North Texas Objectivist Society (NTOS) Message Board › The "crossed legs" strike: Columbian Gang women go on strike

The "crossed legs" strike: Columbian Gang women go on strike

Sherry
SherryTX
Plano, TX
Post #: 240
There is all sorts of funny things in this.

The "crossed legs" strike


Wives of Colombia gang members call sex strike against crime
Reuters


Updated: 4:25 a.m. CT Sept 14, 2006
BOGOTA, Colombia - They are calling it the "crossed legs" strike.

Fretting over crime and violence, girlfriends and wives of gang members in the Colombian city of Pereira have called a ban on sex to persuade their menfolk to give up the gun.

...

Copyright 2006 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.
URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/...­


How insane is this? I guess I shouldn't be surprised...but my goodness...methinks there may be a few women go missing in the next week or so in Columbia confused



Organizer:
Tom makes a good point on this thread about respecting copyrights on our message board. I edited this post to only keep a snippet ("fair use") portion, and the link. (I also corrected the "?" symbol that Meetup's software frustratingly substitutes for unrecognized symbols, in this case, the original quotation marks in the copied text.)
-- Todd
A former member
Post #: 81
[Sherry said]
Copyright 2006 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.
URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/...­

Uh...not to pick on you Sherry, because I see this happening all over the web, but what part of "expressly prohibited" do you not understand?
Sherry
SherryTX
Plano, TX
Post #: 241
Oh the irony.
Guess I should have just posted the link.

I was so moved by the absurdity of the content of the article I didn't really think about it. I glanced the end, making sure I kept the copyright notice, but no, I honestly didn't notice the rest of the blurb.

Forgive me....I've already forgiven myself.
Old T.
OldToad
Group Organizer
Dallas, TX
Post #: 302
Oh the irony.
Guess I should have just posted the link.

I was so moved by the absurdity of the content of the article I didn't really think about it. I glanced the end, making sure I kept the copyright notice, but no, I honestly didn't notice the rest of the blurb.

Forgive me....I've already forgiven myself.



Hi Sherry,

I think Tom makes a good point about respecting copyrights on our message board. The fact that technology makes it so easy to copy does not make it right to do so.

The forgiveness cannot come from Tom -- you did not violate his copyright.

And I think one can forgive oneself for an honest mistake, but only after considering if there are any reasonable steps that could be taken under the circumstances to correct such a mistake, and if so, taking such steps.

In this case, while I don't think it is necessary to contact Reuters and ask for their belated permission or forgiveness for this small mistake, on principle, we should at least consider the possibily of stopping a continuing copyright violation on our message board.

Meetup's message board allows each of us to substantively edit our own posts. While it can violate message-board etiquette to substantively change a post if someone else has already substantively responded, I think we can correct the original copyright violation and still honor etiquette. Further, honoring copyrights should take precedence over etiquette.

I have edited your original post to only include a snippet that should be within the bounds of a "fair use" exception to wholesale copying and kept the link to the original publication.

I am curious if anyone has any helpful comments on this.

-- Todd
Sherry
SherryTX
Plano, TX
Post #: 243
thanks for editing it...I went back to edit it myself after I posted the last comment, but was having issues with my computer last night so gave up.
Just was a case of being to quick with the copy and paste on my part is all.

But back to the content of the article...am I the only one that thinks the whole thing is silly?
Old T.
OldToad
Group Organizer
Dallas, TX
Post #: 303

But back to the content of the article...am I the only one that thinks the whole thing is silly?



Hi Sherry,

There is a great deal of context to this story and these women's situation that I do not know. I believe that the societal context down there is quite a bit different than here around Plano, TX. I imagine -- as I sit here in my context of the comfort of a relatively civilized society -- that these women are taking some serious risk even speaking of "crossing their legs" to "stand up in protest" against their menfolk's violence and immorality. They arguably should do more, but as you also suggested, they may be testing the bounds of their freedom and risking their lives even to make this public statement.

I think it is a small but important step in the right direction for the women in their context to even start talking about withdrawing from relationships with violent and immoral men. What may follow from thinking about their values and their relationships, getting together and talking about the problem with others in similar circumstances, and taking the action of making this kind of statement? They might find that they should start taking additional steps and acts in support of their basic idea -- withdrawing entirely from relationships with violent and immoral menfolk.

-- Todd
Dan
dbclawyer
Allen, TX
Post #: 79
But back to the content of the article...am I the only one that thinks the whole thing is silly?

I would agree that the idea is a pretty silly one. More than that, I think it is downright dangerous for these women to make such a threat.

A number of possible campaign slogans come to mind. I cannot share them with anyone--ever.

Dan
Santiago V.
sanjavalen
Dallas, TX
Post #: 123
But back to the content of the article...am I the only one that thinks the whole thing is silly?

I would agree that the idea is a pretty silly one. More than that, I think it is downright dangerous for these women to make such a threat.

A number of possible campaign slogans come to mind. I cannot share them with anyone--ever.

Dan

Oh, Dan, now you've just got everyone curious.

As to the original article, I have a better idea - how about seperating permanently from violent gangsters?

It is strange that they would disapprove enough of them to stop having sex with them - an attempt at punishment and an active showing of extreme disapprove, I suppose - yet not leave them. Why?
Sherry
SherryTX
Plano, TX
Post #: 244
I was thinking what you were Santiago. If they feel that strongly why be with them to begin with? Or why stay with them.
I am trying not to judge the women too harshly, I really am not, and I do have think it does take courage to take a stand against violence, especially when it is being committed by those that are close to you. However. I think the manner in which they are is foolish for a few reasons:

First, I wonder how reasonable of a relationship it could be if you need to issue ultimatums at all, especially by withholding sex.
Secondly, I wonder how many of the woman may end up putting themselves in the position of being raped, or murdered by these so called loved ones.
Thirdly, I have a repulsion for those that work against their partners in general like this but act like it isn't what they are doing. If they feel this way, they should just leave. Not work with their so called loved one's enemies. Because isn't that what the government is in this case? Of course, the gangsters are corrupt, and wrong to be engaging in violence, but to go out and work against your husband/boyfriend with the government?

Either stand by your man or walk (or run) away. You cannot straddle the fence.

(Of course, I am disgusted by the behavior of the criminals even more.)

I guess this is one of those cases the woman feels like it is a desperate situation calling for a desperate measure?

Edited to add: Dan, be prepared to be stalked at the next meetup. I am sooo curious as to what some of those slogans are.
I have my ways. You will talk.
tongue
A former member
Post #: 82
[Dan said]
A number of possible campaign slogans come to mind [regarding Columbian gang women going on a sex strike]. I cannot share them with anyone--ever.


What a tease!

But seriously, Ayn Rand made a comment somewhere about how despicable she thought it was for women to use the refusal to have sex as a weapon, I believe in an article about feminism.

I think there is also an Ancient Greek story along these lines, but I can't remember the name of it.

While I applaud these women for taking a moral stand against their violent boyfriends, why on earth are they with them in the first place? Or why would they stay with them after finding out about their violence? I would almost suspect that these women thought their violent boyfriends or husbands were quite macho, until someone put the moral word on them. So, it might be worth while to follow upon the story and see if it ever says anything about why the change of attitude is taking place now.

In a way, this reminds me of the "Kill Bill" (volume 1 & 2) movies. This was a very interesting revenge movie. Without giving away too much of the plot, a woman who was a member of an assassination squad decides to retire, but the leader of the Viper Squad doesn't like this, so he tries to kill her, leaving her for dead. However, she recovers from a coma and seeks out Bill, hence the title.

Even though the lead character shows a great deal of courage in her battles, the movies are morally ambivalent, because it never shows how she become involved in the Viper Squad in the first place or why she fell in love with Bill. Surely, she knew what kind of a man he was; yet even in her retirement she is not shown to have moral repugnancy for the guy, except for the fact that he tried to kill her.

But what about all the people she would have to have killed in order to become Bill's number one girl? There is no mention of this. Were they all bad guys? Did no innocent people get assassinated, at least by her? I find this unlikely, given the nature of the other Viper Squad members.

The implication is that she just wants to settle down and raise a nice family. So she murdered a few dozen innocent victims -- who cares?

And what happens if law enforcement personnel catch up with her revenge spree? Is she just going to say, "I'm retired now, leave me alone please"?

I prefer the Clint Eastwood revenge movies, because at least there is some implication that the character he plays was innocent and done wrong -- i.e. that he was taking a moral stance; applying justice. Gotta love that "Who are you!?" at the end of one of those movies.

I didn't quite get that moral rectitude from "Kill Bill." She came across all "innocent" at the end, but I ain't buying it until I hear the rest of the story.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$­$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Philosophic essays based on the philosophy of Ayn Rand

www.appliedphilosophyonline.com­

Applied Philosophy Online .com

Where Ideas Are Brought Down to Earth!

tmiovas@appliedphilosophyonline.com

All rights reserved 2006 by Thomas M. Miovas, Jr.

Powered by mvnForum

Suggested Annual Donation

$10.00 (after 6 event visits)

This covers: Supporting operating expenses and advertising for new members!

Payment is accepted using:

  • PayPal
  • Cash or check - “Please give any cash or check to any Organizer at an event. We also accept BitCoin: 14sioRkdEBcvvQavE4zbDbSwbsvscPAvF9 Thanks!

Your organizer will refund you if:

  • Each event may have a specific refund policy based on the nature of the event. General donations are not refundable. We may rely on any payment, so if you have any questions please ask an Organizer BEFORE making a payment!

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy