As Jerry himself said in one of his recent Final Thoughts (from an episode entitled “Online Strippers”): “Indeed, whatever means of communication mankind develops, what inevitably will be communicated… will be the message of sex. As with any other technology we will argue about it, and say ‘This kind of stuff shouldn’t be turned on!’ But it will be, so long as men are.”
jarbaby
Thanks so much for clearing that up. I feel the urge to repeat myself.
“Woman sperm” works fine as a metaphorical reference. It also works as a factual description if one wishes to address concerns of gender identity as separaet from biology. It makes no sense if one defines “woman” solely in terms of chromosomes. Is it really that difficult for those of you fixated upon the third option to realize that in a conversation with a woman and the transexual lover who impregnated her that perhaps another interpretation was intended?
Care to answer the question?
I have already repeated myself once in this post, so I think I will stick with the motif.
*Perhaps you missed lee’s post clarifying that the sperm originated from a Pre-op MTF transsexual.
Perhaps you also missed my post where I pointed out that said clarification occcured before the complexity remark (which seems clearly directed at issues of gender identity not what chromosome pattern must be shared by sperm producers).*
What part of “[sperm from a] Pre-op MTF transsexual” escaped your comprehension?
minty
Sorry about that. :smack:
Perhaps we have different definitions of irony. Yours sounds closer to Alanis Morisset’s than to my own. Or perhaps the issue is that you, as have several other posters, are framing lee’s position in terms of deviation from an expected family archetype. I have yet to see anyone substantiate a claim that she has taken such a stance.
[ul][li]lee does not like Disney for showing families without mothers.[/li][li]lee is a member of a family with potentially two mothers.[/ul][/li]I see no incongruity. I see no contrast between apparent and intended meaning. I see no irony.
Yes, Spiritus, it is precisely as I stated: If you take a narrow reading of lee’s Disney critique and the defense of her own family structure, there are not necessarily any inconsistencies. If, however, you note that the Disney attack based on Disney’s family structures, then further note that defense of the tripar(en)tite family is a defnse of lee’s own family structure, the incongruity becomes apparent.
I see irony in the broader reading, you see no irony in the narrow reading. No skin off my nose either way.
I’ve typed 4 different drafts that I’ve deleted. I’ll come back in the morning when I’m fresh and try to describe why the idea of a mother, a father who dresses like a mother, and another father who watches the two moms go at it (and kind of gets turned on by the dad/mom but is disturbed by it) makes my WTF meter peg 11 when they’re discussing how a media company screws with the image of the nuclear family.
stofsky, do us all a favor and don’t even bother. We get your point.
Esprix
Spiritus, yes, your explanation is perfectly fine, and I accept it, and in fact I have understood that to be the case for three pages. The point is that YOU gave it, not lee or KellyM. And lee and KellyM were the ones asked to explain the term ‘woman sperm’. lee and KellyM just ASSUMED we all knew what they were talking about and then assumed we were insulting them when all we were asking for was a rock solid definition of the term ‘woman sperm’, which I’m not afraid to admit, was something I NEVER LEARNED ABOUT IN SCHOOL OR HAVE NEVER READ ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD.
In short, if you say something that can have several different interpretations, don’t be amazed when several people ask which one you mean.
To say that asking about the origins of the term or belief in woman sperm is spewing hatred for transgendered people is ridiculous.
347 replies in under 48 hours
8472 hits
Is this some kind of record?
In one corner, Mickey Mouse & friends, in the other, a threesome involving a transsexual who has yet to go through the sex-change surgery and apparently, a voyeur. The latter party claims that Mickey & Co. family values will somehow be harmful/detrimental to their child’s development – although it is not yet clear as to how or why.
And it is being suggested that there’s no “irony” in that position? That this is all fine and dandy and not worth batting an eyelash over…
The world must have passed me bye when I wasn’t looking.
WTF, indeed.
Spiritus Mundi, thank you.
Yes, Kelly is a woman. Any sperm from her is woman sperm. That turn of phrase was from a Kids in the Hall sketch and did amuse me, but it still is an accurate description and truly, I do not understand how it can be so offensive to some. I will not apologize for the truth.
I also do not understand why our sexuality was brought into this thread. I do not understand how, when someone who should know better calls KellyM a man, that I could be anything other than hurt and offended.
Nor do I understand how my sexlife pegging the WTF meter as it was so quaintly called, means that I have any less right to control what comes into my house. I did not say that I would prevent my child from seeing images of Disney out in the world, otherd said that I would. I said that I would not have it in my house and because some assholes had threatened to give gifts just so I would have to accept something I find odious into my house, to ban those as well. A gift given only out of contempt is no kindness.
I did not bring up my sex life. Others saw fit to do that. I only tried to correct mistaken impressions. I do not understand why some saw fit to repeatedly bring it up.
Nothing in these threads has made Disney any less odious to me. To say I do not like it for its treatment of the nuclear family is simplistic and does not include many of the reasons at all. When it comes down to it. it is about taste and values, and Disney is not my taste and all too often does not reflect my values.
I apologize to Ukulele Ike for overreacting to his comments. I do not take well to impreciations that I am less than steadfast. I do not easily drop a course of action and because it is not easy or it is inconvenient. I am not easily swayed into an easier path. This is a virtue and a fault, but it is mine.
I find it particularly funny that you didn’t use HOG to describe me. You might have meant SOW, but couldn’t really differentiate. I will now invite you to kiss my wonderful hog ass.
Nah… not for a rant.
Now, this thread has to be some kind of record… over 87,000 hits and over 700 substantive replies in 2 months, and it keeps going. Our little rant here is an anthill by comparison, both in substance and in origin. 
Joyfully ACCEPTED!
Now, everyone come here for huggles.
before I go, I really really really want lee to understand one thing:
The birth of a baby is a joyous miracle. I am sure yours will be loved, healthy and a screaming bundle of poop and laughter.
I understand that you consider Kelly’s sperm to be from a woman and I am not offended by it…AT ALL.
I have just never…ever in my LIFE heard the term, and wanted some clarification. If this was perceived to you and your husband and lover as insulting or offensive I apologize.
Good luck with your family.
:: jarbaby was here::
Spiritus, thanks for saying so much so well.
I see Lee as saying that her family sees Disney as offensive because of the lack of a mother figure in it’s stories, but also as abecause of it’s homogenous “pap” qualities. To the first, well, that’s a quality of fairytales as a journey story, which Disney has mined quite thoroughly. I think it’s a legitimate genre, and I certainly gained a lot from reading those fairytales. To the second, yep, I hear ya, it’s the nature of mass commercialization. From what I know here of Lee and KellyM, homogenization and fitting “the norm” is not the way y’all have experienced your lives. So. why should you endorse that when raising your child? Do what you see best, but be aware-maybe after this thread all too aware-, that you’re going to encounter a lot of differing opinions, and your child will be in the middle of it. I’d say, lighten up a bit, especially since your family situation will , unfortunately, cause the child that anyway. That’s just the way the world is now. Your child, to my mind, will also be given an amazingly different view of life, due to a bold upbringing. I welcome that ! But, as evidenced from this thread, y’all might want to loosen up a bit, and not see everything as a threat, but learn to let it go without a fight. What better lesson to teach the new exceptional person you’re about to be blessed with?
About the “woman sperm” conundrum; I can see Lee’s view of Kelly’s sperm as being different. I don’t know enough to know if she thought that Kelly impregnating her was a possibility at that point of K’s transgender. Biologically, yes, it’s male sperm, but I can see the psychological viewpoint of it as being a woman’s seed. Maybe going into realms poetic, but I would like to see the difference in perception. At this point, this forum is not the place, but I hope that Lee and Kelly can illuminate that at some point.
And, I have to say, ladies, that I think the OP was an overeaction. I saw it as the slight jibe of an experienced parent to the newbie, and a very common poke in the ribs. It was a basic Ike humorous post, to me. If you were at all doubting his open-mindedness to the very varied human situations on this board, well, that’s quite misguided, from my long term reading of him here.
Most of all, teach your little one to swim well, with strong strokes, and a nice backstroke, too, to look up at the sky!
I now see Lee’s apology to U. Ike.
OK, then.
If there was ever a thread that followed the traditional plot structure, this was it.
Exposition - Uke’s comment in the MPSIMS thread and lee’s here.
Rising Action - Everything up to the conception and “woman sperm” part
Climax - Reaction to the “woman sperm” part in which gender roles were brought into the act
Falling Action - The last page or so
Resolution - This page.
And they all went about their lives.
THE END.
But…but…but…
I STILL wanna know just what it is about Disney that is so objectionable. I’ve been hanging around this and another thread ever so patiently, just waiting for lee or KellyB to tell us why they are boycotting Disney.
AND I STILL DON’T KNOW…AND NOW IT SEEMS LIKE I’M NEVER GONNA FIND OUT.
Bloody, bugger, bitch, bum. Not bloody fair. Damn. :rolleyes:
I think I’ll just go and throw a tantrum now…s’cuse me. 
quote:
Originally posted by lee:
How is it that raising a child without animated Disney movies or related merchandise is beyond thinking? At least one other doper has managed it for 6 years so far. I am not planning to eliminate all other animation, nor am I elimintating all tie-in merchandise. Just Disney. I hate them, I hate their purchased legislation, and I hate their animation, and I hate the resulting degradation of tastes. They seem to encourage the craving of pap by the American public. I will not let them shape my child’s tastes. I will block the Disney channel as well.
You forgot the plastic bubble. And the will only read the Bible part.
lee
You are welcome. I am happy that you have reconsidered your reaction to Uke and that he has accepted your apology.
estelle
Thank you for your kind words.
Esprix
Thank you for your kind words, too.
Can I say this is just like a certain type of animated movie that has a happy ending?