[Buddha-l] Re: On being androgynous

[Richard P. Hayes]

On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 13:46 -0400, Jackhat1 at aol.com wrote:

> ===
> I remember both well but I think it was on the insight list not this
> one. I had thought Quinn and Kevin were the same person; one created
> to bolster the arguments of the other. I remember Quinn insisting he
> was enlightened. Bad tempered, argumentive but enlightened.

Bad tempered, argumentative AND deeply misogynist. (David said right
here on buddha-l that only two or three women in the history of the
human race had an IQ slightly above that of a potato.)

They were on buddha-l until I kicked them off. Then they went to the
buddhist at listserv.mcgill.ca list, which no longer exists. After that,
they went to the insight list. At one point they admitted they were on a
mission to "clean up" all the lists that claimed to be about Buddhism.
They were convinced that no monk, no lama, no roshi, no academic and no
mere practitioner understands Buddhism correctly. Eventually it became
clear that in their view not even the Buddha had understood Buddhism
correctly. These fellows had a lot of correcting to do.

Anyone interested in catching the latest on David Quinn and Kevin Solway
(they're still a team) can read up on their latest attempts to bring
their incomparable enlightenment to this sad and confused planet at
http://www.theabsolute.net. There are even lots of pictures of these two
fellows. They both forty-something now and still enlightened to a degree
that only three of four other people in the history of the universe have
been. Or so they say. And if what they are what they claim to be, they
should know, eh?

-- 
Richard