Atheistforums.com

I never get why people say they wouldn't date someone from a different word view pertaining to religion, I would never date a fundamentalist or a homophobic or transphobic person, or a racist person, but someone believing in something when I don't believe in it, even if I find it to be fucking stupid, is such a small part of who they are, anyone who says they refuse to date a christian in any situation is a fucking moron.
I used to be this way, but I opened my eyes and realized how much of a fucking idiot I was.
The only exception to this would be if you were someone like hitchens, and you know that it would interfere with the relationship.

Honest first thought:  falcon.  But you know what?  Screw society's norms.

Quote from: Jannabear on February 21, 2016, 12:34:01 AManyone who says they refuse to date a christian in any situation is a fucking moron.

It depends on how religious they are.  If they're one of the more liberal types who aren't totally bonkers and that don't automatically hate atheists, then that's fine.  But if they're super religious and preachy to boot, it's not going to work out.

QuoteThe only exception to this would be if you were someone like hitchens, and you know that it would interfere with the relationship.

What's the problem with Hitchens, exactly?  The high-functioning alcoholism or the yanno, necrophilia?

... bitch.

I've dated bitches in the past. No more.

Quote from: Hydra009 on February 21, 2016, 12:45:28 AM
It depends on how religious they are.  If they're one of the more liberal types who aren't totally bonkers and that don't automatically hate atheists, then that's fine.  But if they're super religious and preachy to boot, it's not going to work out.
What's the problem with Hitchens, exactly?  The high-functioning alcoholism or the yanno, necrophilia?

I specified that.
That's not what I meant, I think hitchens was a pretty intelligent person, though he had a few fucked up viewpoints.
My point was that it wouldn't work for him because he was an outspoken antitheist.

Quote from: Jannabear on February 21, 2016, 12:59:17 AMMy point was that it wouldn't work for him because he was an outspoken antitheist.

I have similar views, so I'm probably similarly ineligible.  Guess I should find someone who wouldn't be chased off by a different worldview.  :P

Quote from: Hydra009 on February 21, 2016, 01:07:25 AM
I have similar views, so I'm probably similarly ineligible.  Guess I should find someone who wouldn't be chased off by a different worldview.  :P

I'm saying that if both of you are moderate in how you view religion, why should it matter.

Quote from: Jannabear on February 21, 2016, 01:15:35 AM
I'm saying that if both of you are moderate in how you view religion, why should it matter.

One of my main requirements for any relationship is being able to hold an intelligent discussion for more than 5 minutes. Sadly this does not go that well with many gnostic theists. Though i have agnostic theist, deist and pantheist friends with whom I get to discuss monism vs dualism and it is rather interesting.

I don't know if I have ever held an intelligent conversation that ever came to the topic of theism. There are just infinitely more interesting and productive topics to me than "Is there something neither of us can prove right watching us?"...

As for people I wouldn't date; Anyone "mean spirited". Really just being a kind and caring person is the main thing I look for in a personality. I am not as concerned about someone being book smart or ambitious so long as they are empathetic to the world around them.

Theist and religious. Can't. Never have or even tried, but I don't think I can. Can't help it.

Depends what you mean by 'date'.  If it's just a short-term thing then yeah, why not?  Can't imagine spending my life with someone who thinks there's an invisible superwizard in the sky though....

I wouldn't date an - Arrogent jock type asshole who no matter how pretty looking he is, he's still the kind of cunt who picked on the weaker and less popular people in school. These kind of people need to be disfigured.

..man.

No matter how accepting I am of different lifestyles, I am a "disgusting cis white heterosexual male."

Quote from: Nonsensei on February 21, 2016, 08:58:14 AM
..man.

No matter how accepting I am of different lifestyles, I am a "disgusting cis white heterosexual male."

Is this something you experienced in real ife or is it the part of the victimhood imposed on you via internet media?

I mean, have you ever been subjected to any discrimination becuse you are a white heterosexual male?

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 21, 2016, 09:10:36 AM
Is this something you experienced in real ife or is it the part of the victimhood imposed on you via internet media?

I mean, have you ever been subjected to any discrimination becuse you are a white heterosexual male?

Nope :)

Do you realize that this:

Quote from: Jannabear on February 21, 2016, 01:15:35 AM
I'm saying that if both of you are moderate in how you view religion, why should it matter.

Says something that is very different than this:

Quote from: Jannabear on February 21, 2016, 12:34:01 AM
anyone who says they refuse to date a christian in any situation is a fucking moron.

Words matter. If the first quote is what you meant, the second quote should not have been what you said.

 This ... "I used to be this way, but I opened my eyes and realized how much of a fucking idiot I was."

Given that admission, someone might date you (the other side of your question).

For me, dating a Christian wouldn't be much of a problem unless she was super devout and preachy. It just wouldn't work.

But even if she is one of those tolerant ones who isn't outwardly super religious I would still be concerned with the future. Like, if we actually got married and had kids and suddenly she wants to do all the religious bullshit and wants to make sure they are raised christian. I would have a real problem with allowing my kids to be indoctrinated. Its one of those things that can sneak up on you after its too late. Makes me wary of even dating a christian.

Quote from: Nonsensei on February 21, 2016, 09:14:41 AM
Nope :)

But you enjoy complaining about something you haven't actually experienced; something that is not real when those angry women scream their heads off exactly because of this, right? :)

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 21, 2016, 10:18:33 AM

But you enjoy complaining about something you haven't actually experienced; something that is not real when those angry women scream their heads off exactly because of this, right? :)

At this point im pretty sure you're confusing me with someone else.

I'll date anything that moves!

Quote from: Nonsensei on February 21, 2016, 10:30:07 AM
At this point im pretty sure you're confusing me with someone else.

Oh come on. You used to get furious because of a few women after ratings in a tv show laughed about castration of a man. Remember? I also saw you writing the 'white cis gender male'...blah blah routine somewhere around here. :lol:

Have you changed that much? Kudos, if you have. I'd be glad.

i have dated men, women and children.  And even a dog or two.  But then, I guess what one means by 'a date' could make all the difference.  I've taken kids to movies--and a meal after.  I've taken women to movies--and a meal after--or not.  I've gone to cards shows and ball games with men.  I've gone to ball games with women and children.  I've been to the park with my dogs.  And children.  And wife.  All dates, I guess.  I've been with christians, muslims and maybe a shinto.  If I'm going somewhere and somebody else is interested and I seem to get along okay with them, then why not hook up????  I don't have to marry any of them..............bed any of them..............or talk religion or politics with them either.   

I was talking about a romantic date. I can't get attracted to a religious or a theist male who would start to argue why believing in a super power is valuable and needed at some point. Besides, how submissive is that? What am I going to do with a submissive male? Noone is going to believe in this, but I'm not a dominant woman. Seriously. I am attracted to masculinity and intelligence superior to mine in males. No, it doesn't conflict -even a tiny bit- with being a feminist. None. Zilch. Nada.

I do not have a problem with 'dating' anyone other than that. Apparently, I have already dated with Pickel and Philo (and his girl) from the forum according to Mike's definition.

Romance?  Female and non theist only.

Quote from: Mike Cl on February 21, 2016, 01:51:02 PM
Romance?  Female and non theist only.

What about one night stands?

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 21, 2016, 10:18:33 AM

But you enjoy complaining about something you haven't actually experienced; something that is not real when those angry women scream their heads off exactly because of this, right? :)

Hillarious how you lack self-awareness as you yourself have tried to discredit people on this forum by attacking their characther traits like maleness, whiteness and nationality; because you just cant argue for shit. But yeah it is definitly not a real thing, how could it be? It would go against the gospel intersectional feminist narrative.

Quote from: mauricio on February 21, 2016, 02:31:14 PM
Hillarious how you lack self-awareness as you yourself have tried to discredit people on this forum by attacking their characther traits like maleness, whiteness and nationality; because you just cant argue for shit. But yeah it is definitly not a real thing, how could it be? It would go against the gospel intersectional feminist narrative.

I didn't insult anyone. I asked a question and he answered me. And I made my comment on his answer.

Highly likely, none of the white het males here ever experienced any discrimination, yet they cannot shut up about an imaginary victimhood. Bothers/offends you? Tough.

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 21, 2016, 02:38:41 PM
I didn't insult anyone. I asked a question and he answered me. And I made my comment on his answer.

Highly likely, none of the white het males here ever experienced any discrimination, yet they cannot shut up about an imaginary victimhood. Bothers/offends you? Tough.

Wow its amazing your incapacity to understand or properly read even such a simple and short post. Tell me when did i say anything about you insulting people? No i was talking about your lack of self awareness as you do shit like in this post dismissing people's words due to their characther traits and your perceived statistical relations between human groups and discrimination. How about we do this with women and black people instead of white males. hey the suspects are a black guy and a white guy mmm likely the criminal is the black guy so stop complaining about your imaginary white criminals. A baby was found dead murdered by one of his parents. Bet it was the women, you know women murder babies this much often than males i do not need to actually address the specifics or your argument i already know you are a black or a women statistics tell me you are the most likely culript hur dur.  Males die more often at work, silly women stop complaining about imaginary safety concerns in your jobs.

Quote from: Hydra009 on February 21, 2016, 12:38:25 AM
Honest first thought:  falcon.  But you know what?  Screw society's norms.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aUqjaQnvLM

I don't get this trend of shaming people into being as open to loving as many different kinds of people as possible. I don't care if someone says they will only date skinny white and blond women who look like super models, have no kids, and is a black belt in 50 fighting styles. Let them be as picky as they want. It's their life.

Quote from: mauricio on February 21, 2016, 02:59:28 PM
Wow its amazing your incapacity to understand or properly read even such a simple and short post. Tell me when did i say anything about you insulting people? No i was talking about your lack of self awareness as you do shit like in this post dismissing people's words due to their characther traits and your perceived statistical relations between human groups and discrimination. How about we do this with women and black people instead of white males. hey the suspects are a black guy and a white guy mmm likely the criminal is the black guy so stop complaining about your imaginary white criminals. A baby was found dead murdered by one of his parents. Bet it was the women, you know women murder babies this much often than males i do not need to actually address the specifics or your argument i already know you are a black or a women statistics tell me you are the most likely culript hur dur.  Males die more often at work, silly women stop complaining about imaginary safety concerns in your jobs.

Statistics sources:
Women murder their newborns more often than males: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide

The majority of occupational deaths occur among men. In one U.S. study, 93% of deaths on the job involved men,[4] with a death rate approximately 11 times higher than women https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_fatality


Not like this matters that much my point is about how intellectually lazy it is to dismiss individual cases and their specifics by bringing up average trends. And using average trends to dismiss its exceptions as imaginary is so retarded i cant even that just shows you do not even understand how statistics work.

People often lie, or just confuse themselves, with averages and percentages (of a given sub-category).  Best to just give the raw data.

Quote from: mauricio on February 21, 2016, 02:59:28 PM
Wow its amazing your incapacity to understand or properly read even such a simple and short post. Tell me when did i say anything about you insulting people? No i was talking about your lack of self awareness as you do shit like in this post dismissing people's words due to their characther traits and your perceived statistical relations between human groups and discrimination. How about we do this with women and black people instead of white males. hey the suspects are a black guy and a white guy mmm likely the criminal is the black guy so stop complaining about your imaginary white criminals. A baby was found dead murdered by one of his parents. Bet it was the women, you know women murder babies this much often than males i do not need to actually address the specifics or your argument i already know you are a black or a women statistics tell me you are the most likely culript hur dur.  Males die more often at work, silly women stop complaining about imaginary safety concerns in your jobs.

You accused me of attacking Nonsensei, while I asked a simple question to him and he gave me a simple answer which obviously a topic that is buggering you.

You are constanly insulting me and anyone who disgarees with you and generally all women. And you keep making assumptions about my opinions -which you know fuck about- you are telling me what I am thinking. I am not the person you want me to be. 

I am not black. I am white. You don't know anything about me, my experiences -which is twice is your age- or my opinions on gender issues.

Cut the crap. Grow the fuck up. You sound like an agitated SJWs on stereoids. And you have become a bore.

Quote from: Blackleaf on February 21, 2016, 03:18:27 PM
I don't get this trend of shaming people into being as open to loving as many different kinds of people as possible. I don't care if someone says they will only date skinny white and blond women who look like super models, have no kids, and is a black belt in 50 fighting styles. Let them be as picky as they want. It's their life.

I was called racist once because i said i do not find black women generally attractive. So what is the alternative really? Are we going full clockwork orange on people so they can get it up with anything that walks? And dont get me started on transgender people who think it is transphobic to not date them because they are transgender. That's like saying its mysoginistic for a gay man to not date women. But i do agree with the OP in the sense that we should not demonize a whole group of people due to some morons who are very vocal in that group. Some theists are very sensible, usually the agnostic ones though.

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 21, 2016, 03:31:01 PM
You accused me of attacking Nonsensei.

Amazing this is simply a lie, it never happened. Anyone can read our brief exchange and see i never accused you of attacking nonsensei. Like you are a fascinating example of illeteracy. I skimmed the rest of your post quickly saw another lie. And implication that i though you were black? What? I never have even considered what race you are. And obviously i can bet you never addressed my actual argument about average trends and dismissing individual cases. Will edit after cleaning my puke to confirm you never addressed the argument as usual.

Edit: yep never addressed the argument just deny it. If what i said is not really an applicable critic of your position then why don't you explain your real justification for the controversial statement i originally objected too. Oh wait you can't because you did dismiss discrimination towards white het males as not real and imaginary victimhood. And you did so because your entire ideological narrative is based on how much oppressed is everyone else by the white het male of the western hegemony.

Quote from: mauricio on February 21, 2016, 03:49:10 PM
Amazing this is simply a lie, it never happened. Anyone can read our brief exchange and see i never accused you of attacking nonsensei. Like you are a fascinating example of illeteracy. I skimmed the rest of your post quickly saw another lie. And implication that i though you were black? What? I never have even considered what race you are.

Quote from: mauricio on February 21, 2016, 02:31:14 PM
Hillarious how you lack self-awareness as you yourself have tried to discredit people on this forum by attacking their characther traits like maleness, whiteness and nationality; because you just cant argue for shit.

Nonsensei is the only person I have had any exchange about American culture, white het males and discrimantion in two treads.

Quote... i do not need to actually address the specifics or your argument i already know you are a black or a women statistics tell me you are the most likely culript hur dur.

Self awareness, hur dur, puking anger, can't argue for shit...etc. You are a wet dream of a Freudian physcologist and a champion of projecting.

Quote from: gentle_dissident on February 21, 2016, 02:01:04 PM
What about one night stands?

Female only.  No need to go to politics or religion in that case.

Quote from: Mike Cl on February 21, 2016, 04:09:42 PM
Female only.  No need to go to politics or religion in that case.

People still do one night stands? Cool.

Quote from: Blackleaf on February 21, 2016, 03:18:27 PM
I don't get this trend of shaming people into being as open to loving as many different kinds of people as possible. I don't care if someone says they will only date skinny white and blond women who look like super models, have no kids, and is a black belt in 50 fighting styles. Let them be as picky as they want. It's their life.

It's almost to the point of:
"You're a guy and won't have sex with another guy? You're a bigoted homophobe!!!!"
"Uhh.... no guys just aren't really my 'thing'... relax"

"You aren't attracted to black women? You're a racist pig!!!"
"Uhhh. No... I just tend to be attracted to pale white chicks, Japanese chicks, and Korean chicks... fucking relax..."


I personally don't know if I would date a religious nut or a conspiracy theorist... or a hardcore vegan or Peta activist... or a crazy Feminist....
Maybe if they were not that obsessed with it, I could overlook their religion or conspiracy theories... I can definiately overlook someone who is vegan, but not if they are pushy with it, which in my experience is that vegans always tend to push their veganism on to you. "You knowwww... you shouldn't get coffee there. They mistreat cows" Holy shit. Can I just get my over-priced cup of starbucks coffee in peace?

I tend to get frustrated when I realize someone believes something ridiculous. Things that cause me frustration, I'd rather not deal with.... so I think I might have to avoid the religious/conspiracy theory bunch.

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 21, 2016, 04:10:23 PM
People still do one night stands? Cool.

I don't.  So, the question for me is purely hypothetical.

I'm in between being groggy and my coffee kicking in, so excuse my grumpyness... lol

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 21, 2016, 04:03:51 PM
Nonsensei is the only person I have had any exchange about American culture, white het males and discrimantion in two treads.

I used past tense and said ON THIS FORUM


Like seriously at this point it think this just a language barrier, how can it be so hard to understand i was referring to your entire post history on this forums. Why did you assume i was talking about nonsensei and this thread i never specified anything like that. I was clearly comparing your statement here about something not happening with the fact that it has happened here on this forum and you did it.

Plus my post was nothing about insults. I do not give a fuck about insults. Its about the irrationality of arguing based on indentity politics which is based on general trends when arguing against individuals and their individual cases. And the lack of self awarene

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 21, 2016, 04:03:51 PM

Nonsensei is the only person I have had any exchange about American culture, white het males and discrimantion in two treads.

Quote
... i do not need to actually address the specifics or your argument i already know you are a black or a women statistics tell me you are the most likely culript hur dur.

Self awareness, hur dur, puking anger, can't argue for shit...etc. You are a wet dream of a Freudian physcologist and a champion of Projecting.

  I was giving you hypotheticals to clearly demonstrate the failure of the position i was criticizing. I was not talking about you. I was using the royal you. I Do admit the sudden change to second person on that sentence can be sort of confusing. But really i think this is a language issue at this point considering how many times this has happened between apparently my english grammar and your reading skills add up to terrible misinterpretation.

Oh my fucking hell will everyone just relax.

Quote from: mauricio on February 21, 2016, 04:33:13 PM
I used past tense and said ON THIS FORUM


Like seriously at this point it think this just a language barrier, how can it be so hard to understand i was referring to your entire post history on this forums.

You have read over 10 000 posts I have written in this forum in 6 years and decided to make the specific comment about white het males on the exact time I made an exchange with one about it today?

And the black thing I 'lied' about? You do have a bit of a language barrier, you are so fucking angry, you have no idea what you are writing.

You are a very bad liar -this is not neccessarily a bad thing- and I think you are younger than 20. How old were you when you read my posts?


I'm more curious what you are really angry about though.

Can someone else on the forum give an objective perspective. Was my grammar that bad, that it was not understandble i was talking about hypothetical situations?

Take some deep breaths, take a nap, a shower or something and cool off. You're starting to de-rail the thread with senseless bickering.

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 21, 2016, 04:48:11 PM
Oh my fucking hell will everyone just relax.

I swear, I am relaxed. I want to ruffle his hair and squeeze him. I mean it.

He is like an oversized bear cub that wants to wrestle and bite my head off. He thinks I am 'evil'. :lol:

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 21, 2016, 04:49:42 PM
Take some deep breaths, take a nap, a shower or something and cool off. You're starting to de-rail the thread with senseless bickering.

Im pretty much done with this. At this point i only care whether my post was really that hard to understand or not? Did you manage to catch i was talking about hypotethical black people and women?

Is it really that hard to understand i was doing sarcastic hypotheticals to prove my point with a sort of reductio ad absurdum?

QuoteWow its amazing your incapacity to understand or properly read even such a simple and short post. Tell me when did i say anything about you insulting people? No i was talking about your lack of self awareness as you do shit like in this post dismissing people's words due to their characther traits and your perceived statistical relations between human groups and discrimination. How about we do this with women and black people instead of white males. hey the suspects are a black guy and a white guy mmm likely the criminal is the black guy so stop complaining about your imaginary white criminals. A baby was found dead murdered by one of his parents. Bet it was the women, you know women murder babies this much often than males i do not need to actually address the specifics or your argument i already know you are a black or a women statistics tell me you are the most likely culprit hur dur.  Males die more often at work, silly women stop complaining about imaginary safety concerns in your jobs.

You are talking about me. Stop lying.

Quote from: mauricio on February 21, 2016, 02:59:28 PM
...i do not need to actually address the specifics or your argument i already know you are a black or a women statistics tell me you are the most likely culript hur dur.  ...

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 21, 2016, 04:55:42 PM

That was said by the hypothetical idiot saying to the hypothetical women or black man that the specifics of his situation do not matter because of average population trends.


That post was sarcastic and an attempt of using analogies for a reduction ad absurdum style counter argument.

Quote from: mauricio on February 21, 2016, 04:51:38 PM
Im pretty much done with this. At this point i only care whether my post was really that hard to understand or not? Did you manage to catch i was talking about hypotethical black people and women?

I'm talking about your pissing match with shoe. Both of you, cut it out. I don't care who stops arguing with the other first, I just want the bickering to stop. It's unproductive and it's de-railing the thread.

In reference to the comment that has to do with this thread, just to make sure, are you talking about the one where you started with

QuoteI was called racist once because i said i do not find black women generally attractive.

I just read that now... and yes I agree with that post 100%

Now. As we were and back on topic...

Quote from: mauricio on February 21, 2016, 04:59:48 PM
That was said by the hypothetical idiot saying to the hypothetical women or black man that the specifics of his situation do not matter because average populations trends.

That post was sarcastic and an attempt of using analogies for a reduction ad absurdum style counter argument.

Yeah this is an hypothetical line. :lol:

Quote from: mauricio on February 21, 2016, 02:59:28 PM
...i do not need to actually address the specifics or your argument i already know you are a black or a women statistics tell me you are the most likely culript hur dur.  ...

More like:

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQb6CU_gzb3-2dT_Fc4Jy0bcmdv0Wg6COWln2RDiVk_1I6H4GMarg)

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 21, 2016, 05:03:29 PM
Now. As we were and back on topic...

I have been called 'racist' for not posting a black male pic to a sexy men thread. By a bunch of Brits (white male) Me. I love black men. Just because I just didn't think of it at that time.

back to the topic title:


any of you whacky fuck-ups.

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 21, 2016, 05:06:20 PM
I have been called 'racist' for not posting a black male pic to a sexy men thread. By a bunch of Brits (white male) Me. I love black men. Just because I just didn't think of it at that time.

I've seen some pretty sexy black chicks. Like... stunning. I'm not "unattracted" to them, it's just not nearly as frequent as a pale white girl with either red hair or black hair or Japanese or Korean.

Pale white chicks... I get made fun of all the time... but hey. Vampires need love too.

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 21, 2016, 05:15:04 PM
I've seen some pretty sexy black chicks. Like... stunning. I'm not "unattracted" to them, it's just not nearly as frequent as a pale white girl with either red hair or black hair or Japanese or Korean.

Pale white chicks... I get made fun of all the time... but hey. Vampires need love too.

I am definitely attracted to dark haired males. There is a certain type of Western white male features that puts me off even though they are usually white, big men and I love big men in general but not them. I have no idea why.  I think that type of face translates to me as cold and distant for some reason. I don't like cold-distant people, let alone get attracted to them.   

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 21, 2016, 05:26:42 PM
I think that type of face translates to me as cold and distant for some reason. I don't like cold-distant people, let alone get attracted to them.   

The bad boy? You?  Dang. I think we all understand that for some reason a lot of women want the bad boy. I can only guess it is the idea that YOU changed the bad boy into a good boy. And we all know that that rarely works. My kid passed on a nice guy, is still chasing the guy that won't even walk across the floor to give her a kiss…demands she come to him. Women can be pretty stupid.

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 21, 2016, 05:02:51 PM
I'm talking about your pissing match with shoe. Both of you, cut it out. I don't care who stops arguing with the other first, I just want the bickering to stop. It's unproductive and it's de-railing the thread.

In reference to the comment that has to do with this thread, just to make sure, are you talking about the one where you started with I just read that now... and yes I agree with that post 100%

What i meant is if the following post is really that confusing that it is justified for shoe to think Im calling her black and that her arguments do not matter. I need a third party opinion to judge whether my grammar was actually that confusing. From my point of view I was clearly saying how trying to use average trends of the populations the speaker belongs too to dismiss his argument is cheap and irrational because you are not arguing with his actual specific points of his specific circumstance. To illustrate that point i made some hypothetical examples. About a crime with a white and black suspect and about an infanticide case with the mother and father as suspect. Was this really that confusing to understand:

QuoteWow its amazing your incapacity to understand or properly read even such a simple and short post. Tell me when did i say anything about you insulting people? No i was talking about your lack of self awareness as you do shit like in this post dismissing people's words due to their characther traits and your perceived statistical relations between human groups and discrimination. How about we do this with women and black people instead of white males. hey the suspects are a black guy and a white guy mmm likely the criminal is the black guy so stop complaining about your imaginary white criminals. A baby was found dead murdered by one of his parents. Bet it was the women, you know women murder babies this much often than males i do not need to actually address the specifics or your argument i already know you are a black or a women statistics tell me you are the most likely culprit hur dur.  Males die more often at work, silly women stop complaining about imaginary safety concerns in your jobs.

Quote from: aitm on February 21, 2016, 05:35:52 PM
The bad boy? You?  Dang. I think we all understand that for some reason a lot of women want the bad boy. I can only guess it is the idea that YOU changed the bad boy into a good boy. And we all know that that rarely works. My kid passed on a nice guy, is still chasing the guy that won't even walk across the floor to give her a kiss…demands she come to him. Women can be pretty stupid.

I don't get what you mean by a 'bad boy' here. Because you are describing an ordinary asshole who treats women badly and probably anyone else he can manage. That would never work for me. I don't see why would work for anyone else.

Bad boy is something different and I think it often gets confused with the usual asshole. Bad boy is a rebel. I have had a relationship with anarchist type for almost a ten years who was sued by gov who got injured in a protest -after all that happened- and he was the dreamy bad boy type in our book when we were younger. I have never been politically active in my life, but we all picked those men at that age. He never treated anyone badly, men or women. People looked up to him actually. It was a desired type in my 20s. They are often honest to boot, loyal to their word, loyal to their woman, friends, masculine and highly intelligent, proud, protective over women and sexually and generally agressive in behaviour; somewhat oddly conservative in their relationships, tough, never showing much emotion in public. They have beards even it is blasphemy as a fashion -it was in those years- long hair, they do not talk much, they are mostly not handsome, but ugly sexy, good in bed. They are highly reliable even after years you broke up. They usually have the similar hobbies even. Typical anarchist, socialist youth over here in my time. They are always atheists.

'Bad' boy. Because you are highly likley to get in trouble with them or they do by themselves. Never an asshole. Otherwise what you are describing up there sounds like a scene from bad romantic comedy to me.

Most "bad-boys" here are not "bad-boys" as much as they pretend to be. The play the role simply to fuck the gals that think they are taking a step up by being with them.

Quote from: aitm on February 21, 2016, 06:15:45 PM
Most "bad-boys" here are not "bad-boys" as much as they pretend to be. The play the role simply to fuck the gals that think they are taking a step up by being with them.

Which would take a few conversations for any average woman to figure it out, if she dooes not wish to play along. You are describing American women as if they are all characters out of a stupid romantic movie or some tv show, aitm. Not realistic.

Men chase the 'wrong' skirt all the time. Do you think they are stupid? I don't. Neither I think they are pussy idiots. Monkey see, monkey want. 

It's like you are insisting on not getting women while you get the men for the very same reason. They are people with vaginas, a much more fun genitals and it is easier to get lucky for them. They like drama and challenge. Like men. Just in a different way.

The round room and the square box. The difference between a glass of cold water and diving in to a pool in a summer day. Ring a bell? :lol:

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 21, 2016, 06:31:13 PM
Which would take a few conversations for any average woman to figure it out... You are describing American women as if they are all characters out of a stupid romantic movie….

My dear… in this argument, I must defer to personal familiarity with the target as opposed to your assumptions of what american women are like based on……er…exactly how do you usurp the reality of a life time experience with the american woman as opposed to your, what….two week vacation here? A blog perhaps?

I would actually say aitm's position is somewhat accurate... but it is less to do with them being women or whatever and more to do with lower cultural standards. Intelligence is not an inherently sexy trait to the average American (woman or male).

Quote from: aitm on February 21, 2016, 08:20:33 PM
My dear… in this argument, I must defer to personal familiarity with the target as opposed to your assumptions of what american women are like based on……er…exactly how do you usurp the reality of a life time experience with the american woman as opposed to your, what….two week vacation here? A blog perhaps?

Using the classic shoe tactic against her

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS_I4ACYEXpcnXaP98GW6gSgJGc0Pqv2ElGC44VBBuvfSvBBlJdU4xymIJM)

Shoesy, I would have quit when you were not behind...

My criteria for dating back in the day was that they had all their fingers and toes and brushed regularly. Pretty much covers it.

psychopath

I dated a Wiccan once. He believed he was a witch, and good for him, but for me it meant that I would get kicked out of the room at 3 in the morning at random. He'd then proceed to throw spices around the room. Looking at it through the keyhole (Victorian house) it was like watching a kid play with with random shit. He was a bitch as well, so all in all a horrid time.

Quote from: aitm on February 21, 2016, 08:20:33 PM
My dear… in this argument, I must defer to personal familiarity with the target as opposed to your assumptions of what american women are like based on……er…exactly how do you usurp the reality of a life time experience with the american woman as opposed to your, what….two week vacation here? A blog perhaps?

I wasn't comparing your experience of American women with my very limited experience of them. I am saying what you are saying is unrealistic, you are describing a character out of a romantic comedy. 

I don't read such blogs. They are offer the very kind of stuff you just put here.

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 21, 2016, 08:41:19 PM
Shoesy, I would have quit when you were not behind...

Really? What does that mean exactly? Because I think he sounds out of male Cosmopolitan. Pretty much in general he does. And that has nothing to do with his experience, it is about how he sees women.

What he is saying pretty much like women talking about men about 'giving to them as a reward' or 'rejecting them as a punishment'. You wouldn't believe how real and good that works.

Still both disgusting and completely wrong.

What aitm saying is exactly the stuff out of a male Cosmopolitan. "I fucked 200 women they are all suckers for assholes, bros. Let's go."

(Making a generalisation for the sake of the argument) What I am saying is that women are doing the same thing with men. Men are going after women who treats them that way ALL THE TIME. It's almost accepted that women cuold treat men the way he describes. It's just perfectly OK to chase that ass when you are a man, but it is 'hah women go after pretentious bad boys who are out to fuck them' when they are women. The things men buy into, also pretend to buy into, the things they do/put up just to get into women's pants can get pretty fucked up .... which is nothing wrong if that's what they want. There is nothing stupid or wrong with what women want to live also. The fantasy is different. It doesn't become baaad, because it is a woman and you don't find the fantasy attractive yourself.

This is a control mechanism as always. Another bullshit way to repress first women and then men.

You think it is more harmful to women? Why? Are the children? Stupid? Sorry, they are not, just because you don't like it. That's because what you are progrmmed to think about them because of their gender and th eplac eof that gender in society. I'm not sure if you are even aware of it. That's because of the traditional set of norms. It's OK when men do it; they do it everything for what they want anyway, but bad and sad when women do. Why? Man is a standard, that doesn't fit women. Pffft.

Guys, you really treat women as if they are some completely different alien species, anything but ordinary humans. It's fucked up. Then you complain about angry feminists. Myeh.

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 22, 2016, 04:47:21 AM
What aitm saying is exactly the stuff out of a male Cosmopolitan. "I fucked 200 women they are all suckers for assholes, bros. Let's go."

(Making a generalisation for the sake of the argument) What I am saying is that women are doing the same thing with men. Men are going after women who treats them that way ALL THE TIME. It's almost accepted that women cuold treat men the way he describes. It's just perfectly OK to chase that ass when you are a man, but it is 'hah women go after pretentious bad boys who are out to fuck them' when they are women. The things men buy into, also pretend to buy into, the things they do/put up just to get into women's pants can get pretty fucked up .... which is nothing wrong if that's what they want. There is nothing stupid or wrong with what women want to live also. The fantasy is different. It doesn't become baaad, because it is a woman and you don't find the fantasy attractive yourself.

This is a control mechanism as always. Another bullshit way to repress first women and then men.

You think it is more harmful to women? Why? Are the children? Stupid? Sorry, they are not, just because you don't like it. That's because what you are progrmmed to think about them because of their gender and th eplac eof that gender in society. I'm not sure if you are even aware of it. That's because of the traditional set of norms. It's OK when men do it; they do it everything for what they want anyway, but bad and sad when women do. Why? Man is a standard, that doesn't fit women. Pffft.

Guys, you really treat women as if they are some completely different alien species, anything but ordinary humans. It's fucked up. Then you complain about angry feminists. Myeh.

How actually does your brain process me talking about how women seem to have a heavy leaning towards bad-boys over nice guys to that....er....rant of ..whatever the hell that was?

Quote from: aitm on February 22, 2016, 08:21:08 AM
How actually does your brain process me talking about how women seem to have a heavy leaning towards bad-boys over nice guys to that....er....rant of ..whatever the hell that was?

It's not actually a rant.

I am saying that what you define as 'some women leaning to bad boys' thing is not something different than men chasing 'bitches', 'sluts', 'brightest bulb in the tree'...etc. all kind of women they want and desire.

When a woman makes it diffcult for a man and 'make him crawl' as it were, it looks very normal to you, because it is expected. But when roles change in a fantasy that doesn't work for you, it is suddenly stupid because they are women. It's not.

I may not like, Jane and Mary may not like it but a lot of women like it. They are chasing, playing along, dream about, get something out of it, they get drama. It's nothing more or less than a usual foreplay and fantasy.

Some men want a woman to be warm before everything. Some want her to be intelligent, some just want a good body doesn't matter what the character is. This is exactly the same thing.

And you are calling women stupid, just because you cannot put them in that role.

OK? Peace.

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 22, 2016, 09:29:02 AM


I am saying that what you define as 'some women leaning to bad boys' thing is not something different than men chasing 'bitches', 'sluts', 'brightest bulb in the tree'...etc. all kind of women they want and desire.

I disagree with your understanding of this, men chasing "bitches" as you say have no intention of trying to establish a relationship, whereas the women chasing the bad boy seem to hope that they alone can change the guy into a better person for a relationship. This is what I have seen far more times than I can recall.

QuoteWhen a woman makes it diffcult for a man and 'make him crawl' as it were, it looks very normal to you,

Well, no it doesn't, I have never experienced that.

QuoteBut when roles change in a fantasy that doesn't work for you,

I don't have a clue what this is about.

Again, it seems that in this country women chase the bad boy, seeing something special that is not there simply because he acts that way. I have pointed out this behavior to my daughter in some of her previous "affairs" that this guy expects you to crawl to him, if the guy is interested in you, he will come to you.

QuoteAnd you are calling women stupid,

No, again no. Sometimes you do go off in different directions from the conversation. I have really no idea how you pull all of this out based on a simple observation. I think you would fare very well in the illumnati.

Aitm, do you get the notion that there are people on the forum debating stuff about life experiences that haven't had any themselves? By all means, carry on.

A few people who I cross off my list right away..
Don't drink coffee?  You need to be shot at least once a day and twice on Sunday..
People who think winter and cold weather are great.  I'm sorry..I've come very close to freezing to death more than once in my life. You like snow and cold? Send me a post card..
People who think eating certain foods are worse than death..example: I'd rather starve to death than eat lima beans! Well let's test that theory. How about I tie you up for a week with no food or water with a big plate of lima beans in front of you. The kicker? One bean will be poisoned.. You'll just have to figure out which one..
Anyone who was ever an ex of mine.. You know who you are..
People who think certain cars are so horrible they would never ride in one.. I bet if they were stranded out on a lonely hiway in below zero weather dressed to go to the beach they'd get in my rusty old pickup truck..
This is just my short list, but I have a much longer list and the ultra religious happen to be on it..

Well, guess me and APA won't be going on any dates anytime soon.

Quote from: stromboli on February 22, 2016, 10:18:17 AM
Aitm, do you get the notion that there are people on the forum debating stuff about life experiences that haven't had any themselves? By all means, carry on.

I have it on good authority that people who don't know jack shit are knowledgeable about everything they know absolutely nothing about..

Quote from: Shiranu on February 22, 2016, 10:35:22 AM
Well, guess me and APA won't be going on any dates anytime soon.

Well DAMMIT! My life sucks suddenly.. Well, maybe not that bad.. :lol:

Quote from: aitm on February 22, 2016, 10:07:56 AM

I disagree with your understanding of this, men chasing "bitches" as you say have no intention of trying to establish a relationship, whereas the women chasing the bad boy seem to hope that they alone can change the guy into a better person for a relationship. This is what I have seen far more times than I can recall.
Well, no it doesn't, I have never experienced that.

I don't have a clue what this is about.

Again, it seems that in this country women chase the bad boy, seeing something special that is not there simply because he acts that way. I have pointed out this behavior to my daughter in some of her previous "affairs" that this guy expects you to crawl to him, if the guy is interested in you, he will come to you.

No, again no. Sometimes you do go off in different directions from the conversation. I have really no idea how you pull all of this out based on a simple observation. I think you would fare very well in the illumnati.

I don't think you understand this AT ALL. You see your daughter's relationships through the 'shapes' of your fantasies with the opposite sex. In that frame. This is funny. And you think it is something negative because she doesn't experience it the way like you do.

What you are describing for yourself up there is exactly what 'leaning towards bad boys' mean for some women. It's their version of whatever they want. Just because your 'fantasy' and its 'rules' for a man are different, you cannot put boundaries; right or wrong to this or negative and positive. Well you can, but it doesn't affect the outcome.

Men chase women for any reason. They get them or not. Women do the exact same thing. They getthem or not. If they want to chase a man, they will. For any reason. There is no such thing as they 'should' behave in a certain way to get whatthey want because a man would act this way...etc.

Women are not different than men. People like to think that way, because traditional norms demand it. This actually never happens, women always act the way they like behind everything. It's just when it happens in a way people watch  -like you- they tend to define it as something undesired or out of the norm. That's all.

What they feel/live with the chase is exactly the same as yours; just different fantasies and different things.

Quote from: stromboli on February 22, 2016, 10:18:17 AM
Aitm, do you get the notion that there are people on the forum debating stuff about life experiences that haven't had any themselves? By all means, carry on.

Like a man (aitm), telling a woman (drunkenshoe) how women tend to think/feel/act/behave when chasing a man, because he thinks they want something else, but always get the other?

Hmm. Yeah, right.

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 22, 2016, 10:47:05 AM

and different things.

It's like talking about cars and she responds talking about rabbits. Hey, whatever you want to go on about, go right ahead. I'm getting off the ride.

Quote from: aitm on February 22, 2016, 10:50:50 AM
It's like talking about cars and she responds talking about rabbits. Hey, whatever you want to go on about, go right ahead. I'm getting off the ride.

I hate it when you do this, aitm. I am trying to explain something to you with all my sincerity. And you ALWAYS dismiss it as something crazy.

I am not going to have a converstion with you again. I hope you are happy.

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 22, 2016, 10:59:10 AM
And you ALWAYS dismiss it as something crazy.

Well, maybe because I was discussing a rather common practice, observed many times, among many women and you come back talking about me having some kind of a fantasy or fetish or whatever and fucking 200 women and  gender roles and then my eyes glaze over and I have no idea how it relates.

...............and besides, I've "fucked" far more than 200...  :P~

Quote from: aitm on February 22, 2016, 11:14:07 AM
Well, maybe because I was discussing a rather common practice, observed many times, among many women and you come back talking about me having some kind of a fantasy or fetish or whatever and fucking 200 women and  gender roles and then my eyes glaze over and I have no idea how it relates.

Forget all of that. You misunderstood me completely.

That kind of man chasing you observed with your daughter means the same with what you -men- have with other women for a lot of women in a different way.

OK?

Quote from: aitm on February 22, 2016, 11:17:56 AM
...............and besides, I've "fucked" far more than 200...  :P~

For the record, I was going to make a very mean joke here for revenge, but then I decided no. I feel so mature. *Grins.

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 22, 2016, 11:23:35 AM

That kind of man chasing you observed with your daughter means the same with what you -men- have with other women for a lot of women in a different way.

Sorry, I may see an occasional guy crawling around for a women he is never going to get. The difference is, if the gal isn't interested in him she is not going to fuck him because she can. This is the basic difference.

I agree with aitm based on my experience. You know, that observational data shit. And neither one of us is indicating we are seeing it from a woman's point of view. But that doesn't mean we are wrong, just see it differently.

Sorry. That might be too deep a concept. So call me names or whatever. Carry on.

Quote from: aitm on February 22, 2016, 11:29:54 AM
Sorry, I may see an occasional guy crawling around for a women he is never going to get. The difference is, if the gal isn't interested in him she is not going to fuck him because she can. This is the basic difference.

Which is completely irrelevant to our subject and again just you insisting on seeing all this through male eyes. And then yes a lot of women will fuck a man just because she can. Sometimes just because they want and just because she can 'let' them. (Do you get that?) But this will never be a public info or something to brag around for women. And most men will think this is only what they themselves do.

You don't tell your girl friends when you fuck your way through men, men almost never betray women on having sex anyway.

You know the golden rule. The real body count in sex for men: divide by 2. For women: multiply by 3. :lol:

Quote from: stromboli on February 22, 2016, 11:41:12 AM
I agree with aitm based on my experience. You know, that observational data shit. And neither one of us is indicating we are seeing it from a woman's point of view. But that doesn't mean we are wrong, just see it differently.

Sorry. That might be too deep a concept. So call me names or whatever. Carry on.

Your posts have become passive agressive and empty. You don't even read my posts apparently, so why bother to answer? Don't bother. 

(When have I called you names before, strom? Seriousy, I don't remember, I'd appreicate if you remind it.)

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 22, 2016, 11:44:38 AM
a lot of women will fuck a man just because she can. Sometimes just because they want and just because she can 'let' them. (Do you get that?) 

If you are saying that the very real social dynamic we have of women chasing the "bad boy" is even close to the amount of women that will simply let some guy fuck her because she can, I ain't buying it. Not even close, not even remotely close. But I will happily provide my address and you can attempt to prove me wrong.

You apparently aren't aware that you say nasty and essentially demeaning shit to people on a regular basis. I chalk it up to language differences and not completely understanding our culture. But I don't answer your posts much any more because you accepting a new idea not of your own invention obviously isn't going to happen.

A couple of times I posted responses which basically amounted to agreement and you still told me I was full of BS. Thank you, but I don't have time for people copping attitudes and calling it opinion. See if you can translate that.

I'm spending less time on the forum because unlike some I have better things to do. So carry on, sister, because discussing anything with you is a waste of time and I'm not bothering any more. And if I go with "passive aggressive" its because it is the response your comments deserve.

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 22, 2016, 04:23:45 AM
Really? What does that mean exactly? Because I think he sounds out of male Cosmopolitan. Pretty much in general he does. And that has nothing to do with his experience, it is about how he sees women.

What he is saying pretty much like women talking about men about 'giving to them as a reward' or 'rejecting them as a punishment'. You wouldn't believe how real and good that works.

Still both disgusting and completely wrong.

What I meant by that was sometimes the more people talk, the more they make room for error.

I don't think he was referring to any type of "reward"...
... But aitm is right. Saying what he is said is wrong because it's a stereotype is wrong in its self. The thing about stereotypes is that stereotypes are frequently true...  To a predictable rate. I mean even just now my friend's sister just broke up with her boyfriend because of the same reason. He was an asshole "badboy" that doesn't care about her.

My other friend? She just broke up with someone for the almost same reason. He was lying and cheating.

My other friend told me about how this girl broke up with her boyfriend, turned to him and said "guys are stupid. Want to go out on a date?" which, with two sentences...  One after another like that had him taken aback and wordless... And then immediately she said "Oh I get it.  You don't date MEXICANS" which that had nothing to do with it. She fell for someone stupidly, and then stupidly was going to do it again. Without any thought in the matter. My friend is a good guy, which is why he was taken aback and baffled at why she would even do that, but another case of going in blindly and stupidly causing herself heartache.

Women in this area will even tell you that "women are stupid / crazy" in that sense....  So yeah. Aitm is correct in pointing out that stereotype. And it's not all women, but it does tend to be that way. And likewise not all men are abusive assholes, but it can definitely be that way.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

Quote from: aitm on February 22, 2016, 12:21:44 PM
If you are saying that the very real social dynamic we have of women chasing the "bad boy" is even close to the amount of women that will simply let some guy fuck her because she can, I ain't buying it. Not even close, not even remotely close. But I will happily provide my address and you can attempt to prove me wrong.

Why would we need these amounts to be close or competing? It does not prove anything. This is not a competition. The whole point is you are defining a situation according to 'what a man would want/do' and what appeals to you -as a man- when this is about women. Invalid. And you are deciding if it works or not. Again, invalid. This is not a rant.

Actually, it could be explained in many ways, and also it makes a lot of sense, but you can't stand a post longer than 3 lines, suggesting different meanings of words. Then I want to call you names. This is not flirting.

Quote from: stromboli on February 22, 2016, 12:28:12 PM
You apparently aren't aware that you say nasty and essentially demeaning shit to people on a regular basis. I chalk it up to language differences and not completely understanding our culture. But I don't answer your posts much any more because you accepting a new idea not of your own invention obviously isn't going to happen.

A couple of times I posted responses which basically amounted to agreement and you still told me I was full of BS. Thank you, but I don't have time for people copping attitudes and calling it opinion. See if you can translate that.

I'm spending less time on the forum because unlike some I have better things to do. So carry on, sister, because discussing anything with you is a waste of time and I'm not bothering any more. And if I go with "passive aggressive" its because it is the response your comments deserve.

Oh yes I do. And they do to me too. Often. I really don't care which side you are following or what you think about it. I asked you, if I called YOU any names.

You made a snarky remark out of nowhere and I gave you an answer. I understand your culture much better than you do any foriegn culture. It's not my problem if you get offended by what I see.

If I deserve your passive agressive remarks, don't bother with meaningless explanations and put up with what that deserves in return.

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 22, 2016, 12:37:45 PM
Why would we need these amounts to be close or competing? It does not prove anything. This is not a competition. The whole point is...

No. I made my point exactly as it is. Reality. It has nothing to do with how "I" see it. It is what it is, and to suggest that because some gal once let a guy fuck her when she had no interest in him either emotionally or sexually is the same as a preponderance of women who chase a guy who has no interest in her and then beds him hoping he will, when he won't, is quite a stunning admission of who really has no grasp on the dynamics of the sexes you proclaim to be so proficient in.

Shoesy... The odd thing is, is that you have said very similar things to what aitm have said in the past. I forget where in the forum, but it was a while back and it was very similar; that men usually act a certain way, and that women usually act a certain way.

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 22, 2016, 12:35:25 PM
... But aitm is right. Saying what he is said is wrong because it's a stereotype is wrong in its self. The thing about stereotypes is that stereotypes are frequently true...  To a predictable rate. I mean even just now my friend's sister just broke up with her boyfriend because of the same reason. He was an asshole "badboy" that doesn't care about her.

My other friend? She just broke up with someone for the almost same reason. He was lying and cheating.

My other friend told me about how this girl broke up with her boyfriend, turned to him and said "guys are stupid. Want to go out on a date?" which, with two sentences...  One after another like that had him taken aback and wordless... And then immediately she said "Oh I get it.  You don't date MEXICANS" which that had nothing to do with it. She fell for someone stupidly, and then stupidly was going to do it again. Without any thought in the matter. My friend is a good guy, which is why he was taken aback and baffled at why she would even do that, but another case of going in blindly and stupidly causing herself heartache.

Women in this area will even tell you that "women are stupid / crazy" in that sense....  So yeah. Aitm is correct in pointing out that stereotype. And it's not all women, but it does tend to be that way. And likewise not all men are abusive assholes, but it can definitely be that way.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

I didn't say the stereotype is wrong. I am saying the stereotype is -works or not-  what some women do, because they are attracted to those men and those relationships. It's the same thing with what men do for something they want with a woman. But as women are always pushed out and treated as something else than regular people, being subjected to male standards, when they do it is batshit crazy...something negative.

The way he looks at it wrong. He is looking at it with 'what a man would want /do' and defining a situation as how it appeals to him as a man.  Myeh. She is not a man.

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 22, 2016, 12:53:51 PM
Shoesy... The odd thing is, is that you have said very similar things to what aitm have said in the past. I forget where in the forum, but it was a while back and it was very similar; that men usually act a certain way, and that women usually act a certain way.

Yes. And I am saying exactly the same thing right now. That's what I am defending.

But if you look at what women do and find it 'wrong' or 'stupid' because a man wouldn't do that then it would conflict with I am saying.

So if you don't disagree with his facts, why continue to argue? He's barely (if at all...) is saying how he views it. And even if he is saying how he views it, if someone says another person's viewpoint is wrong and their own is right... is falicious.

If you are saying the same thing as aitm. There is no need to argue. But if you continue to argue, you have to understand where people think you are implying something else. That goes back to my "you should have quit when you weren't behind" comment.

Quote from: aitm on February 22, 2016, 12:49:46 PM
No. I made my point exactly as it is. Reality. It has nothing to do with how "I" see it. It is what it is, and to suggest that because some gal once let a guy fuck her when she had no interest in him either emotionally or sexually is the same as a preponderance of women who chase a guy who has no interest in her and then beds him hoping he will, when he won't, is quite a stunning admission of who really has no grasp on the dynamics of the sexes you proclaim to be so proficient in.

All of your understanding on some score between genders and who is winning. It doesn't mean anything. I am trying to explain you that the bad boy thing is some sort of a fantasy of some women that satisfies them. That's it.

And that there is no difference between those women doing this and men doing something else to get satisfied. None of it is putting one down and another up. Making one crazy/stupid and other sane/clever.

Dynamics of the genders work regardless of what people desire, aitm. That dynamic does not stop those women desiring bad boys and will never stop. Probbaly that is the very reason it enables/necourages them as you mentioned before. :lol:

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 22, 2016, 01:07:22 PM
So if you don't disagree with his facts, why continue to argue? He's barely (if at all...) is saying how he views it. And even if he is saying how he views it, if someone says another person's viewpoint is wrong and their own is right... is falicious.

If you are saying the same thing as aitm. There is no need to argue. But if you continue to argue, you have to understand where people think you are implying something else. That goes back to my "you should have quit when you weren't behind" comment.

No, we are not saying the same thing. We are saying different things about the same thing. I feel the need to argue because he is making an evaluation of the situation with that view point I think is wrong to apply with his standards.

He is talking about what apples do, in terms of what oranges would not do. 

I also don't see what is wrong with arguing about this, about relationship of men and women. What's wrong with it?

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 22, 2016, 01:13:54 PM
All of your understanding on some score between genders and who is winning.

What? Who is winning? What are you talking about? This has nothing to do with winning? Seriously?

QuoteI am trying to explain you that the bad boy thing is some sort of a fantasy of some women that satisfies them. That's it.

Fantasy? Really? Well, I ain't buying it, but you are welcome to keep selling it.

QuoteThat dynamic does not stop those women desiring bad boys and will never stop.

Well, that was the intent of my very first post. And that some women can be stupid because of that. See, it only took us 4 pages to get back to my first point.

Quote from: aitm on February 22, 2016, 01:24:59 PM
What? Who is winning? What are you talking about? This has nothing to do with winning? Seriously?
Fantasy? Really? Well, I ain't buying it, but you are welcome to keep selling it.
Well, that was the intent of my very first post. And that some women can be stupid because of that. See, it only took us 4 pages to get back to my first point.

You are not the target group, you don't need to buy anything. A lot of women do. And always will. This is desire. See we jumped at my point in a second. (By winning I mean two things: your way of looking at those women's bad boy obsession and how you see it in numbers.)

Apples and oranges. There is no meaning in saying what apples are doing in terms of what oranges would not do. This is what you are doing.

People are being stupid about a lot of things. This is desire and sexual attraction. Nobody is being extra stupid than the old usual.

so........................does that mean yer not coming over?

Quote from: aitm on February 22, 2016, 01:46:21 PM
so........................does that mean yer not coming over?

Nope. But you can always send me tickets so I could visit Grand Canyon.  :biggrin:

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 22, 2016, 10:47:05 AM


Women are not different than men.

Mm what? Sexual dimorhpic species, sexual selection, reproductive strategies, observable psychological and behavioral differences, sexual hormone levels and its effects on psychology and conduct. There's differences between women and men from the basic level of their biology to their psychology and the culture. They have been studied. Things like testosterone being 9 times higher on males and the correlation of testosterone with decreased risk aversion in both women and males. Theres studies about differences in sex drive in which males score higher in tons of different parameters. There's a studies about differences in financial decision making associated with increased concentration of testosterone in the saliva of both women and males. The differences between sexual reproduction between males and females across multiple species are well stablished. Due to the resource investment difference between pregnancy vs insemination. Gender roles have been built from the most basic level of biological and material constraints in our ancient past to hundreds of thousands of years of tribal culture, only to start changing significantly into its moderm form in the most recent times due to cultural and technological changes which ultimately have not changed our biology but just rerouted our impulses. Birth control did not set us free from our impulses born out of our ancient sexual strategies. It just rerouts this impulses or makes them express themselves in different ways because now we have control over some of the mechanics of our body.

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 21, 2016, 12:36:35 PM
Oh come on. You used to get furious because of a few women after ratings in a tv show laughed about castration of a man. Remember? I also saw you writing the 'white cis gender male'...blah blah routine somewhere around here. :lol:

Have you changed that much? Kudos, if you have. I'd be glad.

Hmm.

Well I haven't changed my opinion on that segment of the View. I think its pretty reprehensible to laugh at a guy getting his dick cut off and describe the event as "marvelous", and yeah I do think theres an undeniable double standard when you think about what the public's reaction would be to a bunch of guys getting together on TV and laughing about FGM or something.

As to the white cis thing, it was really more a comment about how I'm not a homosexual rather than a reference to gender issues as right before that I said I would not date a man. I haven't experienced direct real life discrimination that I am aware of, but I have definitely been called a white CIS male in real life. I don't think that really counts as discrimination since it amounts to childish name calling.

When it comes to being denied a job or something like that because I am a white heterosexual male comfortable with my gender, that sort of thing has never happened. As far as I know. Lots of discrimination goes undetected by the victim. For example, I am like a 4 or 5 out of 10, not a really handsome dude by any means. Additionally, I am broad shouldered and tall. So when women see me walking past them in a hallway some of them get nervous like im going to try something. Is that gender discrimination? I dunno, since I can't read their minds. But I was slow on the uptake so it took me about a decade to begin noticing it.

Anyway, I think this entire discussion is silly. SJW's are irrelevant. They may not stay irrelevant but chances seem high. People letting themselves get inflamed and forming world views based on what the dunces of the internet are spewing is ridiculous.

Quote from: Nonsensei on February 22, 2016, 05:25:24 PM
Hmm.

Well I haven't changed my opinion on that segment of the View. I think its pretty reprehensible to laugh at a guy getting his dick cut off and describe the event as "marvelous", and yeah I do think theres an undeniable double standard when you think about what the public's reaction would be to a bunch of guys getting together on TV and laughing about FGM or something.

As to the white cis thing, it was really more a comment about how I'm not a homosexual rather than a reference to gender issues as right before that I said I would not date a man. I haven't experienced direct real life discrimination that I am aware of, but I have definitely been called a white CIS male in real life. I don't think that really counts as discrimination since it amounts to childish name calling.

When it comes to being denied a job or something like that because I am a white heterosexual male comfortable with my gender, that sort of thing has never happened. As far as I know. Lots of discrimination goes undetected by the victim. For example, I am like a 4 or 5 out of 10, not a really handsome dude by any means. Additionally, I am broad shouldered and tall. So when women see me walking past them in a hallway some of them get nervous like im going to try something. Is that gender discrimination? I dunno, since I can't read their minds. But I was slow on the uptake so it took me about a decade to begin noticing it.

Anyway, I think this entire discussion is silly. SJW's are irrelevant. They may not stay irrelevant but chances seem high. People letting themselves get inflamed and forming world views based on what the dunces of the internet are spewing is ridiculous.

SJW speech is generally worthless but the ideas in the background from where they spawned are interesting. The debate of social constructivism vs evolutionary psychology and similar evolutionary fields. The nature vs nurture conumdrum. The differences between different schools of thought in feminism and social justice advocacy fields and the differences between its mainstream perception and actual gender theorist's ideas.the history of the movements. The postmodernist relativism of truth vs the scientific descriptive and objective truth. Patriarchy vs gynocentrism. Etc.

Quote from: Nonsensei on February 22, 2016, 05:25:24 PM
Hmm.

Well I haven't changed my opinion on that segment of the View. I think its pretty reprehensible to laugh at a guy getting his dick cut off and describe the event as "marvelous", and yeah I do think theres an undeniable double standard when you think about what the public's reaction would be to a bunch of guys getting together on TV and laughing about FGM or something.

I definitely agree. It's disgusting. But two points here in my opinion: 1. Don't let a bunch of show business characters shape your opinions about basic things. 2. If you do, consider what the show business have in store with other side -from commercial to porn- that disturbs them that you may not even recognise at most times. Obviously, your example is very easy to recognise and trust me most women agree with you.

QuoteAs to the white cis thing, it was really more a comment about how I'm not a homosexual rather than a reference to gender issues as right before that I said I would not date a man. I haven't experienced direct real life discrimination that I am aware of, but I have definitely been called a white CIS male in real life. I don't think that really counts as discrimination since it amounts to childish name calling.

When it comes to being denied a job or something like that because I am a white heterosexual male comfortable with my gender, that sort of thing has never happened. As far as I know. Lots of discrimination goes undetected by the victim. For example, I am like a 4 or 5 out of 10, not a really handsome dude by any means. Additionally, I am broad shouldered and tall. So when women see me walking past them in a hallway some of them get nervous like im going to try something. Is that gender discrimination? I dunno, since I can't read their minds. But I was slow on the uptake so it took me about a decade to begin noticing it.

I see. But yes with men there is that traditional perpetrator bullshit. If you are a big man, you are seen as an automatic threat. We could write a lot of things about how males get discriminated and those would be tied to females closely in a completing form.

QuoteAnyway, I think this entire discussion is silly. SJW's are irrelevant. They may not stay irrelevant but chances seem high. People letting themselves get inflamed and forming world views based on what the dunces of the internet are spewing is ridiculous.

I agree. My whole point. But I'll say again; SJWs-MRAs war will have positive sides in the long run, before it dies out. It will provide benefits for both men and women. You are young, you'll see.

Women and men are not different in many aspects and they are very different many other, do you people need this to be pointed out in every topic about genders? Or just when a convenient strawman thrown by a one line pulled out of its context ?

Every time we are talking about a behavioural pattern with women, I am reading posts interpreting those behaviours with male standards/goals by people who are supposedly reject that their society is shaped to/by het male standards. Make up your mind.

Apples are not treated to be as vegetables in a fruit land, just because they do something oranges wouldn't do.

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 23, 2016, 04:32:53 AM
Women and men are not different in many aspects and they are very different many other, do you people need this to be pointed out in every topic about genders? Or just when a convenient strawman thrown by a one line pulled out of its context ?

Every time we are talking about a behavioural pattern with women, I am reading posts interpreting those behaviours with male standards/goals by people who are supposedly reject that their society is shaped to/by het male standards. Make up your mind.

Apples are not treated to be as vegetables in a fruit land, just because they do something oranges wouldn't do.

This analogy amuses me, if only because I recently read that from a scientific standpoint there are.no such things as fruits. They are all vegetables.

I would argue that MRAs are in a sense SJWs...

Quote from: Nonsensei on February 23, 2016, 11:33:13 AM
This analogy amuses me, if only because I recently read that from a scientific standpoint there are.no such things as fruits. They are all vegetables.

That's more convenient actually.

But just for the sake of sticking to my analogy, I'll say, in a world fruits exist along with veggies, women are treated like tomatoes. :PP  (I mean they are treated like veggies while they are actually fruits.)

Quote from: Nonsensei on February 23, 2016, 11:33:13 AM
This analogy amuses me, if only because I recently read that from a scientific standpoint there are.no such things as fruits. They are all vegetables.

Really? In my botany class in college, I was taught that fruits were things that come from flowers and have seeds (or some other reproductive object), hence why tomatoes are a fruit. Reducing everything to vegetables seems a bit too simplistic to me.

HEY! Stop calling them MRA's.. My initials are MRA.. Come to think about it,  both MRA's and SJW's seem a bit silly.. Male Rights Advocates?  Since when have men needed anyone to advocate for their rights vs women?..and social justice warrior?  I guess that really depends on whose justice we're talking about.. I don't even like the way the word warrior is used anymore.. Wounded warrior?  What a load of crap. If a nation goes to war the government of the nation owes its soldiers a level of medical care commensurate to the damage the war caused to the soldier.
Anyway..language is getting more and more perverted by the day..

Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on February 23, 2016, 01:03:10 PM
HEY! Stop calling them MRA's.. My initials are MRA.. Come to think about it,  both MRA's and SJW's seem a bit silly.. Male Rights Advocates?  Since when have men needed anyone to advocate for their rights vs women?..and social justice warrior?  I guess that really depends on whose justice we're talking about.. I don't even like the way the word warrior is used anymore.. Wounded warrior?  What a load of crap. If a nation goes to war the government of the nation owes its soldiers a level of medical care commensurate to the damage the war caused to the soldier.
Anyway..language is getting more and more perverted by the day..

MRA's are focused on the admittedly few but very real aspects of society that blatantly disfavor men. For example, the utter inability for men to win a custody battle as long as the mother is in the picture. He could be a multimillionaire and she could be recovering from a heroine addiction and she would still win unless she did something like shoot up during a hearing.

SJW is a derogatory term. SJW isn't something you seriously call yourself, its something people accuse you of being. Its supposed to be sarcastic. For me it evokes images of someone in full battle armor sitting behind their keyboard typing furiously and foaming at the mouth.

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 23, 2016, 11:34:43 AM
I would argue that MRAs are in a sense SJWs...

Thats like saying feminists are SJW, there some smart MRA with good arguments about paternal surrender, male fertility control, divorce court bias and refutation of feminist failures like the duluth model of domestic violence and they support this without getting into a bullshit gender war. Obviously there are indeed people from the manosphere which are pretty much the opposite side of a typical SJW.

Quote from: Nonsensei on February 23, 2016, 02:44:46 PM
MRA's are focused on the admittedly few but very real aspects of society that blatantly disfavor men. For example, the utter inability for men to win a custody battle as long as the mother is in the picture. He could be a multimillionaire and she could be recovering from a heroine addiction and she would still win unless she did something like shoot up during a hearing.

SJW is a derogatory term. SJW isn't something you seriously call yourself, its something people accuse you of being. Its supposed to be sarcastic. For me it evokes images of someone in full battle armor sitting behind their keyboard typing furiously and foaming at the mouth.

Some SJW unironically call themselves like that. And i hear the term originated on tumblr and 4chan took it and made it into a meme to mock tumblrites.

Quote from: mauricio on February 23, 2016, 03:13:52 PM
Thats like saying feminists are SJW, there some smart MRA with good arguments about paternal surrender, male fertility control, divorce court bias and refutation of feminist failures like the duluth model of domestic violence and they support this without getting into a bullshit gender war. Obviously there are indeed people from the manosphere which are pretty much the opposite side of a typical SJW.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI7jIvncjnU

Quote from: Nonsensei on February 23, 2016, 02:44:46 PM
For me it evokes images of someone in full battle armor sitting behind their keyboard typing furiously and foaming at the mouth.

You are also describing MRAs and many people who are against SJWs as it is demonstrated often even in this forum which is a little group.

QuoteFor example, the utter inability for men to win a custody battle as long as the mother is in the picture. He could be a multimillionaire and she could be recovering from a heroine addiction and she would still win unless she did something like shoot up during a hearing.

You realise that is an extremely exaggerrated picture and a gross expression, right? It gives the exact sensational SJW-MRA site taste. It's pretty much like SJWs "all men are rapists" or MRAs "all college rape allegetaions are regretted one stands" slogans. It's not real. It's designed to elicit emotional response.

QuoteMRA's are focused on the admittedly few but very real aspects of society that blatantly disfavor men.

You want to believe that? Male issues existed the same way before MRAs. MRAs didn't. None of the men cared about any of them, before SJWs annoyed them. MRAs were not born from the need for solving male issues and supporting male rights. They are men annoyed and want to counter SJWs.

MRAs are exactly like SJWs. (With one difference) Because that's why they are born, reacting/interacting/competing and fighting with. All their time is put in a rat race against SJW as they do the same. Both groups are spending their times trying to agitate people and put each others nose out of the joint. MRAs are not something different or real like you want to believe. Their pages have the same designs trying to provoke sensational bullshit. (But I have to say MRAs could use a better taste. Thier sites like the old bad commercial pages of the 90s internet) MRAs most famous deed is to spread "how The Justice Department of the United  States of America and every criminology rape research is conspiring against Amercian males with its college rape reports, because college rape in the US is not just very rare, but also all rape allegations are regretted one stands". A lot of bullshit of the sort. Like SJWs calling all men rapists. They are making blogs, vlogs and websites with big flashy pictures designed to provoke emotional response and writing sensational stories with huge fonts and gross hyperbolic language.

The difference is MRAs RELY on SJWs, SJWs didn't/don't. If SJWs disappeared from the face of the earth over a night, there wouldn't be any MRAs left after 6 months time. It's a vendetta, not a fight for equality or injustice or men's rights. It's a sub reactive movement to a sub reactive movement.


IF MRAs were fighting for something real, if they actually gave a damn about men's rights, they would have already been an organised structure standing long ago and they wouldn't need to operate with the angry teenage language, sensational bullshit. Everything about them would be different. They would be something else. Something independent, born out of need.


:arrow: The people you defined as MRAs are not MRAs -I am sure some MRAs joined them recently and that they are using it- but they are mostly made up a group of people -men and women who actually have an idea of a real life out of colleges and one nights stands- who have been working on injustice in male-female custody or any divorced cases looong before MRAs-SJWs even existed. And they will highly likley continue to do so after MRAS and SWJs are long gone.

Shoe your "Everything you said is wrong" approach to posting is really something. I don't think I've ever seen anyone say anything that was right when arguing with you. How do you know so much?!

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 23, 2016, 04:04:17 PM
You are also describing MRAs and many people who are against SJWs as it is demonstrated often even in this forum which is a little group.

You realise that is an extremely exaggerrated picture and a gross expression, right? It gives the exact sensational SJW-MRA site taste. It's pretty much like SJWs "all men are rapists" or MRAs "all college rape allegetaions are regretted one stands" slogans. It's not real. It's designed to elicit emotional response.

You want to believe that? Male issues existed the same way before MRAs. MRAs didn't. None of the men cared about any of them, before SJWs annoyed them. MRAs were not born from the need for solving male issues and supporting male rights. They are men annoyed and want to counter SJWs.

MRAs are exactly like SJWs. (With one difference) Because that's why they are born, reacting/interacting/competing and fighting with. All their time is put in a rat race against SJW as they do the same. Both groups are spending their times trying to agitate people and put each others nose out of the joint. MRAs are not something different or real like you want to believe. Their pages have the same designs trying to provoke sensational bullshit. (But I have to say MRAs could use a better taste. Thier sites like the old bad commercial pages of the 90s internet) MRAs most famous deed is to spread "how The Justice Department of the United  States of America and every criminology rape research is conspiring against Amercian males with its college rape reports, because college rape in the US is not just very rare, but also all rape allegations are regretted one stands". A lot of bullshit of the sort. Like SJWs calling all men rapists. They are making blogs, vlogs and websites with big flashy pictures designed to provoke emotional response and writing sensational stories with huge fonts and gross hyperbolic language.

The difference is MRAs RELY on SJWs, SJWs didn't/don't. If SJWs disappeared from the face of the earth over a night, there wouldn't be any MRAs left after 6 months time. It's a vendetta, not a fight for equality or injustice or men's rights. It's a sub reactive movement to a sub reactive movement.


IF MRAs were fighting for something real, if they actually gave a damn about men's rights, they would have already been an organised structure standing long ago and they wouldn't need to operate with the angry teenage language, sensational bullshit. Everything about them would be different. They would be something else. Something independent, born out of need.


:arrow: The people you defined as MRAs are not MRAs -I am sure some MRAs joined them recently and that they are using it- but they are mostly made up a group of people -men and women who actually have an idea of a real life out of colleges and one nights stands- who have been working on injustice in male-female custody or any divorced cases looong before MRAs-SJWs even existed. And they will highly likley continue to do so after MRAS and SWJs are long gone.

Hillarious how you treat MRAs in the way you alledge i treat feminists as if I thought all feminists were feminazi SJWs no matter how many times i have explained my actual point of view. You could cover a football field with that amount of projection.

Also i posted a video of the MRA francis roy, if you could critique that we would have something more worthwhile to discuss than calling a spade spade by pointing out the retardness of the gender warriors on both sides.

Quote from: Nonsensei on February 23, 2016, 05:31:57 PM
Shoe your "Everything you said is wrong" approach to posting is really something. I don't think I've ever seen anyone say anything that was right when arguing with you. How do you know so much?!

I gave you a reasoning about MRAs situation related to the circumstances they came to be. Which is perfectly accurate and not something I made up myself. And you are throwing me a cheap strawman: "you are telling me that everything I said is wrong and you don't say anyone that they are right anyway"?

At this point it is hard to guess that if you snapped at me because what I said above made actually sense to you causing great annoyance or you are just so annoyed by me anyway that it really doesn't matter what I say at all.

This is a public forum. People post what they think. That's what I did up there.

E: By the way, I just realised you said that to me after I agreed with you twice in one post in the same day. 

Quote from: drunkenshoe on February 23, 2016, 05:55:35 PM
I gave you a reasoning about MRAs situation related to the circumstances they came to be. Which is perfectly accurate and not something I made up myself.

Accurate? Don't make me laugh you just have a distorted picture from social media. Everything you post proves you cannot talk about men's issues you are just an angry kid lashing out at internet celebrities as commanded by your chosen internet idols.

What did men ever do to you that made you so angry?

My current partner is religious which is fine by me since I was also when we first got together, but if ever single again I would prefer someone non religious and open to other possibilities than the little bubble they were raised in. I have much more intellectually stimulating conversations with friends of mine who are not religious.

Quote from: AllRight on February 23, 2016, 06:55:35 PM
My current partner is religious which is fine by me since I was also when we first got together, but if ever single again I would prefer someone non religious and open to other possibilities than the little bubble they were raised in. I have much more intellectually stimulating conversations with friends of mine who are not religious.

Anyone can be boring after you have heard "Who let the dogs out" is the only music they listen to ... fanatics don't keep fans for long.  Unfortunately too many religious people are fanatics.  There is a lot of diversity among non-religious people.

Quote from: AllRight on February 23, 2016, 06:55:35 PM
My current partner is religious which is fine by me since I was also when we first got together, but if ever single again I would prefer someone non religious and open to other possibilities than the little bubble they were raised in. I have much more intellectually stimulating conversations with friends of mine who are not religious.

My wife is as religious as the circumstances dictate. When life is great and we are on the boat or at the nice restaurant people that follow gods are somewhat stupid,  but the second the grandkid gets sick the skepticism kinda sinks into the mud.

Quote from: mauricio on February 23, 2016, 03:13:52 PM
Thats like saying feminists are SJW

Correct. Feminists are SJWs also.

Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on February 23, 2016, 01:03:10 PM
HEY! Stop calling them MRA's.. My initials are MRA.. Come to think about it,  both MRA's and SJW's seem a bit silly.. Male Rights Advocates?  Since when have men needed anyone to advocate for their rights vs women?..and social justice warrior?  I guess that really depends on whose justice we're talking about.. I don't even like the way the word warrior is used anymore.. Wounded warrior?  What a load of crap. If a nation goes to war the government of the nation owes its soldiers a level of medical care commensurate to the damage the war caused to the soldier.
Anyway..language is getting more and more perverted by the day..

Everyone knows your initials are APA.... :lol:


I kind of feel like Social Justice Warrior is a sarcastic term. At least that is the way I use it. Kind of like how Bugs Bunny called Elmer Fudd "Nimrod"

Elmer Fudd was referred to Nimrod, the "heroic leader/hunter" from the bible, when in reality he was a bumbling fool. Similarly, we call many people Social Justice Warriors.

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 24, 2016, 01:12:43 AM
Correct. Feminists are SJWs also.

In the english language is it implied that when you say "x are y" that all "x are y"? That always confuses me a bit. When I say x are/do/believe y. I hope people understand that the x's im talking about are only the ones that are/do/believe y. At least thats the way it makes the most sense because of how language and people work. For example christians believe in the young earth, but not all christians believe in the young earth. Having to disclaim im not talking about every single christian every time sounds silly considering how many variations of christianity there are it should already be assumed by reasonable people that hardly any given believe will apply to all of them. Maybe on a superficial way it may, like they will all say they believe in the teachings of the bible or jesus is real, but those statements could mean extremely different things for different believers depending on their interpretation of the bible and their conception of god and jesus.

Saying that ALL feminists are SJW renders the term useless, the term is there to differentiate between reasonable advocates of social justice and those that take it to irrational levels even to the point of betraying their spoused principles. Feminists are individuals who indentify as such and subscribe to certain ideas with a degree of overlap with each other, a subgroup of them subcribe to the SJW ideas and behave in their nasty way.

"No true sjw"...

Mauricio...  X is not y. I would not use that as a metaphor you used for what we're talking about. "X and you are both letters" is a much closer metaphor.
Feminists, MRAs, etc.... All sjws. They fight for their own cause.

If you can't figure that out, be resourceful and look up what an sjw is so you can have a starting point with what you are identifying with it and what you're disconnecting from it. I would for you, but it's 3:30 am and I'm going to sleep.

Good luck with.... whatever your having trouble understanding.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 24, 2016, 03:35:20 AM
"No true sjw"...

Mauricio...  X is not y. I would not use that as a metaphor you used for what we're talking about. "X and you are both letters" is a much closer metaphor.
Feminists, MRAs, etc.... All sjws. They fight for their own cause.

If you can't figure that out, be resourceful and look up what an sjw is so you can have a starting point with what you are identifying with it and what you're disconnecting from it. I would for you, but it's 3:30 am and I'm going to sleep.

Good luck with.... whatever your having trouble understanding.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

X are Y can be anything like: hotdogs are tasty or crystals are shiny. I did not mean that "noun" is "noun". I do not think you are using the term SJW in a commonly used way. I browse lots of places where it is used regulary and i have not seen people use it to mean all feminists and MRA's. SJW does not mean anyone who fights for a cause related to gender or social justice. It means a particular type of individual who does it with zealotry, irrationality, narcissim, agressiveness, superficiality, dogmatically, dishonestly.

Forget the stupid "x and y" metaphor and learn an exact definition of sjw.

Feminists are sjws. MRAs are sjws. Practically anyone that is voicing their opinion like it should have importance and like it should make a change (wether the opinion actually should or not) is an sjw.

Hell. Technically the kkk are sjws. Sometimes certain groups of people and their flavor of justice isn't a very good or effective flavor though in the sense of making the world a better place.



Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 24, 2016, 03:58:33 AM
Forget the stupid "x and y" metaphor and learn an exact definition of sjw.

Feminists are sjws. MRAs are sjws. Practically anyone that is voicing their opinion like it should have importance and like it should make a change (wether the opinion actually should or not) is an sjw.

Hell. Technically the kkk are sjws. Sometimes certain groups of people and their flavor of justice isn't a very good or effective flavor though in the sense of making the world a better place.



Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

There's no exact definition of sjw it is not like a scientific term with an specific operative definition. The way you are using it differs with the common usages i have observed in the websites where it is commonly used which are the only places where we can investigate to reliably describe its usage. The term is dilluting rapidly which happens often with pejorative labels. But the social justice part is important the kkk are directly and explicitly opposed to that concept, so calling them sjw is silly. Also they do not use the rhetoric commonly associated with sjws. Though you could argue that they share characteristics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Justice_Warrior

Quote"Social Justice Warrior", commonly abbreviated as "SJW", is a pejorative term for a person expressing or promoting socially progressive views, particularly relating to social liberalism, political correctness or feminism.

QuoteIn August 2015, the derogatory noun Social Justice Warrior was one of several new words and phrases added to Oxford Dictionaries.

There IS an exact definition, it IS a derogatory term, and it DOES refer to feminists.

I would never date a retired chief petty officer.


(I know they're pervs.)

Quote from: Nonsensei on February 24, 2016, 06:48:01 AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Justice_Warrior

There IS an exact definition, it IS a derogatory term, and it DOES refer to feminists.

That definition kinda lacks the explanation for why it is pejorative, but since that part is subjective, because some people might differ on what kind of social activist qualifies as an actual SJW its fine i guess, but it gives the wrong idea that the term is used to oppose social justice activist in general when it usually is reserved for specific shitheads within those movements.

Quote from: mauricio on February 24, 2016, 03:23:20 AMSaying that ALL feminists are SJW renders the term useless, the term is there to differentiate between reasonable advocates of social justice and those that take it to irrational levels even to the point of betraying their spoused principles. Feminists are individuals who indentify as such and subscribe to certain ideas with a degree of overlap with each other, a subgroup of them subcribe to the SJW ideas and behave in their nasty way.

I agree. Indeed, I, a male liberal, have long identified as a feminist because I subscribe to the philosophy (learned since childhood) that feminism is the idea that women and men are equals.

At the same time, I am disgusted by the extremists in the feminist movement (e.g. those who claim that all men are automatically rapists and other such nonsense). I call them SJWs, whereas I oppose their tactics, their untenable and often extreme and nonsensical beliefs, and their cult-like mentality (even though I believe that social justice is a worthy cause in itself).

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 24, 2016, 02:41:43 PM
I would never date a retired chief petty officer.


(I know they're pervs.)

How about a CPO that was not retired????

Quote from: Mike Cl on February 25, 2016, 08:32:08 AM
How about a CPO that was not retired????

They're preverts.

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 25, 2016, 09:04:30 AM
They're preverts.

is that in the Dr. Strangeglove sense?

Quote from: Mike Cl on February 25, 2016, 10:35:12 AM
is that in the Dr. Strangeglove sense?

Preverts are just learning.
Perverts are at least competent.
Proverts teach at the college level.

Quote from: Jannabear on February 21, 2016, 12:34:01 AM
I never get why people say they wouldn't date someone from a different word view pertaining to religion, I would never date a fundamentalist or a homophobic or transphobic person, or a racist person, but someone believing in something when I don't believe in it, even if I find it to be fucking stupid, is such a small part of who they are, anyone who says they refuse to date a christian in any situation is a fucking moron.
I used to be this way, but I opened my eyes and realized how much of a fucking idiot I was.
The only exception to this would be if you were someone like hitchens, and you know that it would interfere with the relationship.

No, pretty much, go ahead and fuck off. I wouldn't date a Christian. Because what they believe in, that we somehow live on after death even though my favorite flower, lilacs, don't have a "soul", or my least favorite flower, poison sumac, does not have a "soul" that lives on after those bastards die.....what a stupid fucking argument?

YOU, somehow, live on, and me being a non-Christian, I die off but still there's YOU. Somehow. Hanging on. After you're dead.

Good luck to ya! We can't date, though, because you're an idiot.

Quote from: JBCuzISaidSo on February 25, 2016, 08:13:40 PM
No, pretty much, go ahead and fuck off. I wouldn't date a Christian. Because what they believe in, that we somehow live on after death even though my favorite flower, lilacs, don't have a "soul", or my least favorite flower, poison sumac, does not have a "soul" that lives on after those bastards die.....what a stupid fucking argument?

YOU, somehow, live on, and me being a non-Christian, I die off but still there's YOU. Somehow. Hanging on. After you're dead.

Good luck to ya! We can't date, though, because you're an idiot.

You don't die off if you're not a Christian, you burn in hell for eternity.

Not a true Scotsman argument applies ... "not a true Christian" ... so everyone burns in Hell for eternity.  Smores anyone?

Quote from: Nonsensei on February 25, 2016, 10:17:57 PM
You don't die off if you're not a Christian, you burn in hell for eternity.

Well, yeah. But those in heaven won't recall me at all, because their missing my awesome self would mean pain and 'the wailing and gnashing of teeth'......so it's a catch 22 -- they can't miss me because Jesus, but I shouldn't be an atheist because Jesus......!!!

Hi JB welcome back nice to see you

Quote from: JBCuzISaidSo on February 25, 2016, 08:13:40 PM
No, pretty much, go ahead and fuck off. I wouldn't date a Christian. Because what they believe in, that we somehow live on after death even though my favorite flower, lilacs, don't have a "soul", or my least favorite flower, poison sumac, does not have a "soul" that lives on after those bastards die.....what a stupid fucking argument?

YOU, somehow, live on, and me being a non-Christian, I die off but still there's YOU. Somehow. Hanging on. After you're dead.

Good luck to ya! We can't date, though, because you're an idiot.

No need for the the "fuck off"s and other insults. You can make your point without them. Ok? ok. Thank you.

Are we not allowed to swear here any longer?

Quote from: JBCuzISaidSo on February 27, 2016, 01:07:03 AM
Are we not allowed to swear here any longer?

You can swear all you want, but telling someone to "fuck off" is kind of over the top and overly unnecessary. Calling someone an idiot and telling them to fuck off easily starts unwanted and irrational confrontation and arguments.

Calling the argument a "stupid fucking argument", I would say is perfectly fine though. Other similar things that are OK is "what a fucking moronic idea" "this idea is fucking idiotic" etc
Attack ideas, not people.

And don't worry about jannabear insulting and flaming people, we've already addressed her a day or so ago about that. As far as I'm aware, she's cooled off since that message.

Believe me, I love swearing, I'm from fucking New Jersey lol

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 27, 2016, 01:27:19 AM
You can swear all you want, but telling someone to "fuck off" is kind of over the top and overly unnecessary. Calling someone an idiot and telling them to fuck off easily starts unwanted and irrational confrontation and arguments.

Calling the argument a "stupid fucking argument", I would say is perfectly fine though. Other similar things that are OK is "what a fucking moronic idea" "this idea is fucking idiotic" etc
Attack ideas, not people.

And don't worry about jannabear insulting and flaming people, we've already addressed her a day or so ago about that. As far as I'm aware, she's cooled off since that message.

Okay. All respect, of course. I don't read my reply back as an attack on a person exactly. Speaking for myself it was about the thought of dating a Christian. This is completely silly to entertain -- ergo, it's idiotic. Also, fuck off with your (general 'your') fuckery.

I get what you're (not a general 'you're', you PE! YOU! ::ponts at PE::) saying. I will TRY. Wicked hard.

Quote from: JBCuzISaidSo on February 27, 2016, 01:34:36 AM
Okay. All respect, of course. I don't read my reply back as an attack on a person exactly. Speaking for myself it was about the thought of dating a Christian. This is completely silly to entertain -- ergo, it's idiotic. Also, fuck off with your (general 'your') fuckery.

I get what you're (not a general 'you're', you PE! YOU! ::ponts at PE::) saying. I will TRY. Wicked hard.

Thank you, JBC! :biggrin: I really fucking appreciate it. God fucking damn it, you're great. :biggrin: :lol:

(http://www.theptdc.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/cheers-12.jpg)

Oh good Christ, shut the fuck up.....

:signstfu:

Quote from: JBCuzISaidSo on February 27, 2016, 01:53:32 AM
Oh good Christ, shut the fuck up.....

:signstfu:

lol

I would never date a Pentecostal.  I don't think that's unreasonable.  Let me state, I don't date for "fun".  I would never date someone I couldn't see myself being happy with for life.  So if I were to date someone I would at least be considering spending the rest of my life with that person  The moment I'm not, relationship over.  It's stupid and old fashioned, I know, but it's who I am.

So, if I were dating someone it would be someone I would consider spending the rest of my life with.  I'd eventually want to be intimate with that person, which for a Pentecostal means marriage.  That can lead to kids.  I was a kid in a Pentecostal church (to be fair to them, my parents NEVER forced me to go.  Not once.  It's the worst kind of mind-fuck in there, the kind you willingly do to yourself.)  If I had a Pentecostal wife she would want her children to be "saved".  This involves, basically, sacrificing their childhood to the church to turn them into weirdos who can't function in normal society with the hope of cutting them off from the outside world for the rest of their lives.  I would NEVER let my kids attend a Pentecostal church in my current state of mind, but after years in a loving relationship with someone else, my views may soften.  I can't take that chance.

Not that a Pentecostal woman would date a Satan worshiper like me anyway...what did I say there?  I meant atheist.  Same thing, I guess.

Now, I do allow my kids to attend church if they want.  The rule is they can attend any church they like....AS LONG AS that church is not bigoted against science or gays and doesn't fill their heads with any more bullshit than is absolutely necessary to make them believe in magic.  Of course the Catholic church is right the fuck out no matter how progressive their pope is.  If they went there I'd have to take them so I could be sure that they were never alone with the clergy, and I'm not going.

I wouldn't date a- truck driver. Too butch. I actually knew a telephone lineman back in the day who was a busty female. She got a titty burn.  She showed me. I still have fantasies about her.

I wouldn't date a smoker. Too smoky.

Subset of the majority of girls I've met through my life. I couldn't seem to get on with them.

Quote from: Atheon on March 03, 2016, 07:01:49 AM
I wouldn't date a smoker. Too smoky.

I dunno, depends on the man.

(http://blog.dinoray.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/wolverine-smoking-feature.jpg)
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-E1KN9aYTfuo/Uq2lCBt7jyI/AAAAAAAAAgo/m1gUfLnE0MI/s640/xm_018_Wolverine.jpg)

he could puff smoke rings in my face anyday.

I'm Asian and I wouldn't date a non-Asian. My girlfriend is Asian and we're a perfect match.

If I had to date a non-Asian, I'd avoid blacks because I don't find them sexually attractive.

#honestymakestheworldgoround

Quote from: The Atheist on March 16, 2016, 02:38:03 AM
I'm Asian and I wouldn't date a non-Asian. My girlfriend is Asian and we're a perfect match.

If I had to date a non-Asian, I'd avoid blacks because I don't find them sexually attractive.

#honestymakestheworldgoround

Meh, I really don't get people who think that not being sexually attracted to someone makes you racist.

I guess in the very slightest sense I can see it in that what we find attractive is often dictated by our culture, so it might be a statement about a culture being "racist", but even then... nah. And it's certainly not a conscious racism or one you can really change.

I find Asian women very attractive too ... and many African women, but I avoid either, because my mother would kill me ;-)

I find women of any and all cultures attractive.  Way, way back in the day, this white guy had dated Japanese, Filipino and Korean females, but mostly white females.  Right now, I still find women of all cultures attractive, but date only one female at a time--and that female is always my wife.  :)

Quote from: Munch on March 05, 2016, 04:51:30 AM
I dunno, depends on the man.

(http://blog.dinoray.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/wolverine-smoking-feature.jpg)
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-E1KN9aYTfuo/Uq2lCBt7jyI/AAAAAAAAAgo/m1gUfLnE0MI/s640/xm_018_Wolverine.jpg)

he could puff smoke rings in my face anyday.

As a former smoker (don't clap I still vape), I have to say those men could put those oral skills to better use.