I don’t read Ten-Kyu’s posts anymore – they make me pity America and despondent about its future. The frightening thing is I’ve a hunch Ten-Kyu actually has a 3-digit IQ! :smack: (I don’t know how Ten-Kyu picked his user name, but if can play Go at all, I doubt he’s much better than 10 kyu.)
I’m sure I’m missing nothing of value by passing up his messages, but let us know if ever exhibits humor, or any other redeeming quality.
Although intelligent good-spirited conservatives do exist, they’re rare enough that I find your “Oddly” to be odd itself.
Actually, I think feminism *is *a dirty word when applied to anyone, but only because it’s a noun, not an adjective, and therefore it would be ungrammatical. Idiot.
Or you could just be one of those people who thinks we’re post feminist when we’re not. But it’s de rigeur here on the boards to scoff at feminism. Look at any topic about rape, for example. If you want to see just how people regard women, bring up false accusations of rape. It’s accepted here on the boards that false accusations or rape are common, practically sweeping the nation, and people like Bricker will cite ridiculous shit like the Kanin study and nobody calls him on it.
Bottom line is, unless you’re Camille Paglia or some kind of man’s woman, you better get prepared to be dogpiled on the Dope, because the one kind of ignorance they’re fine with is sexism. Bravo!
Since I’ve been here longer than you, and since I don’t recognize your name from feminism threads, I’m going to guess that I know more about talking about sexism here than you do.
I’m willing to bet that I know more about a lot of things than you do, but I’m being charitable. You’re my non-profit donation for today.
I’ve seen your contributions to some feminism threads. You don’t have the guts to call out rapist apologists when they start talking about how their friends’ brothers’ dentist’s cousin was falsely accused of rape. You side with guys. You’re about as much a feminist as Paglia is.
Do I have a dossier? I’ve always wanted a dossier.
I guess I’m a bit more memorable than you are since I don’t know you from Adam. Mind you, I think I would have remembered you had you been crowing about being pornified, so that must be a new schtick. And it’s a beaut and I LOVE YOU.
Did I say that? But it’s an article of faith here on the Dope that false accusations are overwhelmingly common, and any guy can say that he was falsely accused or his friend’s brother’s cousin was----but we never hear from the woman. And while in other cases, anecdote is rejected on the Dope false rape accusations are a sacred cow. Add to that the casual misogyny of the language, and the board is not what it claims it is.
Proves my point. I won’t be bothering with this thread any longer, but you assholes won’t run me off. If the Dope really wants to fight ignorance, it’s ignoring a kind of ignorance that its members promote against one half of the human race. So many of you guys think that sexism is something that’s big and huge and awful; you don’t think that the casual use of “I use ‘cunt’ the way the English do!” or all the other blithe sexist language is in fact, sexist. And too many women go along with it either because they’re lucky enough or stupid enough to have skated by. Or they want to be one of the guys.
It’s hard for me to picture how DNA testing is sexist, so I’m going to go with the idea that about one in four rape complaints are false as against the first identified suspect.
Or I just think you are really stupid and that your sex doesn’t exempt you from being really, really stupid. And napkin sandwiches levels of crazy.
“Anyone who disagrees with me is a sexist!” is all fine and dandy except for the being untrue part and the persecution complex part. But otherwise, fine and dandy!
This does not mean that the complaints are necessarily false in the sense that the victim is fabricating the charge. The fact that DNA evidence could be obtained at all is evidence that an assault happened. The problem here is with misidentification. Victims can be honestly mistaken, or not see their assailants’ faces. Some of the victims in this study could have been killed in the assalut. It does not follow that a misdentification of the assailant must be the result of a lying victim (the identification may not come from victim testimony at all), and certainly does not mean that no assault happened at all.
This study simply addresses false accusation in the sense of, “A person was falsely accused.” It does not address the motives or reasons behind the false accusation, and whether or not a crime was committed at all. The victim of a rape may be wrongly but genuinely convinced she has identified the right man. Or a report may come from a woman who had consensual sex which she later regretted. This study does not differentiate between the two.
Oh, I see. “Everyone who disagrees with me is sexist, therefore all of you are sexist.” Sometimes, margin, you’re just a fucking retard who doesn’t know what she’s talking about.
For my feminist [del]street[/del] Dope cred, I present to you the discussion about “throw like a girl” that starts at post 17 of this thread. There are many other threads that I could show you, but this is one that happened to be easily searchable.
Cite?
It also doesn’t take into consideration who was doing the accusing. The police finding a suspect and the victim going along with it, and the victim saying “It was John Smith, I’m sure of it!” are two very different situations.
The latter case would not involve an exclusion of the accused’s DNA. I also don’t buy that it’s a scenario that happens with any frequency worth noting if it happens at all.
Well I don’t feel like assuming the SOMETIMES, but if one did, I’ll concede that further analysis is warranted. I’d be inclined to explore other matters before the truth/falsehood of Ms Hill’s testimony, though. That is, I would not (in your words) begin the analysis by assigning a believability value to Ms. Hill’s statements.
That’s been done to death in this thread. I am persuaded that any reasonable person who knows anything substantive of the history of Mrs. Thomas and Ms Hill, should say “WTF does Mrs. Thomas expect will be the outcome of this voicemail? She’s asked before and not gotten an affirmative response. And Ms. Hill could only harm her own interests/reputation by recanting her testimony and claiming the stigma of the perjurer.”
You are apparently not so persuaded; under the circumstances, I will hold my own opinion as to your own degree of reasonableness, and stipulate that an analysis of Ms Hill’s truthfulness is consistent with your view of tone-deafness in general, and the specifics of l’affaire Thomas-Hill-Thomas in particular.
And on reflection, I’ve decided that even more egregious than asking for an apology is Mrs. Thomas’s uninvited recommendation to Ms. Hill as to what she should be praying about. That suggests not only social tone-deafness, but spiritual arrogance.
Of my circle of friends at college, I would estimate 80-90% were intelligent, good-spirited conservatives. The fact that some of them are now representing constituencies gives me hope for the future. Doesn’t stop me hoping they lose every election, but there are a lot of other people I would rather see lose.
There are idiots on the right and left. And lying isn’t a right wing phenomenon. It should be called out whoever does it, from whichever side of the fence.
All in all, I’d rather hang out with a smart conservative who has a sense of humor and knows when to put his hand in his pocket and buy a round of drinks than a dumb lefty any day.