Welcome to Gaia! ::

Omorose Panya's avatar

Wheezing Prophet

7,350 Points
  • Conversationalist 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Forum Sophomore 300
fubar0
Omorose Panya
fubar0
I find it funny how the default response to any one of your vague points is "comprehension fail". It's almost like you make points that you can make any number of arguments from just so you can say "LOL that's not what I meant, y u no smart liek me?!"

Yes I did have something useful to add, it got one reply and after explaining it again it went largely ignored. In before "cause you so stupid!"

I'd rather not waste my time making what feminists consider troll bait. In the end one of you three will come in and try to make it sound like what we go through doesn't amount to anything and call us misogynists, all the while trying to justify it by making poor one v.s. a million analogies about disease or murder.
Aaaand we're back to the point about determining if a label is warranted rather than complaining that it is used. If I must explain the two times I used it, which can be considered a "default" only by those who are terrible with math, then I will.

1) ExodusNirvana took Zin's words out of context---literally emphasized half the statement in two instances, which effectively changed the point---and attacked a straw man.

2) You keep complaining about things that are not happening and changing arguments. On top of that, you keep complaining about the labels people are giving to these actions. Sure we can stop labeling them, but that doesn't make the issues themselves go away. It's better for you all to, y'know, stop doing it in the first place. If you refuse, then stop complaining when people call you on it.

Sounds reasonable to me. Do you have an actual refute?

Which point was it?

Direct quote evidence that has not been taken out of contet (<--- back up if you missed that part) for the bold.

---This is where you, once again, run with your tail between your legs because you know damn well that there isn't any. But I'll humor you. Please remember that we expect you to back up your bull in this forum.

Good luck, child.

I guess the good point you asked for goes ignored again.
No we're not. I never said it whether it's warranted or not, no doubt there would be some men who actually hate women in there, I just said you would do it. Is that true or not?
When I said default you were not the only person I was taking into consideration.
The usual reaction to being taken out of context is usually to explain what you said better, so please do.


1. I never addressed this
2. where did I do this?
What point is that?

The issue is that you need evidence from the past to make that a worthy prediction. Otherwise, I'll say that I bet you're going to go up a some person, scream "Die f*****t!" at the top of your lungs and shoot them. It's okay because I don't need a real reason to predict this; I can just go with whatever pops into my head at the time.

You keep missing the point that it is entirely dependent upon the content of the thread you make, not the fact that there is a men's issues thread. If you end up making a sexist and/or misogynistic thread, then yes, I will label it as sexist and/or misogynistic. But my hope is that you don't make one that is either, hence the guidelines.

Um, no. The solution is for you not to take it out of context in the first place, not for me to explain it better; that is an entiely different issue. If you need me to rephrase, then ask, but first tell me what you do not understand so I know what you are referring to. As for default, okay, but who were you talking about then? I think I was the only one who said "comprehensionphail."

Regarding the numbers, I was explaining why I called each case comprehensionphail. They were not anything you had to respond to.
Omorose Panya's avatar

Wheezing Prophet

7,350 Points
  • Conversationalist 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Forum Sophomore 300
fubar0
Omorose Panya
fubar0
Omorose Panya
fubar0
Funny, you try to deny his logical argument with an analogy to racism, going so far as to use the full derogatory term. If that isn't an appeal to emotion I don't know what is.
Your argument is that appealing to the law is acceptable? Or are you saying that you actually didn't understand that my point was the opposite, which I illustrated with culturally significant examples?

'Cause, y'know, it was kind of obvious.


If you wanted to illustrate law change there are a dozen different laws that could have been looked into, no this was about getting the biggest emotional/shock impact.
You have essentially admitted that the example was valid and thus did in fact counter his argument.

Thanks for playing.

...And I suppose it does take a genius to realize that examples that hit home are more effective than random examples no-one cares about.


GASP! How did you discover that I was saying you had a point while disagreeing with the delivery?! Truly I am out matched!

Seriously though, you don't have to make Jim Crow examples to make a point.
No. Perhaps that it what you meant to convey, which I will accept as your intention, but your actual wording attempted to invalidate my point.

Do you have a real reason not to use it, or is it just more vacuous complaining?
CosmicJazzKitten's avatar

6,850 Points
  • Gaian 50
  • Contributor 150
  • Signature Look 250
(TW: a lot of c&p'd sexist remarks.) Relevant. I promise. Just take a tiny peek.

I had nothing better to do since TF2 replay is going along slowly so let's talk about this ontd_political post and whether or not you think it's a good call, if it infuriates you or if you just want to say "boooo!" or "right on!" ...

...I personally feel that men hate themselves and their bodies as much as women hate their own selves and bodies. To me, this is why a man can have lots of sex and not be considered dirty--he's allowed to pass that imagined dirtiness onto a woman (or girl). It functions as an act of power--domination if you will. He's "ruined" her and put her in her place. ninja
Yoshpet's avatar

Dedicated Loiterer

4,200 Points
  • Super Tipsy 200
  • Lavish Tipper 200
  • Forum Regular 100
Orphan_Shadow
(TW: a lot of c&p'd sexist remarks.) Relevant. I promise. Just take a tiny peek.

I had nothing better to do since TF2 replay is going along slowly so let's talk about this ontd_political post and whether or not you think it's a good call, if it infuriates you or if you just want to say "boooo!" or "right on!" ...

...I personally feel that men hate themselves and their bodies as much as women hate their own selves and bodies. To me, this is why a man can have lots of sex and not be considered dirty--he's allowed to pass that imagined dirtiness onto a woman (or girl). It functions as an act of power--domination if you will. He's "ruined" her and put her in her place. ninja


The sexual repression of women is not something that men universally revel in. Most men I know enjoy a sexually liberated woman; she's more fun, more like them. I'd sooner blame our Christian roots for useless chasitity than blame men for projecting their psycho-filth onto the women they sleep with.

How dramatic. neutral
Vixianna's avatar

Beloved Genius

7,450 Points
  • Forum Sophomore 300
  • Forum Dabbler 200
  • Full closet 200
Yoshpet
Orphan_Shadow
(TW: a lot of c&p'd sexist remarks.) Relevant. I promise. Just take a tiny peek.
I had nothing better to do since TF2 replay is going along slowly so let's talk about this ontd_political post and whether or not you think it's a good call, if it infuriates you or if you just want to say "boooo!" or "right on!" ...
...I personally feel that men hate themselves and their bodies as much as women hate their own selves and bodies. To me, this is why a man can have lots of sex and not be considered dirty--he's allowed to pass that imagined dirtiness onto a woman (or girl). It functions as an act of power--domination if you will. He's "ruined" her and put her in her place. ninja

The sexual repression of women is not something that men universally revel in. Most men I know enjoy a sexually liberated woman; she's more fun, more like them. I'd sooner blame our Christian roots for useless chasitity than blame men for projecting their psycho-filth onto the women they sleep with.
How dramatic. neutral


Yeah except there are PLENTY of cultures, many of whom non-christian and some of whom never had contact with Christians or who were in the past that believe in a woman's "purity" and "chastity". It's not just the Abrahamic three.

So why, maybe in our specific culture a lot of the chastity problem are linked back to Christianity, but it'd be shortsighted to think that the concept originated with Christians.

And the men in these cultures enjoy sexually liberal women. They enjoy ******** them and then talking about them behind their backs and marrying proper women. That's how it's been for awhile(though certainly not how it is now in America in most places and social circles...) It isn't as if Victorian men never visited loose women, they sure did, that's why there was so much syphilis back in the day for one. But they didn't marry them, and proper women (of means especially) were their culture's ideal of sexually virtuous, which was always a different standard for men and women.
Yoshpet's avatar

Dedicated Loiterer

4,200 Points
  • Super Tipsy 200
  • Lavish Tipper 200
  • Forum Regular 100
Vixianna
Yeah except there are PLENTY of cultures, many of whom non-christian and some of whom never had contact with Christians or who were in the past that believe in a woman's "purity" and "chastity". It's not just the Abrahamic three.

So why, maybe in our specific culture a lot of the chastity problem are linked back to Christianity, but it'd be shortsighted to think that the concept originated with Christians.

And the men in these cultures enjoy sexually liberal women. They enjoy ******** them and then talking about them behind their backs and marrying proper women. That's how it's been for awhile(though certainly not how it is now in America in most places and social circles...) It isn't as if Victorian men never visited loose women, they sure did, that's why there was so much syphilis back in the day for one. But they didn't marry them, and proper women (of means especially) were their culture's ideal of sexually virtuous, which was always a different standard for men and women.


So it's more complicated than I implied? Alright, I don't see why not. You haven't really suggested where it's originating though.
Keltoi Samurai's avatar

Benevolent Dog

16,050 Points
  • Citizen 200
  • Voter 100
  • Mark Twain 100
Vixianna
Yoshpet
Orphan_Shadow
(TW: a lot of c&p'd sexist remarks.) Relevant. I promise. Just take a tiny peek.
I had nothing better to do since TF2 replay is going along slowly so let's talk about this ontd_political post and whether or not you think it's a good call, if it infuriates you or if you just want to say "boooo!" or "right on!" ...
...I personally feel that men hate themselves and their bodies as much as women hate their own selves and bodies. To me, this is why a man can have lots of sex and not be considered dirty--he's allowed to pass that imagined dirtiness onto a woman (or girl). It functions as an act of power--domination if you will. He's "ruined" her and put her in her place. ninja

The sexual repression of women is not something that men universally revel in. Most men I know enjoy a sexually liberated woman; she's more fun, more like them. I'd sooner blame our Christian roots for useless chasitity than blame men for projecting their psycho-filth onto the women they sleep with.
How dramatic. neutral


Yeah except there are PLENTY of cultures, many of whom non-christian and some of whom never had contact with Christians or who were in the past that believe in a woman's "purity" and "chastity". It's not just the Abrahamic three.

So why, maybe in our specific culture a lot of the chastity problem are linked back to Christianity, but it'd be shortsighted to think that the concept originated with Christians.

And the men in these cultures enjoy sexually liberal women. They enjoy ******** them and then talking about them behind their backs and marrying proper women. That's how it's been for awhile(though certainly not how it is now in America in most places and social circles...) It isn't as if Victorian men never visited loose women, they sure did, that's why there was so much syphilis back in the day for one. But they didn't marry them, and proper women (of means especially) were their culture's ideal of sexually virtuous, which was always a different standard for men and women.


it could be due to the faith problem.

y'know the one? "a mother knows the child is hers, the father has faith."

of course, in the modern world where DNA tests are available at the corner drug store, it really has no place.
Vixianna's avatar

Beloved Genius

7,450 Points
  • Forum Sophomore 300
  • Forum Dabbler 200
  • Full closet 200
Yoshpet
Vixianna
Yeah except there are PLENTY of cultures, many of whom non-christian and some of whom never had contact with Christians or who were in the past that believe in a woman's "purity" and "chastity". It's not just the Abrahamic three.
So why, maybe in our specific culture a lot of the chastity problem are linked back to Christianity, but it'd be shortsighted to think that the concept originated with Christians.
And the men in these cultures enjoy sexually liberal women. They enjoy ******** them and then talking about them behind their backs and marrying proper women. That's how it's been for awhile(though certainly not how it is now in America in most places and social circles...) It isn't as if Victorian men never visited loose women, they sure did, that's why there was so much syphilis back in the day for one. But they didn't marry them, and proper women (of means especially) were their culture's ideal of sexually virtuous, which was always a different standard for men and women.

So it's more complicated than I implied? Alright, I don't see why not. You haven't really suggested where it's originating though.


That really wasn't the point of my response. My point was that even IF it's because of Christian roots in America, that doesn't mean the idea isn't older and Christianity borrowed it. Hell, just looking into Judaism, since the first Christians were converted Jews, the idea is prevalent there.

@Kei: There's that possibility yes, since men won't to avoid being cuckhol'd, but that doesn't really explain the contempt for women who had no husband and just provided sex.(either a mistress or a prostitute) Honestly, that's probably related to the ideals of femininity revolving around her ability to provide children(and a mistress or a prostitute would do neither). It's likely also related to the idea that women(especially so in the past but not Victorian England who had the "purity" ideal) had ravenous sexual appetites, and in certain cultures girls were married off so that they had an outlet and the community had some means to control their "flamed passions" and ravenous sexual lust.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get Items
Get Gaia Cash
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games