psychoceramics: Does this guy qualify?

[David Fleck <fleck @ stripe.Colorado.EDU>]

In the news.groups Usenet group, Peter Zohrab recently opined (on how the 
program "Baywatch" is feminist propaganda):

>Baywatch I do know.  The Lesbian Feminists presumably enjoy watching the 
>Babes, and the other Feminists enjoy watching the men.  I don't see 
>what Feminism has got to do with that -- I expect (I don't watch it often 
>enough to be sure) that female lifeguards get equal pay with the men, but 
>that the women are incompetent when there's heavy lifting and dragging of 
>drowning people to be done.  If a man was as physically incompetent as 
>those females, he wouldn't get the job.  So, instead of people being 
>saved, and physically competent men getting jobs, you get (I surmise) 
>people drowning who should have lived, and men without jobs who would 
>have done a better job that the incompetent women who stole their jobs 
>from them.

I know that the realm of kookdom is a shadowy place, and its borders 
indistinct- we can all recognize physics-kooks, and religion-kooks, and 
just-plain-kooks -- what about social kooks? Does a statement like the 
above indicate its speaker should be watched closely for more evidence of 
kookdom?

	David Fleck		(d--@u--.edu)