[Foundation-l] On curiosity, cats and scapegoats

[Milos Rancic]

On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 17:30, Milos Rancic <millosh at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 15:54, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stierch at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think this moves beyond just one organization. As a "concerned feminist"
>> who "lives in America" the idea of calling the women who support the
>> referendum, aren't into bad porn on Commons, and tacky use of sexualized
>> images on articles as "educational" when they really aren't, "sexually
>> impaired" - is beyond sexist.  Unless, perhaps, I'm mis-understanding your
>> post.
>
> Thanks to Fred, I've realized that it seems that you misread my email.
> My sarcastic example related to particular organization, not to
> "concerned women/feminists from America". The organization is called
> "Concerned Women for America" [1]. They started the whole drama in
> 2008 [2].

And to be more precise: I can't have a position about your position if
I don't know it; thus I can't be sarcastic toward your position.
However, the position of the Concerned Women for America is well
described and I can be sarcastic about it. That doesn't include just
their position toward sexually explicit content.