uggabugga uggabugga
* * *
Return to Dudeism.com |  recentposts2

Author Topic: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏  (Read 34047 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

cakebelly

  • Dude
  • ******
  • Posts: 1014
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #30 on: February 12, 2011, 06:55:27 PM »
...on second thoughts: Who is to represent them, if they do not so themselves.

And, don't stone me for that, what if - for whatever fucking reason - dudeism  d o e s have more appeal to johnson-wearers than to amphibious rodent owners ;D   I'm talking about beavers here, not marmots.  ;D (or, in German parlance: bears)

Perhaps, after all, dudeism is a male solution to a male thing.... ???
Like TBL seams to appeal, on average, more to male viewers than to female ones?

And if so, what would be wrong about it?

Faithfully BE

You could be right, there Brother Erwin  - but I gotta say - that would be a bummer, man. Shabbos every day . . fuck that.

Especially in light of recent discussions on these here boards (Dudeism was recently slammed as "another patriarchal religion").
« Last Edit: February 12, 2011, 06:57:26 PM by cakebelly »

Outer Element

  • Dude
  • ****
  • Posts: 198
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #31 on: February 12, 2011, 07:03:23 PM »
...on second thoughts: Who is to represent them, if they do not so themselves.

And, don't stone me for that, what if - for whatever fucking reason - dudeism  d o e s have more appeal to johnson-wearers than to amphibious rodent owners ;D   I'm talking about beavers here, not marmots.  ;D (or, in German parlance: bears)

Perhaps, after all, dudeism is a male solution to a male thing.... ???
Like TBL seams to appeal, on average, more to male viewers than to female ones?

And if so, what would be wrong about it?

Faithfully BE

Yep. Jest about every way you look at it, hee-roes come in different genders. To the extent you identify as that gender, that's who your hee-roes are.

Probably a better reason to put more great female Dudes up on this site is so that whoever partakes of Dudeism will have the benefit of having a range of Dude role models to look to for inspiration, no matter what gender.  Process of dismantling bias and all that--would be good to do with race, ethnicity, etc., as well.
The Dude Abides.

brother_erwin

  • Dude
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #32 on: February 12, 2011, 07:06:48 PM »
Yeah, but I wasn't talking about shabbos every day, man.

Also, I wasn't talking about patriarchal stuff , just, forgive me, there might be differences between the sexes, like there are differences between submarines and fiords, like the former may enjoy finding their way in the latter, or rodents and johnsons.
Fuck it, all these hormones and things, they are not there for just fun and games, there must be an unspoken message.
What's wrong with differences? I mean, there is discriminating - and there is discriminating against.

Faithfully BE
« Last Edit: February 12, 2011, 07:08:21 PM by brother_erwin »

brother_erwin

  • Dude
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #33 on: February 12, 2011, 07:15:48 PM »
Why would it be a bummer, if - on average - some things appeal more to men than to women?
On average - I stress this point. I don't wanna argue black and white, there's brown and beige and tan also, of course.

Why would it be a bummer, if it was as it is, just if.... even if some people called it what-have-you ?

cakebelly

  • Dude
  • ******
  • Posts: 1014
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #34 on: February 12, 2011, 07:24:10 PM »
No, Dude - an all male environment (that is Dudeism without Vaginas) would be like Shabbos every day; extremely dull and no place for me. Early days, we are exploring the reasons why it appeals more to males than females. You could be right in that TBL is more a movie for men than women and that would explain the gender discrepancies. However, the movie isn't scripture and we can mold (or steer) the Dudeism experience into something approaching a C21 code/belief structure (you know what I'm trying to say). Words man - just words but we have to careful how we use them. Look at the shit the Catholics have got themselves into: a woman can't be a Priest but she can be a Nun - subservient to a Priest. We don't wanna set off on the wrong foot: a Dude is  Dude, in the Lodge/Church - Dudettte implies something less. . . fuck it, not going through that  again. In short, there is nothing wrong with the biological differences, nothing at all. As to unspoken messages - not sure what you mean; but if there are lessons to be learned from the different biological factors - if we filter out all the gender-assigned (by society) crap then what better place to learn about them than a Forum/church/whatever that recognizes only Dudes (nothing less nothing more)? There are enough all male clubs/religions in the world - let's have a human being club and have fuckin' done with it.

cakebelly

  • Dude
  • ******
  • Posts: 1014
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #35 on: February 12, 2011, 07:34:15 PM »
If it isn't a bummer to you, that's okay; for me it would be a disappointment, another missed opportunity to further our understanding of each other  (genders) and really explore the differences (I am not sure there will be that many). Really just a side issue (IMO) to what we may be able to do in years to come. I don't see the point (personally) in expending energy on just another male (hedonist) pursuit. Seriously, wtf would be the point? May as well just call ourselves a fan club  - Saturday nights you could invite your 'special lady friends' along . . perhaps those who are uncomfortable with the idea should explain why the notion doesn't sit well with them. I am at a loss to understand the reticence.

forumdude

  • Administrator
  • Dude
  • *****
  • Posts: 704
    • Dudeism
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #36 on: February 12, 2011, 08:39:34 PM »
It's totally cool if some people want to identify with their traditional gender roles to the exclusion of others. That's your personal choice. But Dudeism has nothing to do with gender, it's about attitude. The fact that there are far fewer female dudes is because (for whatever reason), women find it harder to live the Dudeist lifestyle without self-reproach or the criticism of others.

I personally believe that male Dudes would love to have more female Dudes to hang around with. If women find it harder to be Dudes than men (or less appealing) then that should stop anyone from encouraging them to be part of the movement. Maybe they need to be afforded the luxury to see just how horrible and shallow society's expectations of them is.

Look at the difference between women's magazines and men's (lad's in the UK) magazines. Sure, lad's magazines may be rude and vulgar at times, but at least they offer some ideas and philosophy and practical living and aren't just pure vehicles for pleasing the opposite sex and worrying about how you look. I submit that women have it harder than men do. They need to know that most of us don't give a shit about their hair products and nail polish and quality of their clothing. Consider the disarmingly sexy librarian! - she dresses dull but so what? And anyway, if feminism should have taught them anything its that a life spent worrying about what men think about them is half a life. Anyway, maybe they need us to help them conceive - not a baby, necessarily, but a new and more relaxed way of looking at life.

Also, I think that people are happiest when hanging out in a group of like-minded equals of both sexes. That's just my opinion, man. Too many guys together brings out the worst in us, too many women together brings out the worst in them. We soften each others' edges and bring more love into the room, even if it's platonic love.

The only flaw in this argument (and its a big one) is that of children. Woman are under literal and unavoidable pressure there. And a good thing too, I guess, or the human race might die out.

Sorry if this is a bit rambling - haven't yet had my coffee. It's my strict drug regimen.
I'll tell you what I'm blathering about...

forumdude

  • Administrator
  • Dude
  • *****
  • Posts: 704
    • Dudeism
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #37 on: February 12, 2011, 08:43:49 PM »
just had a sip of coffee and it gave me super dude power to see a typo. i meant "then that should NOT stop anyone from encouraging them to be part of the movement.
I'll tell you what I'm blathering about...

DigitalBuddha

  • Administrator
  • Dude
  • *****
  • Posts: 9456
  • I ain't never seen no queen in her damn undies...
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #38 on: February 12, 2011, 10:16:54 PM »
Was just looking at a thread I started and noticed that I also used the term "chick dude." But that brings a question of would you have use the term "dick dude" to be fair? Trying to keep my mind limber here.

See..............  http://dudeism.com/smf/index.php?topic=1558.0

forumdude

  • Administrator
  • Dude
  • *****
  • Posts: 704
    • Dudeism
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #39 on: February 12, 2011, 10:43:42 PM »
the same way as we say female actor and male actor now, i think female dude and male dude are fine.

if we want to be fatuous we could say johnson dude and beaver dude.

maybe we should adhere to religious tradition and say brother dude and sister dude? or brother and sister shamus?

lotta strands.
I'll tell you what I'm blathering about...

Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #40 on: February 12, 2011, 10:45:18 PM »
I just want to help Sarah Silverman conceive.
Is this your only ID?

Outer Element

  • Dude
  • ****
  • Posts: 198
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #41 on: February 12, 2011, 11:25:13 PM »
the same way as we say female actor and male actor now, i think female dude and male dude are fine.

if we want to be fatuous we could say johnson dude and beaver dude.

maybe we should adhere to religious tradition and say brother dude and sister dude? or brother and sister shamus?

lotta strands.

I like brother and sister dude. I wouldn't go with beaver dude, even in fun. It's got a negative connotation to it, whereas johnson does not (that I'm aware).
The Dude Abides.

DigitalBuddha

  • Administrator
  • Dude
  • *****
  • Posts: 9456
  • I ain't never seen no queen in her damn undies...
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #42 on: February 13, 2011, 01:36:44 AM »
I just want to help Sarah Silverman conceive.

 ;D Me too! ...


brother_erwin

  • Dude
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #43 on: February 13, 2011, 04:22:09 AM »
Re-hi, CB, outer element & forumdude,

sorry, complete darkness (the European night) washed over me some hours ago. Re-reading the thread now, I feel a bit misunderstood.

(And I haven't got a clue what C21 stands for in this context. You were not referring to anal cancer, CB, were you?)

Now, surely I don't fancy an all-male environment (here or elsewhere), and for sure I welcome any female dude. What I said was just descriptive statistics, if you will. Sorry, I was not aware that all this had been discussed before.

Then, and yes I think we differ on this, the next question for me is, if there is a sex (or gender-) related appeal differential, ::) , is it necessarily a problem? In my opinion it isn't - although I don't want an all male environment. I don't think men and women, and everything in between the two, have to be "equal" in what appeals to them. And, yes,  I don't think we can put it all down to society.

What I also don't want is to censor my mind because some people think of dudeism as patriarchal (or blasphemist, or un-American, or ....).  And I don't feel in a position to argue the female view, either. I mean I don't like the idea of a female dude development schedule or something like that, because I think it is basically patronizing. That does not exclude encouraging any female dude who feels at home on the rug to join.

Well, anyway just my opinion.

Faithfully BE



cakebelly

  • Dude
  • ******
  • Posts: 1014
Re: Great Dudes in History - Sarah Silverman is no dude‏
« Reply #44 on: February 14, 2011, 10:35:53 AM »
There is no female Dude development schedule: people can still dig whatever they want to dig - just sorting out the language used on the Forum. C21 is a lazy way of writing 21st Century (a hangover from my university days).

 

Recent Posts

Store

Dude Vinci
Get Dudeism tee shirts, ordination certificates and more. Help feed our monkey.
Click Here

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 07, 2020, 11:01:00 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Recently Posted

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 53501
  • Total Topics: 6183
  • Online Today: 98
  • Online Ever: 7905
  • (January 16, 2020, 02:55:01 AM)
Users Online
Users: 0
Guests: 41
Total: 41