|
This Web address: www.korky.ca.
Reader comments How to submit comments To send something for this page, or to comment to me otherwise, please e-write to korkyday@yahoo.com.
Please state whether I can publish your name, e-address, etc. I will include your submission if I want to, but you don't have to curry favour. I haven't censored any yet. Criticism is welcome and I will probably publish it here. For my final text, I shall incorporate as many of your suggestions as I agree with. I shall try to answer all the reasonable or common criticisms. The comments below are ordered from the newest at the top, to the oldest at the bottom. Reader # 3-b suggests changes for abortion article.
2005 April 12.
Anonymous in BC> Vancouver sent some excellent suggestions for the abortion article in Part 14, article 16. I will incorporate almost all of them.
Reader # 10: Another stranger's warning. 2005 April 8.
It will still need some work to turn this collection of texts into something integrated and, alas, saleable. --Bob Glenn Smith, BC> Burnaby.
Reader # 9: Thorough critique from a stranger. 2005 March 10.
"SueW" wrote: Definitely an interesting site. Quite a mix. Basically agreed pretty much with the section on drugs (I've wondered myself whether booze wasn't introduced to weaken the Native Americans). I have no use for booze or party drugs. You mentioned that movies push smoking - partially true but what they REALLY push is drinking. Notice in almost every movie--they celebrate, they drink, they are upset, they drink--BLATANT and no one even seems to notice it and kids ARE starting drinking earlier than they did when I was a kid ( . . . I am 4 years older than you, born in 1944). The liquer lobby is so powerful it just blatantly advertises it's poison and no one cares. Right you are that beer is rotten grain--hello! And it smells like it also. Breast feeding - well, I'm not convinced it's the only way or that kids who are not breast fed are deprived. (love the expression tit deprivation) I tried to breast feed and had collapsed nipples (even with large breasts). And my milk took forever to come in. In restrospect, had I encountered a group like la leche (I did encounter them later on), I should have breast pumped so he'd at least gotten the anti bodies etc. Also there is something called a "nipple shield" which might have enabled me with collapsed nipples to breast feed. Try getting help and support outside la leche league--Baby Magazines, whatever - no real help for difficulties with breast feeding. I had no idea the la leche league existed until our son was way beyond the age of breast feeding. Anyway, our son turned out great.
Nudity: I almost went to a nudist party once but chickened out. i.e. I didn't want to make friends with people JUST BECAUSE they liked shedding clothing--seemed as superficial as making friends with people because they adored adorning themselves with fancy clothing--My attire around the house is a sports bra and panties. Going bra-less is difficult when a person has very large breasts (size DD). I have never heard of a nude activist--interesting--I think people should do what they want to do - either be nude or not nude - we make too much fuss about clothing (the prices some of these folks pay for dresses eek). I don't like hanging "stuff" on my body i.e. jewelry. Not logical-- and I keep my hair very short like in a crewcut--why? Because I CAN and it's wonderful--washes in a few seconds and I don't have to comb it. That's time I can spend in more rewarding occupations than primping myself. Like yourself, I walk to the beat of a "different drummer" but you probably figured that out already. Religion etc. Seems you have not had a background in a strict monotheistic tradition. (and I know you mentioned one of your religions as Judaism which IS monotheistic but unless you were orthodox and studied it deeply, you probably weren't really exposed to the revelation.) LDS is basically polytheistic (although they call themselves monotheists because they say they are only involved with the "God of this world"). I studied Mormonism - with the missionaries and then, was so intrigued, I ended not only reading their "Scripture" (BOM, D&C and Pearl) from cover to cover - read "Pearl" twice but also read both the authorized and unauthorized biographics of Joseph Smith, one of the Spencer Kimball books, and the three volume set (from cover to cover) DOCTRINES OF SALVATION by Joseph Fielding Smith. The God concept particularly intrigued me since it was markedly different from what is called the revelation of Yahweh. Back to LDS, even the missionaries didn't quite understand the God concept so after I figured it out, I, in a 2 hour conversation showed one of the missionaries where their God concept was contradicting the BOM (which of course is NOT where much of their beliefs come from but rather from the D & C). The intriguing thing about the LDS religion is- if you accept the basic concept, the rest logically follows. It's a nice religion in many ways and the companionship is also nice. I often watch the BYU channel on TV. Unitarianism is a "UNIVERSAL" religion which fits in with any beliefs. The term atheist "A-THEIST" is interesting in itself because to say you do not believe in God you are in a sense acknowledging that there is "Something" to not believe in. Hence, ironically enough, the phenomenon of atheists becoming deists (or even Catholics) is non uncommon and in fact much MORE common than the conversion of agnostics (who do not know if anything is 'out there' and don't care). C.S. Lewis was one of those atheists who became anglican Catholic. Bill W of AA also converted from atheism and attributed his alcoholism to his former atheistic belief set (I noticed you mentioned in passing that many atheists are using some sort of drugs - or as you called it, drope which was an interesting comment especially coming from a person who labels himself an atheist). Your lack of acknowledging that there may be things beyond our comprehension (or beings) may someday end up imprisoning you in a two dimensional universe. The fact that our universe is greater THAN two dimensional has even been theorized by scientists - I am thinking of a very intriguing article which appeared in a Scientific American many years ago about a concept of overlapping dimensions called "superspace". My background is quite different--I was born to two agnostics - father was kind of a deist - sort of believed in "something". Mother voiced belief at times but never received what we commonly call "the gift of faith". She despaired and ended her life at the age of 68, not an uncommon end for agnostics. At the age of 12, I stole the family Bible (no one was reading it anyway) and started reading it from cover to cover. I had no ax to grind--was just intrigued. It seemed to have a beauty I found in no other books. I followed a long path but ended up a Roman Catholic and have found a lot of richness and beauty in that church. . . . from the age of 3, I was aware of a Being which quite literally "filled the Heavens and the Earth". This with NO religion in the home. Go figure. I remember at the age of 6 standing at the bus stop waiting for the school bus and someone asked me what religion I was. We had no religion so I didn't know what to answer and said "I don't know what religion we are" and he said "well do you believe in God?" and I said, "No, I don't BELIEVE in God, I KNOW God is there." For me to say I believed in God seemed as ridiculous as my saying I believed in the young boy asking me the questions. He looked very surprised at my answer. Later I asked my mother what religion we were and she said "we are free thinkers but if someone asks, you can tell them you are Luth-er-an" So the next day I report to the boy at the bus stop that I was Luth-er-an, having totally no concept of what "Luth-er-an" was. If you've ever read the author Robert Nathen, he writes fiction but extremely thought provoking fiction--I just figured your writings were worth more than a one sentence comment like "that's interesting". A lot of thought and work went into that and there are a lot of interesting thought provoking ideas therein. I enjoyed reading it. See also http://healthread.net. Reader # 8: Metaphysics and physicalism. 2004 12 23. Felipe Gaston Muñoz of Arizona asked me how I define metaphysics and physicalism. After I told him, he concluded that he pretty much likes what he's read of my book so far. (I'll add those definitions. See Part 4? ______ and "Introduction", Words I coined??.) Reader # 5-b: Says the writing seems self-centred and fragmented. 2004 12 22~.
The professor (same person as # 5-a below) told me that she thought that I sound too self-centred, saying "my Leaps", etc. in the book. She also said that the articles so far are too fragmented, like separate newspaper articles. (I intend to improve the manuscript on both counts.) Reader # 7 questions me on drugs, matriarchy, evolution, and political strategy. 2004 October.
An anonymous friend of mine wrote:
I did glance at your online book. It looks like your views have remained pretty consistent over the past decade. Rather than directly disputing a number of your assertions, I'll try a slightly less confrontational approach: (a) where would you place the boundary between carbohydrate foods that are drugs and those that are not, assuming that elevation in blood sugar is the sole psychoactive effect of the food (e.g. wonderbread)?
(b) if someone, offering examples of peyote, DMT, psychadelic mushrooms, Inuit fermented meat, drug-use patterns on Irian at the time of contact, etc., argued that hunter-gatherer cultures appear equally as inclined to use drugs as agrarian societies, how would you respond?
(c) how would you respond to a North American aboriginal historian who told you that their research showed that pre-contact agrarian societies were more likely to be matricentric than pre-contact nomadic societies?
(d) how would you respond to a geneticist or biologist who explained that your understanding of evolution is teleological and fails to account for such things as tigers in India?
(e) are there ever times when a social problem is so deeply entrenched that simply acting as though the problem does not exist actually further entrenches it? (e.g. can Bush's attempts to abolish affirmative action be compared to abolishing anti-nudity laws in their impacts on women and children?)
(Thanks, anonymous. I will answer your questions and put references here. Other readers may comment on the above ideas, too.) Reader # 6, a respected activist, thinks "Breast-right" is not sexy enough. 2004 August. "Hi; read breast-right! It's all very logical, well written and informative. But very dull! Perhaps you could sex it up a bit!!! Cheers, Jamie Lee Hamilton" (of BC> Vancouver).
[Breast-right is Part 1. Later, after discussions with my friend Jamie Lee, a defender of sex trade workers, and a transexual, I wrote "Prostitution is fake love!" in Part 3.] Reader # 5 is a professor who is impressed with the author. 2004 April.
A professor writes regarding "Hair codes are evil" in Part 3: I am very much affected by your bravery, your consistency and your love--for others.
(I, the author Korky, am a long-haired male.)
Reader # 4, a friend of a friend, praises book. 2004 April ~20. Teresa Ram, BC> Burnaby: Your writing is superb and I look forward to reading some more of your work. I hope you do write a book because you are a very talented and creative writer.
(Yes, Teresa, at this Web site are the first parts of my book which will be published on paper.) Reader # 3-a is woman who likes Breast-right and Breast-love. 2003 November 20. Anonymous in BC> Vancouver: I was reading some of your new on-line book and am actually quite impressed with what I looked at so far, especially the breast-love stuff. You say things that I believe are true, but do not feel that I, as a professional, can express so forthrightly. Right on! I hope you will add some text on the family bed and recommend some books, such as Three in a Bed. I think there's a revised edition, and you can probably get some good ideas from checking out the natural child website. They break down the site into specific topics, and it's pretty easy to navigate. There's a good article by Jan Hunt "Why you should sleep with your baby" or something like that.
Reader # 2 switching to Green Party. 2003 November 19. Anonymous in BC> Vancouver says he'll solidly vote Green.
Reader # 1 will check back often. 2003 November 17. Therese: I am reading your website with your book. Very nice. Hooray! Excellent! Wonderful! and Good for You! I have bookmarked your site. I'll check back often. I look forward to reading your thoughts on Joy-earned and watching your website grow. Thank you for sending me the link!
| ||
|
© Copyright 2003, 2004, 2005 by "Korky" Kirk Norman Day in Canada, in the USA, and in all countries.
End of the page called "Reader comments" of www.korky.ca. | ||