Look, Jack, I’m not for keeping women stupid, by all means I want them happy and in a natural order, but I think you will always misunderstand me and the others here at SAB (for the time being) because you have come here predisposed to frustration.
Open your mind, take a deep breath, and engage in intellectual conversation.
dirl126 - 05:05pm on 05/11/2008
Look, Jack, I’m not for keeping women stupid, by all means I want them happy and in a natural order…
“Natural order” is just right-wing code for “get your ass back in the kitchen and make babies!”
You claim that being inferior to men is the “natural order” for women. How can I have an intelligent conversation with someone like that?
jack - 05:05pm on 05/11/2008
That comment is inane. You ignored my evidence of your previous assertion of my being insane because all women do not WANT to live a secondary role which I just proved to be untrue.
I gave a clearcut example of an INTELLIGENT and respectable women wanting to live a secondary role. She was actually one of the most respectable women I’ve ever met. Compared to more promiscous less educated ones, who often attempt to domineer their spouses.
You’re being rude and presumptious. You have become the exact enemy you are trying to eliminate and are doing more damage than good. I’m sorry.
dirl126 - 05:05pm on 05/11/2008
Dirl: Feed the trolls at your own discretion, but don’t expect to turn that sow’s ear of reading mis-comprehension into the silk purse of sweet reason any time soon!
Proof - 05:05pm on 05/11/2008
Natural, Definiton:
Based on innate moral feeling of humankind.
You took my words into context of being in the kitchen instead.
I told you, we’re not no-brain conservatives, so defining everything amongst the “right-wing code” won’t work.
dirl126 - 06:05pm on 05/11/2008
Haha! : ) Thanks Proof!
dirl126 - 06:05pm on 05/11/2008
You ignored my evidence blah blah blah…
First off all you didn’t offer evidence, you offered an antecdote. I don’t expect you or proof to understand the differnce, but there it is.
Secondly, you claim that since one woman WANTS to be inferior therefore ALL women are inferior to men.
Your primary thesis---that women live only to serve men, their lord and masters---is just too crazy to have an intelligent conversation about. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.
jack - 06:05pm on 05/11/2008
Natural, Definiton:
Based on innate moral feeling of humankind.
So you know know the “innate moral feeling” of the entire species? How arrogant of you to claim superior moral knowledge over every person on the planet.
You took my words into context of being in the kitchen instead.
It’s called a metaphor, and it went whizzing over your head.
I told you, we’re not no-brain conservatives…
Um...yes, you are. Sorry.
jack - 06:05pm on 05/11/2008
Secondly, you claim that since one woman WANTS to be inferior therefore ALL women are inferior to men.
Your primary thesis---that women live only to serve men, their lord and masters---is just too crazy to have an intelligent conversation about. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.
jack,
Reading through the entire thread, I don’t see where anyone has claimed either of your theses. Are you in the habit of making up stupid shit as a diversion whenever you find yourself at a loss for something cogent to say, or is this a congenital disability of which we should be aware so as not to embarrass you by making fun?
So is wearing a burkka
Look, Jack, I’m not for keeping women stupid, by all means I want them happy and in a natural order, but I think you will always misunderstand me and the others here at SAB (for the time being) because you have come here predisposed to frustration.
Open your mind, take a deep breath, and engage in intellectual conversation.
“Natural order” is just right-wing code for “get your ass back in the kitchen and make babies!”
You claim that being inferior to men is the “natural order” for women. How can I have an intelligent conversation with someone like that?
That comment is inane. You ignored my evidence of your previous assertion of my being insane because all women do not WANT to live a secondary role which I just proved to be untrue.
I gave a clearcut example of an INTELLIGENT and respectable women wanting to live a secondary role. She was actually one of the most respectable women I’ve ever met. Compared to more promiscous less educated ones, who often attempt to domineer their spouses.
You’re being rude and presumptious. You have become the exact enemy you are trying to eliminate and are doing more damage than good. I’m sorry.
Dirl: Feed the trolls at your own discretion, but don’t expect to turn that sow’s ear of reading mis-comprehension into the silk purse of sweet reason any time soon!
Natural, Definiton:
Based on innate moral feeling of humankind.
You took my words into context of being in the kitchen instead.
I told you, we’re not no-brain conservatives, so defining everything amongst the “right-wing code” won’t work.
Haha! : ) Thanks Proof!
First off all you didn’t offer evidence, you offered an antecdote. I don’t expect you or proof to understand the differnce, but there it is.
Secondly, you claim that since one woman WANTS to be inferior therefore ALL women are inferior to men.
Your primary thesis---that women live only to serve men, their lord and masters---is just too crazy to have an intelligent conversation about. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.
So you know know the “innate moral feeling” of the entire species? How arrogant of you to claim superior moral knowledge over every person on the planet.
It’s called a metaphor, and it went whizzing over your head.
Um...yes, you are. Sorry.
jack,
Reading through the entire thread, I don’t see where anyone has claimed either of your theses. Are you in the habit of making up stupid shit as a diversion whenever you find yourself at a loss for something cogent to say, or is this a congenital disability of which we should be aware so as not to embarrass you by making fun?