Another personal comment. Have you tried rational argument? I’m wide open to it, personally. Your ideology would be so much more persuasive if it didn’t seem to rely solely on slandering those who disagreed with it.
Irony!
The lack of self reflection here is so appalling I’m beginning to think you are a vampire.
Because of all those feminists about whom the claim has been made, repeatedly and by several posters, that they represent only a loony fringe of extremists. Nobody has been prepared to back that claim up (though someone (you’ve largely become indistinguishable) did at least confess that it was entirely anecdotal.) You, meanwhile, claimed that I’d claimed the reverse - and here you are doing it again. I just questioned the claim that was continually repeated - that all those feminists who apparently even embarrass feminists are just a loony fringe minority of extremists.
Again, your ideology would be so much more convincing if it didn’t depend on schoolboy (or girl!) sophistry.
Did I miss you responding to my post which picked up on your confusion of ‘women’ and ‘feminists’? I have no ideology, I just stand against yours. Which would be so much more convincing if etc…
Another personal comment. Have you tried rational argument? I’m wide open to it, personally. Your ideology would be so much more persuasive if it didn’t seem to rely solely on slandering those who disagreed with it.
More irony!
And another personal attack from the man with the moderator badge. Is this one of those anecdotal claims or do you have figures, and facts, and such? Do you, in fact, have anything to say on the topic? Your ideology would be so much more convincing if any of you were prepared to discuss it, rather than just attacking anyone who refuses to (re)join it.
More evidence.
Has anyone tried rebooting the Turing bot?
Your arguments consist of nothing but anecdotes of dubious veracity and insults against other posters. I’ve got no interest in responding to them. I don’t see how it would benefit me at all. I’ll just post things that amuse me.
I disagree with the idea that men are seen as disposable, but this doesn’t seem to be a very good argument towards it. It’s true that in historic time girls may have been more often the victim of infanticide, however when we look at the natural sex rate at birth, we observe a slight overweight of boys. This is to make up for a greater number of boys that died before they reached adulthood, so that there was an about even ratio at adulthood. Meaning that for one reason or another, throughout the long evolutionary past of humanity boys tended to die at a greater number than girls.
Incidentally, around here, when a catastrophe of some kind is reported on the news, the newsreader will go something like: 20 people were killed, including women and children.
And more evidence. There was no personal attack in what you responded to. There was a glossing over of any substantial point (cue your inaccurate post: “there was no substantial point”). There was no attempt to address your confusion of ‘women’ and ‘feminism’ (though there are afeminist women, and feminist men - for a given value of feminist which doesn’t include those feminists who insist feminism can’t include men).
Again, for the benefit of the hard of understanding: I have no ideology. I just reject yours. I rejected 20 years ago after embracing it for 20 years. I grew up*. I commend it to you all.
*Though not so far, apparently, that I’d stop trying to earnestly and honestly engage with the sort of people who can make posts like that. It’s primary (elementary) school stuff. “I know I am but what are you?”.
You need to start doing something before you can stop doing it.
Your arguments include a conflation of women and feminism, which may be amusing to you. Contributing nothing of value may be amusing to you. I am not amused (said a female absolute monarch). I’ve learned so much about what feminists are in this thread… ‘Our ideology based on a fiction of powerlessness has so much power we can simply mock you from our position of power’.
I’m still not even sure what part of my ideology Jack of Words rejects.
Probably the part between the capital letter and the ending punctuation.
Like a tango, it takes two. I’ve yet to find a partner for earnest and honest engagement on this topic from those who claim to be feminist here. More evidence…
I don’t think he knows, either.
I haven’t made any arguments in this thread.