk.

it is illegal to hunt for whales on Sunday. (Surely it's illegal to hunt whales full stop?)

In Alaska, the following laws apply to moose:

a moose may not be viewed from an aeroplane.

it is illegal to give alcoholic beverages to a moose.

it is an offence to push a live moose out of a moving aeroplane.

In Texas the following laws apply:

it is illegal to take more than three sips of beer whilst standing.

the entire Encyclopaedia Britannica is also banned, as it contains a formula for making beer at home.

a new anti crime law has been introduced, requiring criminals to give their intended victims 24 hour notice, either orally or in writing to explain the nature of the crime.

In Pennsylvania the following laws apply:

Because of the farmers Anti-automobile society, these are some of the rules of the road:

Automobiles travelling on country roads at night must send up an rocket every mile, then wait ten minutes for the road to clear.

If a driver sees a team of horses, they are to pull to the side of the road, and cover their machine with a blanket or dust cover that has been painted to blend into the scenery.

In the event that a horse refuses to pass a car on the road, the owner of the car must take their car apart and conceal the parts in nearby foliage.

In Alabama it is illegal to wear a fake moustache that causes laughter in church.

In Jasper, Alabama, it is illegal for a husband to beat his wife with a stick larger in diameter than his thumb.

In Arizone it is illegal for donkeys to sleep in bathtubs.

Also from Arizona, if a person is caught stealing soap, they must wash themselves until it is all used up.

In California, it is illegal to ride a bicycle in a swimming pool.

In L.A., it is an offence to lick a toad. Apparently, this is because people were getting high off them! (How!??)

In New England, fire engines are not allowed to exceed 25mph - strangely, this includes the journey to the fire!

In Devon (yes there is a place called Devon in the US), it is illegal to walk backwards after sunset.

In Hartford, it is considered an offense to cross the road on your hands.

In Cleveland it is illegal to drive whilst sitting on another persons lap.

In New Jersey you can be arrested for slurping soup in public.

Zoin city, Illinois, has a law that states that you cannot make faces at anyone.

A Kentucky law states that burglary can only be committed at night.

Fishing from the back of any animal is illegal in Idaho.

In Sheridan, Wyoming, a policeman can bite a barking dog, in order to quiet him.

Citizens in New York may not greet each other by putting ones thumb to the nose and wriggling the fingers.

When you pass a cow in Pine Island, Minnesota it is illegal not to tip your hat.

Georgia has a law prohibiting people from saying ‘oh boy’ in public.

In Atlanta its illegal to tie a giraffe to a telephone pole or lamppost.

In Hawaii it is illegal to insert pennies into your ear.

It is illegal in Idaho for a man to give his sweetheart a box of chocolates that weighs less than 50 pounds.

Women in Joliet, Illinois, can be arrested for trying on more than six dresses in one store.

In Chicago it is illegal to eat in an establishment that is on fire.

In Winnetka, Illinois, theatre managers can kick out any patron who has ‘odorous feet’.

In Lawrence, Kansas, it is forbidden for anyone to carry bees in their hat, whilst on the city streets.

In McLough, Kansas, it is against the law to wash your false teeth in a public drinking fountain.

In Natoma, Kansas, it is illegal to practise knife throwing at men wearing striped suits.

In Lexington, Kentucky, it is against the law to carry an ice cream cone in your pocket.

In Owensboro, Kentucky, it is illegal for a woman to buy a new hat without her husband trying it on first.

In Canton, Mississippi, it is illegal to kill a squirrel with a gun whilst in a courtroom.

Any city in Missouri can levy a tax to support a band, as long as the mayor plays piccolo and each band member can eat peas with a knife.

In Greene, New York, it is illegal to eat peanuts and walk backwards down a street, whilst a concert is on.

In North Carolina it is illegal to use elephants to plough cotton fields.

It’s illegal in Oklahoma to get a fish drunk.

In Seattle, goldfish can ride the city buses in bowls, but only if they keep still.

It is illegal in Maine to step out of a plane, whilst it is in flight.

In Florida, you can be fined to fall asleep under a hair dryer, and so can the salon owner.

Also in Florida, if an elephant is left tied to an parking meter, the parking fee has to be paid, just as it would be for a vehicle.

Again in Florida, it is illegal to have sexual relations with a porcupine.

In New York, you need a license to use a clothesline outdoors.

In Minnesota, you may not cross state lines with a duck on top of your head.

In Carmel, New York, it is illegal for a man to go outside if his jacket and trousers do not match.

In Baltimore, it is illegal to throw bales of hay out of a second storey window, within the city limits.

Also in Baltimore, it is illegal to take a lion to the movies.

The state of Washington has passed a law stating that it is illegal to paint polka dots on the American flag.

In Conneticut, for a pickle to be officially be considered a pickle, it must bounce.

In Bexley, Ohio, it is prohibited to install or use slot machines in outhouses.

In Harthahorne city, Oklahoma, it is unlawful to put any hypnotised person I an display window.

In Clawson, Michigan, there is a law that makes it LEGAL for a farmer to sleep with his animals.

In Gary, Indiana, persons are prohibited from attending a movie theatre or riding an street car within four hours of eating garlic.

In California, animals are banned from mating publicly within 1,500ft of a pub, school or place of worship.

In Kentucky, no female is allowed to appear in a bathing suit on a highway unless she is escorted by at least two police officers, or armed with a club.

In Russel, Kansas, it is against the law to have an musical car horn.

It is illegal to hum in public on Sundays in Cicero, Illinois.

In Clinton county, Ohio, there is a fine for anyone caught leaning against an public building.

In Kenosha , Wisconsin it is illegal to have an erection in public. Even if you have clothes on.

In Kansas it is illegal to swim with a polka dotted bathing suit before 12:00 noon.

[Corkey]

Dear Constituent,

Thank you for your message and for taking the time to contact the Arizona Governor's Office.

We appreciate you sharing your thoughts and your comments will be passed on to Governor Brewer.

If you require assistance, someone from the Governor's Office will respond to you as soon as possible.

NOTICE:
This is an auto-reply to the email you have submitted to the Arizona Governor’s Office.
Please DO NOT respond to this email. This is an automated message only and any replies to this email are not processed.

Thank you,
Governor's Office of Constituent Services
1700 W Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85007
602-542-1318
602-542-1381 (fax)
www.azgovernor.gov

[Toughy]

Kobi,

What you seem to equate with ethics and philosophy.......hedging your bets and maybe it's right and maybe it's wrong..........actually has nothing to do with what I know about ethics and philosophy.

I have been on a couple of Institutional Review Boards (Ethics Review Board).....actually I was Chair of one. An IRB is set up to protect the welfare and rights of persons who volunteer for clinical trials and medical research. Incidentally, IRBs are the direct result of the 40 year Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments that ended in 1972. If you don't know about it.............try that google thang.....It was wrong then and it's wrong now.

We made judgments about every trial. We decided what was right or wrong. We approved or disapproved recruitment, retention, monitoring, design, and implementation of clinical trials. If we decided it was not ethical, then it had to be changed or that trial would not be conducted at our institution.

That IS what ethics are about. Making judgments about what is good for the individual and good for the community.

I am appalled that you will not condemn the fucked up racist shit that has happened and continues to happen in this country. As Aj pointed out........if you will not condemn racism, then I know I cannot count on you to condemn bigotry against the queer community. I cannot count on you to stand up and demand we queer folk be treated equally under the law.

[TheBellyBionic]

Originally Posted by Toughy

Kobi,

What you seem to equate with ethics and philosophy.......hedging your bets and maybe it's right and maybe it's wrong..........actually has nothing to do with what I know about ethics and philosophy.
<snipped for brevity, I hope you don't mind, Toughy>
I am appalled that you will not condemn the fucked up racist shit that has happened and continues to happen in this country. As Aj pointed out........if you will not condemn racism, then I know I cannot count on you to condemn bigotry against the queer community. I cannot count on you to stand up and demand we queer folk be treated equally under the law.

This, exactly. Refusing to condemn actions which are clearly wrong in every way denotes nothing so much as a complete *lack* of any kind of ethics. I feel that I have a very strong sense of ethics, and those ethics mean that I absolutely will stand up and say "No, there is definitely a difference between right and wrong. Slavery was wrong. Jim Crow laws were wrong. Apartheid is wrong. There is nothing redeeming or debatable about any of these things. They're just wrong. Always, in any era, at any time, always wrong." Kobi, you say "who am I to judge?" I don't. I, as a person with ethics, am an excellent judge of right and wrong. I, a person with ethics, am absolutely *obligated* to judge right from wrong. I find it incredibly disturbing that anyone could claim otherwise. I'm horrified that anyone could actually say that they can't judge the actions of the past. If you can't judge the past, then why should any of us trust you to make good decisions in the future? If you can't say whether or not slavery was wrong, why should any of us think that you'd stand against it happening again?

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by TheBellyBionic

This, exactly. Refusing to condemn actions which are clearly wrong in every way denotes nothing so much as a complete *lack* of any kind of ethics. I feel that I have a very strong sense of ethics, and those ethics mean that I absolutely will stand up and say "No, there is definitely a difference between right and wrong. Slavery was wrong. Jim Crow laws were wrong. Apartheid is wrong. There is nothing redeeming or debatable about any of these things. They're just wrong. Always, in any era, at any time, always wrong." Kobi, you say "who am I to judge?" I don't. I, as a person with ethics, am an excellent judge of right and wrong. I, a person with ethics, am absolutely *obligated* to judge right from wrong. I find it incredibly disturbing that anyone could claim otherwise. I'm horrified that anyone could actually say that they can't judge the actions of the past. If you can't judge the past, then why should any of us trust you to make good decisions in the future? If you can't say whether or not slavery was wrong, why should any of us think that you'd stand against it happening again?

SHIT! Hell yes, one can determine if something in the past is right or wrong. And one would have to rather moronic to not be able to see what those wrongs have produced that we deal with today. Unless one just wants to keep themselves under a rock. Which is the choice of many, unfortunately.

You are right on here, Aj. I often look around at some of the wing-nut garbage today and wonder.... Would these people stand up against forms of the past transgressions today? My gut fear is they would not. and cry that they didn't know it was happening just as so many did while Jews (and others) were being gased in concentration camps (just one example).

In fact, examples of this kind of thinking (and in-action) are with us today! How many turn the other way with environmental hazards, domestic abuse and violence right next door, hate crimes against people, crimes against women, child labor infractions, blatant racism and the long term effects of structural racism... on and on..... fill in more blanks....

You bet the sins of the past are on me if I don't recognize exactly what they are and how they continue in various forms!

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by TheBellyBionic

This, exactly. Refusing to condemn actions which are clearly wrong in every way denotes nothing so much as a complete *lack* of any kind of ethics. I feel that I have a very strong sense of ethics, and those ethics mean that I absolutely will stand up and say "No, there is definitely a difference between right and wrong. Slavery was wrong. Jim Crow laws were wrong. Apartheid is wrong. There is nothing redeeming or debatable about any of these things. They're just wrong. Always, in any era, at any time, always wrong." Kobi, you say "who am I to judge?" I don't. I, as a person with ethics, am an excellent judge of right and wrong. I, a person with ethics, am absolutely *obligated* to judge right from wrong. I find it incredibly disturbing that anyone could claim otherwise. I'm horrified that anyone could actually say that they can't judge the actions of the past. If you can't judge the past, then why should any of us trust you to make good decisions in the future? If you can't say whether or not slavery was wrong, why should any of us think that you'd stand against it happening again?

Originally Posted by AtLastHome

[FONT="Century Gothic"][COLOR="Black"]

You are right on here, Aj. I often look around at some of the wing-nut garbage today and wonder.... Would these people stand up against forms of the past transgressions today? My gut fear is they would not. and cry that they didn't know it was happening just as so many did while Jews (and others) were being gased in concentration camps (just on

ALH:

I have to call something out here. Ordinarily I would let Belly do this because I don't fight her battles but you addressed me so it's my responsibility. Since it was public and since this is an example of something Belly has complained about generally here (so I'm not trying to make you the scapegoat) I'm doing this out in the open. If this was something better handled privately I apologize in advance.

You responded to me, but those thoughts are Belly's. Yes, it's something I might have said. It's certainly something I absolutely believe to be true. But Belly came into our relationship already believing that. She gets me. I get her. So it shouldn't be surprising that we would think a lot alike.

On another thread, Belly complained about butches not taking femme's seriously. This is what that looks like. Belly is a very intelligent woman and she has her own opinions. When she's posting, she's expressing *her* opinions. Opinions that I assume she arrived at on her own. I know that she did not have them fed to her by me.

On the larger point, femme's deserve to be taken seriously. We butches should take them seriously, we should do so because they deserve it and we should do so because if feminism means anything at all it means taking women seriously as human beings.

Cheers
Aj

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

ALH:

I have to call something out here. Ordinarily I would let Belly do this because I don't fight her battles but you addressed me so it's my responsibility. Since it was public and since this is an example of something Belly has complained about generally here (so I'm not trying to make you the scapegoat) I'm doing this out in the open. If this was something better handled privately I apologize in advance.

You responded to me, but those thoughts are Belly's. Yes, it's something I might have said. It's certainly something I absolutely believe to be true. But Belly came into our relationship already believing that. She gets me. I get her. So it shouldn't be surprising that we would think a lot alike.

On another thread, Belly complained about butches not taking femme's seriously. This is what that looks like. Belly is a very intelligent woman and she has her own opinions. When she's posting, she's expressing *her* opinions. Opinions that I assume she arrived at on her own. I know that she did not have them fed to her by me.

On the larger point, femme's deserve to be taken seriously. We butches should take them seriously, we should do so because they deserve it and we should do so because if feminism means anything at all it means taking women seriously as human beings.

Cheers
Aj

I actually did not mean to do this at all, I knew full well it was Belly's post. I feel terrible for the slip. And do apologize. I do remember reading both you and Belly's posts in one sitting... and I just typed Aj. You certainly do not need to tell me that Belly is one hell of an intelligent woman.

I would have preferred that you did PM me as this was just a slip of names due to knowing you as a couple and nothing more. A human error. Your comments about taking femmes and feminist ideology to me seems a bit off as I am a rock solid feminist and one of my Master's Degrees is in Women's Studies as well as my doctorial dissertation was on sex-roles and women's oppression (back in the day). As a woman and a feminist, and past professor of feminist and women’s studies, I certainly do take us seriously.

This was a simple error without any ill intent whatsoever and I did not think you wrote the post. I just mixed-up names, that's it.