War on Women

Generally an unmoderated forum for discussion of pretty much any topic. The focus however, is usually politics.
Post Reply
User avatar
k9nanny
General
Posts: 777
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 3:11 pm

Re: War on Women

Unread post by k9nanny »

Vrede too wrote:By that definition stalking and rape are okay, too.
Bingo!
Like rape, sexual assault and harassment are not about sex.
Se Non Ora, Quando?

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 50649
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Vrede too »

A Catholic Nun Perfectly Explains the Major Hypocrisy of the "Pro-Life" Argument

"I do not believe that just because you're opposed to abortion that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why would I think that you don't? Because you don't want any tax money to go there. That's not pro-life. That's pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is."
-- Sister Joan Chittister
Always be yourself! Unless you can be a goat, then always be a goat.
-- the interweb, paraphrased
1312. ETTD.

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Mr.B »

k9nanny wrote:
Vrede too wrote:"By that definition stalking and rape are okay, too."
Bingo!
Like rape, sexual assault and harassment are not about sex.
THAT would be an example of misogyny. A rapist most always has a hatred toward women. A man clamoring for extra curricular activity is not hate; improper, yes. Not hatred ... When Bill Clinton was getting his official presidential bj's, was he 'hating' on Monica?
"We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is."
Let's start with "Thou shalt not kill".

To use abortion as a means of birth control is wrong. There are other reasons where abortion is justified, but the subject of the thread is hatred of women, and the proper definition of what hatred is.

User avatar
Boatrocker
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 2059
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:53 am
Location: Southeast of Disorder

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Boatrocker »

Vrede too wrote:A Catholic Nun Perfectly Explains the Major Hypocrisy of the "Pro-Life" Argument

" . . . We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is."
-- Sister Joan Chittister
What it is, is nonexistent.
I will not lie down.
I will not go quietly.

User avatar
k9nanny
General
Posts: 777
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 3:11 pm

Re: War on Women

Unread post by k9nanny »

Boatrocker wrote:
Vrede too wrote:A Catholic Nun Perfectly Explains the Major Hypocrisy of the "Pro-Life" Argument

" . . . We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is."
-- Sister Joan Chittister
What it is, is nonexistent.

Yep.
In the same vein, I wonder if the asshole-in-chief, who spoke of dead babies and God's children
in Syria, will change his position on refugees.
Se Non Ora, Quando?

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 50649
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Vrede too »

k9nanny wrote:... I wonder if the asshole-in-chief, who spoke of dead babies and God's children in Syria, will change his position on refugees.
Tell President Trump: Open Doors to Survivors of Violence in Syria
Always be yourself! Unless you can be a goat, then always be a goat.
-- the interweb, paraphrased
1312. ETTD.

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 50649
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Vrede too »

Vrede too wrote:
k9nanny wrote:They need to pull advertising from the entire network, not let their ads get assigned to other shows.
I thought of that, too. One critical step at a time, I guess.
Not to mention why it took so long for them to get disgusted with O'Reilly. It's not like his abusive misogyny, let alone his other bigotry, are new revelations.
Always be yourself! Unless you can be a goat, then always be a goat.
-- the interweb, paraphrased
1312. ETTD.

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Mr.B »

Mr.B wrote:"When Bill Clinton was getting his official presidential bj's, was he 'hating' on Monica?"
Notice when I ask a legitimate question, the parrots fly back in under their rocks?

To begin with, I merely asked why womanizing is considered misogyny, and I got shot down. If a man is not "gay" and is attempting to hit on a woman, whether his advances are welcome or not, why would he be called a misogynist?

Let's reverse the roles a moment. Suppose that prior to the election, it was discovered Hillary had been involved in the same shameful episode as Trump, O'Reilly, or even Bill; Would the oh-so self-righteous liberal crowd have gotten their silken step-ins in a wad over it and demonstrated in the streets?
Vrede too wrote:"....anyone defending Trump."
I'm not defending anyone here. I've never been a fan of talk show/talk news from any network; I voted for Trump only to keep Hillary from being elected; as neither of them impressed me (other than Hillary having more political experience) with their resume' . Yes. I'm sorry I voted for Trump, but I wish I hadn't voted at all given the choices. Since he's in, we'll wait & see.

FWIW, I did not vote a straight ticket.

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 21328
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: War on Women

Unread post by O Really »

It's unfortunate, but "hate" has been about as over-used as "like" and it's serious meaning has been diluted. Be that as it may, Bill Clinton probably didn't by any definition "hate" Monica Lewinski. But by taking advantage of her state of star-struck, and treating her like a free ho, he without doubt majorly disrespected her and treated her contemptuously as a lesser person.

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 50649
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Vrede too »

O Really wrote:.... Be that as it may, Bill Clinton probably didn't by any definition "hate" Monica Lewinski. But by taking advantage of her state of star-struck, and treating her like a free ho, he without doubt majorly disrespected her and treated her contemptuously as a lesser person.
True, but one big difference is that Monica was a consenting adult. Trump's nonconsensual sexual assault and underage teen peeping, and O'Reilly's nonconsensual sexual harassment are worse, as all decent people know.

None of us have used the word "hate" here and it's not in the unsourced definition of "misogyny" that was posted.

Here are other definitions: lame straw man.

That said, I do hate despicable misogynists that think that illegal and immoral sexual assault and workplace harassment are natural and acceptable extensions of skirt-chasing, as all decent people should.
Always be yourself! Unless you can be a goat, then always be a goat.
-- the interweb, paraphrased
1312. ETTD.

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Mr.B »

"Here are other definitions: lame straw man."
I apologize; I didn't know. How long have you had these conditions?
"None of us have used the word "hate" here and it's not in the unsourced definition of "misogyny" that was posted."
Misogyny (Google) dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women .... So why is it, according to you, when I say I have a dislike for homosexuality, I'm a "hater"? :shock:
"That said, I do hate despicable misogynists that think that illegal and immoral sexual assault and workplace harassment are natural and acceptable extensions of skirt-chasing, as all decent people should."
You read minds too? Do you really think "all decent people should" think that illegal and immoral sexual assault and workplace harassment are natural and acceptable extensions of skirt-chasing? (Punctuation 101 much?) :lol:

User avatar
homerfobe
Ensign
Posts: 1565
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 9:37 am
Location: All over more than anywhere else.

Re: War on Women

Unread post by homerfobe »

Hey tu-tu and ninny woman What do you call a faggot hater?
Proudly Telling It Like It Is: In Your Face! Whether You Like It Or Not!

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Mr.B »

*
Last edited by Mr.B on Sat Apr 08, 2017 8:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Mr.B »

Mr.B wrote:Misogyny, oh the misogyny running rampant among the Amish!!

Image

Amish Children’s Educations End At The 8th Grade Level
Boys will pick a trade to go into, and girls are all pre-destined to be housewives.
Because of this, they see no need for an education past the 8th grade level.


Women Are Considered Second-Class Citizens
As their tradition and old-fashioned thinking dictates, women are treated as second class citizens.
This means girls are only destined to become housewives to cook, clean, and raise children.
The women are completely happy with their life style.


Image

The Average Amish Couple Has Between Five And Seven Kids
Amish communities do not believe in or use contraceptives, which results in large families.
It’s also said they aim to have as many children as possible


Their Modesty Extends To Their Opinions Of Others
The Amish are not arrogant people, as they see that as a sin.
This being so, they do not judge or condemn people of the modern world for their lifestyle choices.


Petition link here :lol: :lol:

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 21328
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: War on Women

Unread post by O Really »

Good observation, Mr.B. I'm surprised you noticed. The Amish are very much the misogynist society, with the men generally treating the women slightly better than the animals (sometimes). Domestic violence rate is high.

For example:
http://fox43.com/2013/05/08/fighting-se ... community/
or
http://www.marydemuth.com/bonnets-buggi ... ual-abuse/
or
http://lancasteronline.com/news/hidden- ... 36ba3.html

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Mr.B »

I don't know how that got posted twice; I deleted the first one.
O Really wrote:"Good observation, Mr.B. I'm surprised you noticed. The Amish are very much the misogynist society, with the men generally treating the women slightly better than the animals (sometimes). Domestic violence rate is high."
I noticed. I was aware of two of your links; namely the last one.
To many people, the thought that Mennonite and Amish folk - known for their work ethic, humility, gentleness and orderliness - would abuse their spouses and children is beyond belief.

The public sees large families of well-behaved children, straight rows of colorful flowers and tidy homes. They see church members cooperating to send vast quantities of food to poor countries, homemakers delivering meals to a shut-in, strong men ready to lend a hand at a moment's notice and entire churches working together to build a barn in one day.

Many are exactly the God-fearing, loving people they appear to be - even the abuse victims say that. But that makes it even harder to believe that they would not see or would tolerate abuse within their close-knit communities.
"As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one .... For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God "
Those who are quick to condemn the Bible as "fairy tales" fail to see so much truth that is contained therein. Mankind (this includes women) is a depraved creature; as along as the world can influence and draw him/her away from moral and righteous living and make him/her believe that evil is all in the mind, this kind of behavior isn't going away anytime soon; and it's grip on mankind knows no race, color, creed, or religion (or lack of same).

Being a Christian, Muslim, Amish, Jewish, or whatever does not exempt anyone from temptation or depravity; I've said it before; the devil is alive and well ... and succeeding ... believe it or not; just look around.

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 50649
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Vrede too »

So, the Amish adhere to the Bible.
Always be yourself! Unless you can be a goat, then always be a goat.
-- the interweb, paraphrased
1312. ETTD.

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Mr.B »

Vrede too wrote:"So, the Amish adhere to the Bible."
Mr.B wrote:"Being a Christian, Muslim, Amish, Jewish, or whatever does not exempt anyone from temptation or depravity; I've said it before; the devil is alive and well ... and succeeding ... believe it or not; just look around."

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 50649
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: War on Women

Unread post by Vrede too »

Fox to investigate sexual harassment claim against O'Reilly

In unrelated news, a fox will investigate recent deaths in the hen house.
Always be yourself! Unless you can be a goat, then always be a goat.
-- the interweb, paraphrased
1312. ETTD.

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 21328
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: War on Women

Unread post by O Really »

Vrede too wrote:Fox to investigate sexual harassment claim against O'Reilly

In unrelated news, a fox will investigate recent deaths in the hen house.
Funny, and maybe appropriate.
But it's the bigger Fox corporation, not Fox News that's investigating, and they've hired the same outside law firm that led to the dumping of Ailes to run the investigation. What would you like them to do?

However, I don't know how much more "investigation" should be necessary. Fox news has spent $13 mill or so in settlements of harassment claims against O'Reilly - seems unlikely those went un-investigated. Probably can't just walk up to them and say "I was harassed, give me some money" and they'd say, "sure, here's a couple mil." So when are settlements made? Small settlements might be made just to get a bad publicity issue to go away when it would otherwise be difficult to demonstrate innocence (she said-he said type of thing). Big settlements are made when the accused really is guilty or, if he's not clearly guilty but the complainant has a good enough story to risk loss in court. So bottom line, if 5 different people got an average of just over $2.5 mill each, then there was definitely some bad behaviour - whether exactly as the complainants alleged or not. To reach a decision to ante up that much money 5 times, somebody - at least the internal attorneys - had to have dug into facts and circumstances pretty deep. And 5 times they reached the conclusion that they were better off to pay than to fight. Hmmmmmm.

Post Reply