There is a thread on the Facebook that is dealing with the accusation that Dudeism is just another phallocentric religion. Here's the link: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/02/yet_another_patriarchal_faith.php (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/02/yet_another_patriarchal_faith.php)
Will come back and comment on this soon.
IMO: The problem in kicking-around in a religion/club/hobby called 'Dudeism" is, of course, that people will automatically assume that it's a men's/guy's/chap's club. Dude, in the parlance of our times, means man, does it not? In the beginning was the word and the word was Dude.
Let me digress (slightly) for awhile: I have neighbours, oh yeah man, Cake has neighbours, I am (somewhat unwillingly) part of this here community. Anyway, one side we have some fucked-up Christians (scream and fight all the time, physical violence, kids are never allowed outside the house to play) but on the other side we have a noisy, cleft-asshole, functional alcoholic: he's a Dude. He refers to all his mates/pals as "Dude" - when they get together (and they frequently do) it sounds like a tourette syndrome club meeting: "fuck Dude, I put the fuckin' donkey-flange on the wrong fuckin' way, Dude" - well, y'know the type of thing. He's just trying to get by, in the great scheme of things, he's okay, for an asshole (and we are all assholes to someone). To him and to most other folk 'dude" means 'man', 'guy', 'bud'. Correct me if I'm wrong, but 'Dude' means something else . . something more, to us, doesn't it?
How do we (if in fact, we should bother at all) go about making that word our own? Will it just come in time - as the movement grows? Will people feel the need to clarify themselves in everyday conversation: : "Hey, you know that Dude with the fast spin?" - "Uh, that Dudeist, you mean?".
I don't know, Dudes - I think the word has been out there too long, it's part of the American psyche, now - it may always be a neurolinguistic stumbling block. Which is a fuckin' shame because, obviously, in the greater wide world, Dude is a gender exclusive term.
The issue of gender nomenclature keeps popping up on these boards, too. Although I wasn't an active poster at the time, there is (maybe someone can enlighten me) a thread, somewhere, that deals with the issue. The first step - at least among ourselves - is to get over our NL programming and start referring to female Dudes as Dudes: no more Dudettes, please. If we want to shake-off the charge of being just another phallocentric waste of space then we have to start with that issue. (Perhaps, then, we can actually start getting some women on the forum).
(http://i.imgur.com/oexQ2.jpg)
It is not surprising, then, that the movement will, on first impression, be considered patriarchal. That's before we even get to the movie . . okay, let's go to the movie. Some Dude (on FB) commented that the women portrayed in the movie (para-phrasing) are: 'strong - and affect change". Is this true?
Maude is something of a cold-fish, has her own agenda, is in charge of her life (and in charge of the lives of others); that's cool, yes she is a strong role model, I guess. Bunny speaks for herself: pure hedonist, nuff said. Outside the gender issue they are avatars of the human condition: they do not represent anything that cannot be represented by a male character (okay, Vaginas, okay, okay the conception of the Little Lebowski, but that's it). Vaginas, Dudes. As far as I'm concerned (right here, right now) all characters in TBL may as well be representations of the voices in some Dude's head. Anyway, I guess what I am trying to say is that if we are looking for a positive female counter-balance to the Dude's persona where are we gonna find it? Is it Maude, if so, why?
(http://i.imgur.com/0agEm.jpg)
Apart from the obvious reason why.
For me, the issue resides in the lodges of our minds: we are looking for avatars/hierophants/archetypes in a movie (and therefore the movement) that are imperfect human beings to begin with (whatever perfect is). Sub-consciously or otherwise we seem to be doomed to continually separate ourselves into two camps (and maybe a third one for the camp Dudes who ain't sure). Why? Because that's the way it has always been? Because the feminine and masculine must be negotiated differently? Gods and Goddesses; all well and good. However, the best way to get a glimpse of the feminine is to talk to women as equals and for the women to talk to men as equals; without all their pre-conceptions of gender assignment. Human Dudes - let Dudeism purge all that creaky old shit. What separates us in nature should not divide us on the Lanes. Do we really need male-female icons to hang our hats on? Are we not - or trying to be - just Dudes? In short: it doesn't matter what fuckin' gender you are, just be a human being, just be Dude. It's okay, Dudes,, we can still shag each other senseless.
Idea for countering the gender-issue in Dudeism:
Well, I guess we could put it about that DL is an honest to goodness hermaphrodite. Get him (her, sorry - no erm . . ) to start growing his/her hair long Paramahansa Yogananda style. He certainly sports the knees to help pull it off.
(http://i.imgur.com/1DyaK.jpg) (http://i.imgur.com/y2iFn.jpg)
Maybe we could have an annual event where Dudes cross-dress? Not sure about that one - events where people all dress the same always freak me out: which is why I guess I'll never make it to a Lebowski Fest. Anyway, Dudes . . it's your roll.
(http://i.imgur.com/BKvta.jpg)
;)
I should add that I have nothing against gender-specific clubs - I just don't want to be in one.
(http://i.imgur.com/pJgV5.jpg)
The original meaning of Dude has changed to now mean almost it's opposite.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dude
From a fancy dressed city fop to a laid back person who is not a dick by nature.
That doesn't mean don't be a dick as in...rod...johnson...(or does it?), but don't be a dick as in dickwad asshole douchebag dick dickhead loser douche idiot jerk prick retard moron tool shithead fuck cunt fucker dumbass bastard fuckhead wanker asswipe!
(from: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dickwad)
Our purpose is no(t) to emasculate the male dude, or masculate the gentle feminine dude, but to degender
the the meaning of the term Dude itself. To make it self-applicable to either gender equally and without prejudice.
As with yourself rev cakebelly, this decision was agreed upon before my arrival, and I had no say, but it is one I can embrace without reservation. It is a Dudely endeavor and one worthy of support.
But that is just like our opinion dudes, and far be it for us to strip anyone; male or female from self-applying the Dudette or Dudess nomenclature if that is their desire.
After all what is a Dude anyway in this whole durned human comedy?
But I believe the rev meekon5 put it best with his post on the new bible:
Quote from: meekon5 on January 31, 2011, 08:16:09 AM
(http://www.somethingofthatilk.com/comics/39.jpg)
After all, what is a Dude? Well mang, a Dude is not a Dick! 8)
I ain't fer sure that's the case, man; I have yet to hear a woman refer to another as a Dude. Maybe I'm not mixing the cocktail of my life as I should. I would like to think it's so but - from my experience - Dude is still used as a generic term for a chap*. Nice use of the British street-parlance "wanker", there. CC. I don't know why but I am all in favour of W words. 8)
*Edit: among the general populace, that is.
Well cakebelly dude, it's like we just got started. It may take awhile for the whole idea to catch on. It's like that sometimes. 8)
Yeah, I like the term "wanker" as well. Think I first heard it used in a movie called The Commitments
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101605/
Loved the music! 8)
Yeah, good little movie saw it a couple of weeks ago (again) in fact. 8)
I will admit I was around when we where discussing gender politics and the "Dude" word. Can't find links to that discussion at the moment. (Am off work ill so slightly more dysfunctional than usual).
My first term of reference has to be:
Quote from:
A dude is an individual, typically male, particularly somebody well dressed or who has never lived outside a big city. The female equivalent, which is used less often, is "dudette" or "dudess". However, "dude" has evolved to become more unisex to encompass all genders,[3] and this was true even in the 1950s.[4]
I am also probably the first to jump on the soap box about the misuse of the "Dudette" word.
I actually studied the modern French feminists who unlike their American and UK counterparts went in for the study of language and followed Barte and Lacan, people like Kristeva. All who work with the premise that language having been in control of the masculine for thousands of years it is essentially misogynist in nature, it is only at the edges of language where the structurue and limitation break down that the feminine breaks through.
Sorry I lost the plot there for a minute.
I especially like the idea that an Actor is a person of either gender that acts.
I think it is up to us to ensure that the usage changes to "Dude" for either sex.
(all IMHO as usual)
I am also interested that the original article does not expand on his argument, it is just one line. Also it only references a CNN article so is a third party reference.
Quote from: cckeiser on February 09, 2011, 03:49:23 PM
...Yeah, I like the term "wanker" as well. Think I first heard it used in a movie called The Commitments
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101605/
Loved the music! 8)
Went to Leicester square especially to see this. Still love it now.
Quote from: meekon5 on February 09, 2011, 08:59:26 PM
Quote from: cckeiser on February 09, 2011, 03:49:23 PM
...Yeah, I like the term "wanker" as well. Think I first heard it used in a movie called The Commitments
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101605/
Loved the music! 8)
Went to Leicester square especially to see this. Still love it now.
Yeah, now that it got me thinking about it, I would like to watch The Commitments again. Will have to see if it's out on dvd. No longer have my VHS...well I have it, but it stopped working about a year ago.
Hope you feel better soon M5 8)
Quote from: cckeiser on February 09, 2011, 10:08:34 PM
Quote from: meekon5 on February 09, 2011, 08:59:26 PM
Quote from: cckeiser on February 09, 2011, 03:49:23 PM
...Yeah, I like the term "wanker" as well. Think I first heard it used in a movie called The Commitments
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101605/
Loved the music! 8)
Went to Leicester square especially to see this. Still love it now.
Yeah, now that it got me thinking about it, I would like to watch The Commitments again. Will have to see if it's out on dvd. No longer have my VHS...well I have it, but it stopped working about a year ago.
I still actually have my families old Betamax video recorder.
I never bought into the video thing (saw they wore out too quickly and where easily damaged). But have really bought into the DVD thing, much better format, more durable (they do still wear out eventually).
Commitments DVD (http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare2/commitments.htm) (tech details):
UK version (region 2) GBP 3.99 (http://hmv.com/hmvweb/displayProductDetails.do?sku=120301&affiliate=td&lpgrp=network&tduid=9eb579da796ac035eb7e031b48a5b12d).
Unfortunately I am really good at finding stuff for UK prices (my 42 inch HD, 1080p, TV cost me GBP 400) but don't really have the tools for US so best I can find is:
US version (region 1) 2 disk $22.49 (http://www.amazon.com/Commitments-Two-Disc-Collectors-Robert-Arkins/dp/B00018D3XW)
Scratch that, try this:
The Commitments (1991) $8.99 (http://www.amazon.com/dp/6305622922?tag=dvdbeaver-20&link_code=as2&creativeASIN=6305622922&creative=374929&camp=211189). Doh followed the link from the tech spec page.
Sorry about the GPB (Great British Pound) I can't find an asci insert (asci 0163 = British pound).
Quote from: cakebelly on February 10, 2011, 01:16:56 AM
Hope you feel better soon M5 8)
It's probably my post xmas pre birthday malaise. Birthday middle of this month. It being close to Valentines day I get really arsy about the pressure put on just before my birthday. And it also may stem from my Dad making jokes about my birthday cards possibly being Valentines cards. It's amazing how well (and how easily) you can scar your children psychologically with a little throw away phrase. Half the problem was probably they never were when I really wanted them to be, and I was upset they would be when I didn't want them to be.
Parents you have to love them.
;D
Yeah, I usually feel somewhat down a week or so before the old Solar Return; playing with my new Kindle soon chased the blues away. Valentine's Day seems to be a bigger deal over here. Just finished knocking out a few: my daughters expect one (also Busmum, of course) but they are not allowed to give them out at school unless every kid gets one - currently there are 24 kids in their class. Sheesh!
Quote from: meekon5 on February 10, 2011, 04:49:58 AM
Quote from: cckeiser on February 09, 2011, 10:08:34 PM
Quote from: meekon5 on February 09, 2011, 08:59:26 PM
Quote from: cckeiser on February 09, 2011, 03:49:23 PM
...Yeah, I like the term "wanker" as well. Think I first heard it used in a movie called The Commitments
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101605/
Loved the music! 8)
Went to Leicester square especially to see this. Still love it now.
Yeah, now that it got me thinking about it, I would like to watch The Commitments again. Will have to see if it's out on dvd. No longer have my VHS...well I have it, but it stopped working about a year ago.
I still actually have my families old Betamax video recorder.
I never bought into the video thing (saw they wore out too quickly and where easily damaged). But have really bought into the DVD thing, much better format, more durable (they do still wear out eventually).
Commitments DVD (http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare2/commitments.htm) (tech details):
UK version (region 2) GBP 3.99 (http://hmv.com/hmvweb/displayProductDetails.do?sku=120301&affiliate=td&lpgrp=network&tduid=9eb579da796ac035eb7e031b48a5b12d).
Unfortunately I am really good at finding stuff for UK prices (my 42 inch HD, 1080p, TV cost me GBP 400) but don't really have the tools for US so best I can find is:
US version (region 1) 2 disk $22.49 (http://www.amazon.com/Commitments-Two-Disc-Collectors-Robert-Arkins/dp/B00018D3XW)
Scratch that, try this:
The Commitments (1991) $8.99 (http://www.amazon.com/dp/6305622922?tag=dvdbeaver-20&link_code=as2&creativeASIN=6305622922&creative=374929&camp=211189). Doh followed the link from the tech spec page.
Sorry about the GPB (Great British Pound) I can't find an asci insert (asci 0163 = British pound).
Well Thankee meekon5 dude! That was very thoughtful of ya. Yep, I found it on that amazon site for 8.99 or something like that as well, but ended up renting it from one of the mail order video rental places. May end up buying it after all, but so far all the dvd movies we have bought just sit there collecting dust after a showing or two, so I am a bit reluctant to spring for yet another dust collector...ever a great one like The Commitments.
Once again I am impressed with how our word associations work. Discussing the Dude/Dudette controversy lead to dick which lead to dickwad which lead to wanker which lead to The Commitments which lead to Maria Doyle Kennedy which led me to The Tutors and Queen Katherine of Aragon!
Cool! 8)
Quote from: cakebelly on February 09, 2011, 10:13:15 AM
There is a thread on the Facebook that is dealing with the accusation that Dudeism is just another phallocentric religion. Here's the link: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/02/yet_another_patriarchal_faith.php (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/02/yet_another_patriarchal_faith.php)
Will come back and comment on this soon.
How the Hell did that happen???
I did not like that article???
I thought the article was complete unresearched rubbish.
Dave (A.K.A. Homebrew)
Quote from: Homebrew on February 12, 2011, 08:28:11 AM
How the Hell did that happen???
I did not like that article???
I thought the article was complete unresearched rubbish.
Dave (A.K.A. Homebrew)
It's minimal research, he's probably some born again christian. ;D
Quote from: Homebrew on February 12, 2011, 08:28:11 AM
Quote from: cakebelly on February 09, 2011, 10:13:15 AM
There is a thread on the Facebook that is dealing with the accusation that Dudeism is just another phallocentric religion. Here's the link: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/02/yet_another_patriarchal_faith.php (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/02/yet_another_patriarchal_faith.php)
Will come back and comment on this soon.
How the Hell did that happen???
I did not like that article???
I thought the article was complete unresearched rubbish.
Dave (A.K.A. Homebrew)
I totally agree it was far from an in-depth analysis.
However, I wouldn't say Dudeists are any freer from sexism than the general populace. Everyone needs to be mindful to one degree or another. For instance, it looks like the vast majority (95-98% perhaps) of names nominated for Great Dudes in History (http://dudeism.com/smf/index.php?topic=31.0) are male.
No doubt this figure is pretty close to being representative of the current gender make-up of the membership, which some Dudes have said they want to change. I think it's also true that when you say "Dude," the gender of the image in most people's minds is male. A few here are trying to change that as well, and I think cc is right when he says it's going to take awhile. I think it will also take many voices, as well as a good amount of conscious effort (although the latter may be thought of as unDudely), and, of course, abiding...
We also need to emphasise that having facial hair is not required.
Stick to the gender neutral "Dude", but don't be up tight and brow beat people over it.
We need to allow space for feminine Dudeism to grow, but actively trying to coerce ladies to join us over here probably would lead to some unDudely behaviour.
And maybe you are looking at this from the wrong direction, maybe gents are the ones who are actually the ones society is trying to keep away from Dudeism. Society tends to glorify aggression in men, and a lot of pressure is put on men to be anti-Dude, achieve, compete and gather the most toys. In some respects I see that pressure as part of Dudeisms creation, societies sexism against men.
Much of western culture places expectations on men, saying they should be all Big Lebowskis, when some of us just want to be a Dude. It's the rest of societies phallocentrism that created the space for Dudeism's genesis.
I am fairly sure no lady Dude would come in here and say, "what a bunch of sexist pigs!". But I also don't see a lot of lady Dudes saying, "oh yeah, this mancave is for me". Some day we will see the rise of the Lady Dudes, but it's not really up to us to force it to happen.
I also kinda think most Lady Dudes are off doing Yoga and Zen, they look at us and say, "okay Dudes, we sit on rugs too, welcome to the party".
But hey, that's all just like my opinion man.
good points, GMS. you're probably right about most of them.
i do think that we could benefit from more special ladies, but we shouldn't force it. and anyway, if it isn't about gender or natural zesty enterprises then it hardly matters whether we've got beavers or johnsons or bags of birdseed down there. it don't matter to the dudeist.
still, it's a hurdle we'll have to keep jumping over - the gender connotations associated with the word "dude". but fuck it, it's good exercise. keeps the mind limber.
incidentally, "dude" comes from "dandy" (yankee doodle dandy) and dandy is middle english for "fool" or "trickster" so the origin of the word is totally gender neutral. and it also supports meekons assertions that the dude is a cognate with the fool in tarot symbolism.
it's a brave dude world, pendejos. cheers to that.
I am with you two on that. Think that is basically what I wanted to get at in the Sarah Silverman thread. Was just a bit more "convoluted" in my thoughts. Must check my drug regimen. ;D
Well, yeah, fer sure - no one is planning to coerce anyone, that has never been on the cards; just sorting out the language, is all. 8)
(http://i.imgur.com/ZUozL.jpg)
The Fool Abides by Fevamouf
(http://i.imgur.com/gv76i.jpg)
ha ha. that's marvelous. love the dudeist sun. makes me feel all warm inside.
Quote from: cakebelly on February 13, 2011, 11:40:04 PM
Well, yeah, fer sure - no one is planning to coerce anyone, that has never been on the cards; just sorting out the language, is all. 8)
(http://i.imgur.com/ZUozL.jpg)
The Fool Abides by Fevamouf
(http://i.imgur.com/gv76i.jpg)
Dude art, love it, cake dude!
Quote from: cakebelly on February 09, 2011, 10:13:15 AM
There is a thread on the Facebook that is dealing with the accusation that Dudeism is just another phallocentric religion. Here's the link:
Will come back and comment on this soon.
I think that Dudeism is strongly vaginal.
Setting aside for a moment that I have a hard time taking seriously anybody who regularly uses the term "patriarchal" in a modern context, I'm not sure how this guy drew his conclusions. Is a religion sexist just because it *happens* to attract predominantly members of one gender or another? I don't recall seeing any Dudeist (man or woman) actively attempting to repel members of the opposite sex.
And furthermore, what if many of us reject the entire concept of gender as an antiquated binary that unfairly limits and stifles the human experience? Why can't "dude" just as easily stand in for the algebraic "x", as in "insert meaning here"? "Dude" can mean anything from "man", "woman", or "human being" to "the Queen in Her Damned Undies" or what-have-you, just as easily as it can refer to some rigid, Western concept of maleness.
Seriously, maybe this PZ Myers guy is some kind of an expert in some field of academia, but the way he tries to condense thirteen years of beautiful tradition into something he can easily label and categorize strikes me as the behavior of a real reactionary, who tries to come off as edgy and insightful but whose thinking about this case has, nonetheless, become very uptight.
Quaker Dude, you have some decent investigative skills man. There are a lot of ins an outs, PZ seems to have missed all the new shit that has come to light.
Yeah! What the Quaker Dude said! ;D
Testify brothers and sisters! Testify!!
And dudes, it has been proven....I mean according to statistics...within the forum limits....there are actually more vagina dudes then there are johnson dudes! That whole misconception about male dominated dudeness is not the real reality dudes.
The Dude Abides no matter the dudes gender dudes! 8)
Quote from: cckeiser on February 25, 2011, 02:37:24 PM
And dudes, it has been proven....I mean according to statistics...within the forum limits....there are actually more vagina dudes then there are johnson dudes!
I was going to say that we should publish those stats, but thinking about it that would take the whole purpose of "Dude" not being gender specific away. The point (for me) is that it shouldn't matter.
I'd like to see that stats and think it would be good to post them somewhere on the site so people doing their research can see them.
Quote from: meekon5 on February 25, 2011, 07:47:18 PM
Quote from: cckeiser on February 25, 2011, 02:37:24 PM
And dudes, it has been proven....I mean according to statistics...within the forum limits....there are actually more vagina dudes then there are johnson dudes!
I was going to say that we should publish those stats, but thinking about it that would take the whole purpose of "Dude" not being gender specific away. The point (for me) is that it shouldn't matter.
I agree. I say ignore this bum who hasn't got a clue and simply don't give him any more extra balls to help light up his pin ball machine.
Quote from: Koog-meister on February 25, 2011, 10:30:03 PM
Quote from: meekon5 on February 25, 2011, 07:47:18 PM
Quote from: cckeiser on February 25, 2011, 02:37:24 PM
And dudes, it has been proven....I mean according to statistics...within the forum limits....there are actually more vagina dudes then there are johnson dudes!
I was going to say that we should publish those stats, but thinking about it that would take the whole purpose of "Dude" not being gender specific away. The point (for me) is that it shouldn't matter.
I agree. I say ignore this bum who hasn't got a clue and simply don't give him any more extra balls to help light up his pin ball machine.
Dudes! Dudes! The Stats are open for anyone to read. They are right at the bottom of the forum on the right hand side listed under....are you ready for this?...Stats!!! 8)
Quote from: cckeiser on February 25, 2011, 10:50:25 PM
Dudes! Dudes! The Stats are open for anyone to read. They are right at the bottom of the forum on the right hand side listed under....are you ready for this?...Stats!!! 8)
Cool! (never clicked on it, just read displayed stats) Even though members are 1:1.3, male:female, women don't post much, it seems.
I've wanting to post in a substantive way for awhile on this topic, but the monkey has been very demanding. Hopefully soon...
Quote from: cckeiser on February 25, 2011, 10:50:25 PM
Dudes! Dudes! The Stats are open for anyone to read. They are right at the bottom of the forum on the right hand side listed under....are you ready for this?...Stats!!! 8)
I never noticed the male to female ratio before.
Probably too engrossed in trying to beat DB's stats (Yeh like that will ever happen ;D).
Top Ten Posters:
digitalbuddha 2708
meekon5 823
The Dude just can't have a job. Unless this is his job!
When I first join the forum the ratio was 1 male to 1.5 female. But we can't worry about that shit dudes...life goes on...8)
I've been meditating on this since I saw the article on facebook. Eventually, I've come to this. Bear with me since I tend to write stream-of-consciousness.
Dude, capital D, refers to all Dudeists; how we refer to ourselves. The name being of course taken from The Dude, which is also capitalized but includes "The". Using dude - lower case d, refers to comrades, amigos, bruddas and assorted other nomenclatures for the male of the species. As in "Some dude asked me for spare change I didn't have so I shared my lunch instead." Dude in this case means "fellow human being."
It is unfair to call Dudeism a phallocentric religion since we don't venerate a male deity or male prophet. Sure there's The Dude, but unlike say, a Lebowski-ist, to us The Dude represents a philosophy, a path, a dharma, not an end in and of himself. If Walter espoused the traits of The Dude, we'd call ourselves Sobchaks. It's all just a name, the gender has piss all to do with anything. We certainly don't promote oppression.
To even hint that we're somehow anti- female is feral and preposterous. I know I for one, refer to all people as "dude". Hell my boss is a woman, and about my age. I begin most emails that aren't work related with "Dude..." because it establishes a tone, a sense of kinship, a level of connection that is separate from the bullshit argot of business speak - you dig?
Thinking back to the movie itself, I meditated on the female characters. There's Bunny, who can represent a gold digging whore archetype, but is she really anything but an unfettered id? "Our Special Lady" Maude is certainly not a negative stereotype. She's in control, smart, sentimental, confident, artistic, well spoken, as well as lovely to look at. There's the unseen ex-wife of Walter's. All we know of her is via Walter, who is an unreliable narrator.
There's an entirely different tangent I want to go on where we can view The Dude and the rest of the crew through the lens of "emptiness" and "inter-connectivity" but that's a different thing alltogether.
My point being: this guy who gives a cursory once over of an article and starts making broad proclamations about us being some sort of He Man Woman Hater's Club can go piss on someone else's rug.
I like the chick with nine toes.
is that phallocentric?
Quote from: revgms on February 13, 2011, 11:25:57 AM
I am fairly sure no lady Dude would come in here and say, "what a bunch of sexist pigs!". But I also don't see a lot of lady Dudes saying, "oh yeah, this mancave is for me".
I think this is the crux of the matter. As far as The Dude symbolizing higher principles that go beyond gender, yes, that's true, and it is true of any gendered god-figure. One big problem is that this figure is usually male in our day and times, so it's women who have to do the work of that kind of conversion in their minds and psyches if they are to apply the principles to themselves as women. And even though TBL can be viewed as validating strong and independent or unabashedly hedonistic women, it still has a male protagonist. The story is about The Dude and how he experiences women, as well as others in his life, not about a particular woman and how she experiences the people in her life.
Women have been and still are being denied spiritual equality in religions that conceive of their gods as male. This is where I think the patriarchal accusation comes from, and I think it has a high degree of validity in regard to religions that hold a lot of societal power. Dudeism is not a major religion, nor does it have a history of having been born and developed when there was much more extreme discrimination against women than there is now. I don't think Dudeism, as it stands, can influence gender issues to any great degree, but because gender equality has not yet been reached, I think that a bit of the patriarchy is probably contained in its message and its adherents. We are all a product of our times.
im no product of my time, i am a product of my own instincts and i am, vagina and all, a DUDE.
notonly that, my best friend, who doesnt even know about TBL has called me, and everyone else 'dude' her entire adult life.
some of us just ARE, man.
Quote from: hannahdude on April 24, 2011, 07:34:54 PM
im no product of my time, i am a product of my own instincts and i am, vagina and all, a DUDE.
notonly that, my best friend, who doesnt even know about TBL has called me, and everyone else 'dude' her entire adult life.
some of us just ARE, man.
Testify dude! Testify!! ;D
Quote from: hannahdude on April 24, 2011, 07:34:54 PM
im no product of my time, i am a product of my own instincts and i am, vagina and all, a DUDE.
notonly that, my best friend, who doesnt even know about TBL has called me, and everyone else 'dude' her entire adult life.
some of us just ARE, man.
No offense meant. I'm not saying I think that dudes (whether johnson or vagina) don't stand up to the man when it's called for, just that there's a bit of the man in all of us. Just my opinion. Can I offer you an oat soda?
I just found the excellent Dudepaper article by Rev. Stella Quinn, "Dudeism for Chicks" (http://dudespaper.com/dudeism-for-chicks.html/). I'm totally with that.
oh, outer-element-hyena-dude, no worries, man!
"Excellent"? Really? Didn't think much of it myself - agreed with a couple of her points - the rest I found to be an article by numbers. Shallow reading of the material she used but I guess it was a timely piece. More forum Dudes need to venture forth into the Dudespaper article game, perhaps. There is an open invitation to bloggers everywhere to write about Dudeism to buff up their profiles. Nothing wrong with that, I guess, as they say 'there is no such thing as bad publicity" (although I am not too sure about that now I've used the quote). When all is said and done I am kinda done with that particular issue.
Yeah, it was an ok article, but the problem I thought was that is was covering a lot of old ground. That is not to detract from the validity of the article in anyway, I'm glad to have it published and read :)
As a veteran Dudespaper reader/contributer, I know a few good places to uncover some of the older articles about Dudeism's feminine side:
http://dudespaper.com/sermons-from-the-sofa-2-female-dudes-and-their-discontents.html/ - An early article by The Dudely Lama on the subject.
http://dudespaper.com/section/columns/strongly-vaginal/ - My good friend Rev. Wendy's column on those ladylike issues.
Take a gander, guys :)
Yeah well, that's just, ya know, like, their opinion, man.
Quote from: cakebelly on April 25, 2011, 02:03:10 AM
Shallow reading of the material she used
Care to elaborate? I didn't find it shallow at all. Pretty much spot on.
Quote from: Rev. Ed C on April 25, 2011, 04:03:07 AM
Yeah, it was an ok article, but the problem I thought was that is was covering a lot of old ground. That is not to detract from the validity of the article in anyway, I'm glad to have it published and read :)
As a veteran Dudespaper reader/contributer, I know a few good places to uncover some of the older articles about Dudeism's feminine side:
http://dudespaper.com/sermons-from-the-sofa-2-female-dudes-and-their-discontents.html/ - An early article by The Dudely Lama on the subject.
http://dudespaper.com/section/columns/strongly-vaginal/ - My good friend Rev. Wendy's column on those ladylike issues.
Take a gander, guys :)
I'm on the road today, but will check them out as soon as I can.
Quote from: Outer Element on April 25, 2011, 09:47:09 AM
I'm on the road today, but will check them out as soon as I can.
You're a good man... and thorough!
Quote from: cckeiser on February 09, 2011, 02:52:31 PM
But I believe the rev meekon5 put it best with his post on the new bible:
Quote from: meekon5 on January 31, 2011, 08:16:09 AM
(http://www.somethingofthatilk.com/comics/39.jpg)
After all, what is a Dude? Well mang, a Dude is not a Dick! 8)
That's true, it is a wonderfully Dudeist sentiment.
Although a more accurate summation of what the bible does already say, in my opinion, is this:
Quote from: New Testament
Don't be a dick,
love Jesus
Quote from: Old Testament
Don't dick about or you'll get a slap!
God
If you feel that the article was "spot on" and that works for you then all well and good; if your reading of the movie concurs with that of the articles author then I have to say I am mildly perplexed but not fussed. If I saw the movie as the author of the piece did then I doubt if I would have viewed it more than once. [I responded to the piece in the comments section of the Dudespaper and here and there on this here forum. Even though I kicked this thread off I feel I have said what I wanted to].
Maybe I need to view the movie a few more times - I have only seen it about 10 times or so ( I know that probably makes me something of a lightweight) but, to me, it is nothing more than a good movie; a modern (almost spoof) film noir. I do not draw much inspiration from it, well practically none, I guess. I just enjoy it for what it is: a good movie (as I said). The ideas that were spawned by the movie are far more interesting than the film. Although, of course, in dialogue, discussion and debate we reference the film it is to be hoped that we will, one day, evolve beyond that. It is to be hoped, IMO, that the term "Dude' just becomes synonymous with 'human being' - y'know.
I guess I am entering a phase where I feel that I have said all I wanted to about Dudeism; maybe I need a break from it. I dunno, we'll see.
@ Ed wasn't aware of the other articles - read them: a much better read than the article in question.
"Free time should be used to free your mind and cultivate inner peace. Not to play 'Grand Theft Auto' all day and gorge on snack food," he says.
GET OUT OF TOWN!
YOU MEAN WE AREN'T SUPPOSED TO DO THAT?!
WHAT A RIP OFF MAN!
Quote from: cakebelly on April 25, 2011, 12:12:11 PM
. . . [I responded to the piece in the comments section of the Dudespaper and here and there on this here forum. Even though I kicked this thread off I feel I have said what I wanted to].
. . .
I guess I am entering a phase where I feel that I have said all I wanted to about Dudeism; maybe I need a break from it. I dunno, we'll see.
Just skimmed your comments in response to the article. Durned innarestin'. Will respond about a couple of points later--I'm in Micky D's about ready to go to rehearsal. If you don't have the stomach, wal, that's ok. But you brought up one thing in particular that I been thinking about--that The Dude needs a drug regimen to keep his cool (which also doesn't always work). Wouldn't mind chewing on that a bit more, if you're up to it. Also, I don't think this whole idea of degendering The Dude will totally equalize the sexes with regard to the religion. I'm not saying it can't work to a good degree, just that I think getting rid of gender avoids the issue. I'm a proponent of dual- or even many gendered gods, and I don't think The Dude is one of them. Later, dudes.
Quote from: Rev. Ed C on April 25, 2011, 04:03:07 AM
Yeah, it was an ok article, but the problem I thought was that is was covering a lot of old ground. That is not to detract from the validity of the article in anyway, I'm glad to have it published and read :)
As a veteran Dudespaper reader/contributer, I know a few good places to uncover some of the older articles about Dudeism's feminine side:
http://dudespaper.com/sermons-from-the-sofa-2-female-dudes-and-their-discontents.html/ - An early article by The Dudely Lama on the subject.
http://dudespaper.com/section/columns/strongly-vaginal/ - My good friend Rev. Wendy's column on those ladylike issues.
Take a gander, guys :)
I just read these over. Enjoyable, clever, and good points in both. But, being that Dudely Lama's article focuses on relationship issues and Rev. Wendy's on how to deal with life in general as a female dude, I don't see how Rev. Stella's article using feminist analyses of TBL and religion is old news in comparison. I guess the concepts in the first two are a bit old to me, while the third seems the most strongly vaginal in my mind. But that's cool. There are a lotta ins and outs to living in Dudely fashion, and a lot of different kinds of dudes. The more strands, the better.
it's like lennon said. er...yea.
Quote from: BikerDude on April 25, 2011, 01:09:52 PM
"Free time should be used to free your mind and cultivate inner peace. Not to play 'Grand Theft Auto' all day and gorge on snack food," he says.
WHO THE FUCK SAID THAT?
HAND ME THEIR TESTICLES ON A PLATE MAN.
THATS MY ENTIRE LIFE PLAN OUT THE FUCKING WINDOW MAN.
I can understand, somewhat anyway, why people think of Dudeism as being male oriented, but phallocentric? That's going to far.
Religions tend to be somewhat male oriented. Usually the top person/deity/god/whatever, is either an actual male, or referred to as male. Most people today tend to equate Dude with the masculine, so I can understand where some of this is coming from.
However, I am hearing more and more women refer to themselves, and other women, as Dude. Not very often, but it is noticeable. It's just a matter of time, I think, before this becomes part of the common culture. Maybe then this idea of Dudeism being male oriented will go away.
Quote from: karmatso on April 30, 2011, 02:28:52 AM
...Religions tend to be somewhat male oriented. Usually the top person/deity/god/whatever, is either an actual male, or referred to as male. Most people today tend to equate Dude with the masculine, so I can understand where some of this is coming from...
That's a very broad brush your using there "Religions". I would argue that the Abrahamic religions are definitely (I hope to prove that this is the effect of
Akhenaten's religious reforms (http://www.heptune.com/Akhnaten.html) changing the
jewish idea of religion (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biblianazar/esp_biblianazar_jehovah02.htm), but that's the subject of a PhD I think), particularly all the
various flavours of christianity (http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_true2.htm) (but I count that as one religion, you don't get more than one vote just because you can't agree on what language your holy book should be in, imho) but not
all religions (http://www.musesrealm.net/deities/deitiesfemale.html).
I think a lot of mistake is made just looking at the phrase "Dude" and assuming it is male, and the use of "Dudette", a practice you will find me shouting against on a regular basis.
Having run a small theater company previously I was impressed by the dropping of the term "Actress" (for female "Actors") and the adoption of "Actor" for both sexes. This I believe we have regularly discussed and the general approach is to refer to male and female "Dudes", though there are some female Dudes who refer to themselves as "Dudette" which of course is their right, and any male Dudes that wish to
refer to themselves as "Dudette" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&v=sFBOQzSk14c), I'm sure none of the rest of us will stand in your way.
Little emphasis is placed on the fact that we are very much anti-violence, anti-capitalist, and anti-competition. All these are major misogynistic concepts, and our opposing them actually makes us more to the feminine side of spirituality.
The path of acceptance, and abiding, rather than fighting I think also makes us a more "Vaginocentric".
Nothing ever changes.
too many words, dudes, too much rampant intellectualism going on here, abide man, have a drink...
and im NO dudette,
hugs and kisses....(eh HEM)
hannahdude
...Religions tend to be somewhat male oriented. Usually the top person/deity/god/whatever, is either an actual male, or referred to as male. Most people today tend to equate Dude with the masculine, so I can understand where some of this is coming from...[/quote]
[/quote]That's a very broad brush your using there "Religions". I would argue that the Abrahamic religions are definitely (I hope to prove that this is the effect of Akhenaten's religious reforms changing the jewish idea of religion, but that's the subject of a PhD I think), particularly all the various flavours of christianity (but I count that as one religion, you don't get more than one vote just because you can't agree on what language your holy book should be in, imho) but not all religions.[/quote]
You are absolutely correct, and I apologize. I should have been much more specific with examples rather than making a broad generalization. Of course there are so many different types of religious practices out there. I guess I was thinking more of the "major" religions practiced by people today - Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, etc., etc.
Quote from: hannahdude on April 30, 2011, 09:45:47 PM
too many words, dudes, too much rampant intellectualism going on here, abide man, have a drink...
and im NO dudette,
hugs and kisses....(eh HEM)
hannahdude
I like the way you think.
thank ya kindly, stranger.