Sexist, or true?

[gladiator2]

blahblahblahblahblah

I love how you always have to turn everything into a personal issue, declaring how you're not like that ooooh so speshul

If you keep imagining the world is against you, someday you'll find the world against you 4realz.


This isn't exactly on topic about the original article but since we're touching on the issue...

You can't deny from a physiological perspective, the definition of gender means there's a different between man and woman. They have two different functions. To fill those, oftentimes you can see different psyches. These days the gender issue is too often confused with providing equal opportunities to both sexes. As long as you can provide the same opportunity, then selection based on gender may be appropriate: an analogy would be "Can you say that it's wrongfully discrimination if you choose a smart person over a mentally challenged person to fill a supervising position?"

Feminism is also sexism. Is it right that they can have 'reverse sexism' as compensation? I think not, because all it does is exacerbate the issue, similar to the perpetual chain of revenge attacks between Middle East people. Feminism advocates rights for the sake of rights, not for what is right. Rights falls into "what is right," but once you lose sight of the real reason behind rights, then the issue becomes perverted into power grabs instead.

...So lemme get this one straight...

In other words... you're gonna take whatever I say, and then state the exact opposite?   

Hey Esp, The sky is usually blue and the grass usually is green. 

Exactly where did I make it "personal?" If anything, I think that applies to you, mate.

Also, learn to actually read people's posts. This isn't the first time you've misinterpreted what I said.

I didn't say the current status regarding women's rights and changes in the system are perfect, now did I. In fact, come to think of it, I didn't even bring that up. What I said (had you read it) was that technically speaking, "sexism" is saying you hate an entire gender.... and saying all women are equal to a truck stop bathroom that hasn't been cleaned since it's creation.... is pretty sexist.

What is your problem with that? Do you agree with Mr. Blogger, that every female you know is the same as a s$%t-encrusted toilet? 

I love how you like to target every post I make, and desperately try to find a way to argue it.

[Espadon]

Horizontal rule between top comment and bottom stuff meant that there's no connection between stuff above and stuff below? lern2read

I was remarking on comments like

Thank GOD I'm not like that.

As in, "Do I care about that?"


The answer is, "No."

Don't read too much into it haha

[Sir Jeremy]

* Sir Jeremy SIGHS, here we go again..?

Sexist.  I hate bloggs, lol.

[LtKillroy]

I can't be arsed into reading that whole thing but as a whole, its a case by case basis that has been said by everyone. Each group has their normals (or majority) their fringe (kinda out there) and the crazies (which are major minorities) Not to put the KKK in the same bracket as feminists, but the KKK is a warped Christian group, like feminists are an extreme group of trying to get equal women's rights. (Especially the '60s). Again, not the same, just a general idea.

[gladiator2]

Horizontal rule between top comment and bottom stuff meant that there's no connection between stuff above and stuff below? lern2read

I was remarking on comments like

Thank GOD I'm not like that.

As in, "Do I care about that?"


The answer is, "No."

Don't read too much into it haha

Just when I thought the headache went away....

I know what the line means. Why post two paragraphs, repeatedly stating "you" (indicating me, since the above text referred to me)... especially when they have nothing to do with the thread?

It's called a figure of speech, Esp. "Thank God I'm not like that."

Someone: "Hey did you hear about Billy? He crashed his car into a building and blamed it on all women."
Me: "Damn. Thank God I'm not like that."

...You certainly have some "personal" issues, huh? 

Oh, and that wasn't my quote.

That was an exxageration, that made the "I'm" bold. Now, had I done what you cleverly did, then you would have a point. Exxagerating is one step away from blatently lying.

Don't lie, Esp. Not cool. 

[Espadon]

Extremists oftentimes get more attention than they deserve because they're the loudest. Does anyone think that it would then be justified to manipulate the media [or other equivalent means] to quell the rabble-rousers?

[gladiator2]

Extremists oftentimes get more attention than they deserve because they're the loudest. Does anyone think that it would then be justified to manipulate the media [or other equivalent means] to quell the rabble-rousers?

So, you're gonna just go off on a tangent, huh? 

About controlling the media, and limiting free speech, and all that...

I really can't believe people blame me for going off the topic.

[n00bface]

It's sexist, stereotypical, and offensive.
And completely not true.

idante is right. the article doesn't even know what feminism is, and i love how the author shows some sense of entitlement like everyone should be working to earn his favour.  women today can't be married? please

lol

[N. Escalona]

His point is that feminists don't know what feminism is, either.

[a-4-year-old]

Most of it was completely untrue, bits were total hyperbole and a tiny morsel of truth was vomited upon by his tone.

[Demonic]

blablabla

Okay man, final friendly warning here.

If you de-rail one more thread again with dragging it to a personal level with off-topic posts, I will remove your appendix using a wooden cooking spoon and a can of clam chowder. If you want to dribble verbal shit around, use the private message functions.

---

The linked blog post was biased, and it does show a whole load of spite.

However, with all our newfound liberties abused into oblivion, some of his points are valid. As an example from the top of my head, young girls whore around quite a lot and cover it up with some post-feminist hoo-haa, 'That's how I am, fuck your constraints!'. Great. Good for you. Equality yeah. What they seem to forget is that a man fucking 20 chicks in a month will be the macho archetype, while a girl doing 20 guys even in a year will be considered a slut. That, and they are actually getting wider, while we're just counting the 'frags'.

[Espadon]

All his blog posts seem to be about relationship issues. Well, I guess he caters to a certain crowd. These people love to read these kind of stuff so they can go UNNHUNH THAT'S RIGHT and so they can feel totally justified in their own world when what they really need is a huge fucking shot of cold reality.

I'm not a big blog reader. Many people read or write blogs in order to feel like a pundit but in reality they're not capable of doing anything of use. They leech off of the actions of others [like 4yo] and so we have this huge economic dead weight.

What I'm saying is that these people aren't working towards making something new. Few are useful at all.

[gladiator2]

Demonic, get your facts straight.

I'm not de-railing any posts, here. I posted my opinion that the blogger was being sexist. Last time I looked, the title asks if the blogger is sexist.

With all due respect, you're targeting the wrong person here. I didn't post that someone else is being "personal" (Espadon).

I will remove your appendix using a wooden cooking spoon and a can of clam chowder.

I believe that constitutes as a physical threat. Not smart to say, for a number of reasons. Besides verbal abuse, it's totally useless. My appendix, a wooden spoon, and a can have nothing to do with the conversation.

Talk about de-railing threads... I'm the one saying the blog is sexist, Espadon is the one talking about disabling free speech, and you're the one making irrelevent threats. Now, who's straying from the topic at hand?

You know, just because you're an "admin" doesn't mean you have the right to bully people for "derailing" threads, and then do it yourself. With power, comes responsibility. Re-read your post. Does that sound like an admin? 'Removing part of my body with a wooden spoon?'

[LtKillroy]

And blogs are stupid. Biased source, not an expert, usually have too much time on their hands to write these stupid things, have their audiences, etc. I just don't like them.

[N. Escalona]

I will remove your appendix using a wooden cooking spoon and a can of clam chowder.

I didn't read the post but that's pretty funny.
Can't we just be friends? 

[iDante]

There's plenty of "before/after" pictures showing what the feminist movement has actually purchased for women along with the franchise and related rights they do deserve. They didn't just make up the dichotomy here; don't you agree that there have been horrible side-effects of feminism?

If by horrible side-effects you actually mean the fact that woman today are almost able to behave as men do (however they want), then yes there are horrible side-effects.

[gladiator2]

I will remove your appendix using a wooden cooking spoon and a can of clam chowder.

I didn't read the post but that's pretty funny.
Can't we just be friends? 

Can't I just say Mr. Blogger is sexist... without being threatened of blunt-appendix-removal or being banned? 

[N. Escalona]

There's plenty of "before/after" pictures showing what the feminist movement has actually purchased for women along with the franchise and related rights they do deserve. They didn't just make up the dichotomy here; don't you agree that there have been horrible side-effects of feminism?

If by horrible side-effects you actually mean the fact that woman today are almost able to behave as men do (however they want), then yes there are horrible side-effects.

Men should not be able to behave however they want.
Women should not be able to behave however they want, but more so (I say this tentatively because it's a generalization).

[iDante]

"however they want" is a generalization, ofc however they want within laws and such.

Men should not be able to behave however they want.
Women should not be able to behave however they want, but more so (I say this tentatively because it's a generalization).

Why more so? In what case should a man be allowed to do something but not a woman?

[N. Escalona]

Husbands have (limited, obviously) authority over their wives.