So when you called my first post here stupid and irrelevant, that was because I have trouble engaging in rational debate?
Well…yeah. Where’ve you been?
We would need more time. Ordinary stupid can be resolved and defined in a few moments, galactic, transcendent stupid cannot.
Depends. Was your first post here stupid and irrelevant?
Quit trying to speak for women. Quit trying to speak for minorities. You’re only embarassing yourself and insulting the fuck out of others.
Why the FUCK do you think people tried to change things, just for shits and giggles? Are you fucking stupid?
You may have been there, but you weren’t in their heads. You only saw what was on the outside. It’s called a facade. Is it better to cope, or is it better to stop it from happening in the first place?
mhendo is beyond doubt the biggest asshole on this board. He’s especially fond of jumping on new posters and belittling them, as he did with CinnamonBabka, but he by no means limits his aggressively insulting behavior to new posters only. An examination of his posting history will show that he insults someone in one out of every three to four posts he makes to this board, and usually these insults are completely gratuitous and not made in response to anything objectionable anyone has said to him.
He knows all this, of course, and is in fact proud of it, stating as he did on one occasion to me that yes, he’s an asshole and he owns it.
I was amused in going over some of his posting history a while back to read that his wife was going to San Francisco to visit her family for Thanksgiving while he was staying home in San Diego, as it was my guess that they can’t stand him.
He is some sort of professor however and likely doesn’t make much money, so it’s also possible that he’s chosen to accept a necessarily penurious lifestyle in service to being able to insult and bully young college students and simply couldn’t afford airfare to San Fran for two people.
Wow, so you really have no moral lower bound, do you.
I’m not speaking for anyone but myself, dear. Quit trying to think. You’re embarrassing yourself.
Because they were impressionable, drug-addled 19 and 20-year-old lamebrains ripe for the picking by liberal college professors and an anti-Republican, anti-conservative media during the perfect storm for liberalism that occurred in the mid to late sixties. Fuckupingness ensued, and now we’re a nation full of drug addicts and fatherless kids getting passed from grade to grade until they graduate (hah, it is to laugh) from high school unable to read even at a first grade level, with a huge underclass on government benefits and likely trapped in a barely getting by dependent lifestyle for the rest of their lives, while people like you whinge over every conceivable injustice in the world…as long as it smacks of politically correct undertones, that is. You don’t care a shit about the victims of drugs or their families, whose lives they also ruin. And you don’t give a shit about the victims of convicts you work so hard to get released from prison in the revolving door prison system you’ve created. And you don’t give a shit about all the kids who can’t hold down a job or even read road signs because you thought it would be better for their self-esteem to pass them even though they weren’t learning anything.
But let a woman claim she got kissed unexpectedly or touched inappropriately by a comedian 40 years ago and you go off like a pop bottle rocket. :rolleyes:
Most adult women of the era loathed and were unhappy about the counter culture revolution and women’s liberation and much of the nonsense associated with them. It’s true I’m not a woman but I certainly heard comments made by many of them. You and many others of your ilk have bought into a revisionist history regarding that time and simply don’t know what you’re talking about.
Okay, he’s back from his moment of lucidity.
SA, I was there. I lived it. I know exactly what I’m talking about. I’m not a revisionist. Your “observations” are seriously divergent from reality. And you’re an amazingly skeevy asshole. Incredibly, you become even more skeevy and a bigger asshole as time goes on. I am actually amazed at the things you defend these days.
Of course – everyone must listen… white man talking. He’s here to mansplain the way things really are.
Right. Segregation and overtly racist society in much of the country, in addition to women being unable to make decisions about their lives, like on medication, without the permission of their husbands, had nothing to do with this.
Or drugged and raped.
I don’t believe that you spoke to most adult women in America, so I don’t believe that you have any idea what most adult women of the era thought.
To put it with less snark: SA, I believe you have a good handle on the experience of a white male in the 60s and since.
But I don’t believe you have any handle whatsoever on the experience of a woman or a non-white person in the 60s and since. Since most of the women and black people who I’ve spoken to who lived in those decades have a totally different take on the 60s than you do, I believe their account much more accurately reflects the real-life experiences of women and non-white people in the 60s and since.
I’m not sure why you’d insist otherwise… why would you think that you have some special insight into the female or black experience in the 60s? Do you really think I should accept your word for it, with respect to the female and black experience, over that of women and black people who lived in that decade?
When you say “Quit trying to think. You’re embarrassing yourself.” to a woman who is disagreeing with you about experiences you have never had and couldn’t possibly have, it makes you look both incredibly foolish, incredibly lacking in self-awareness, and very mean-spirited.
Well sure, there had to be liberals such as yourself there then to kick things off. The fact you have a different view of the era doesn’t mean I was wrong about what most people thought then. It should be obvious that if most people were on board with liberal group think it wouldn’t be such a struggle for liberals to get anything accomplished.
Still, there’s a lot of revisionist horseshit swallowed without question by many of today’s liberals. A woman not being able to have her own checkbook without her husband’s permission - and of course thereby being treated as a child :rolleyes: - is one inflammatorily phrased example that comes to mind. Call me delusional all you want but the fact is both my mother and my stepmother and my aunt and grandmother all had actual jobs (a couple were income property owners even, imagine that) and they all had their own checking accounts without getting anyone else’s permission.
Your relatives had good experiences. Many women did not. Until 1974, banks legally could and usually did turn away women for credit cards and other services without their husband’s permission.
You see! SA’s female relatives had checkbooks! It was all good.
I said that because she was presuming that I was attempting to speak for women and minorities, which is stupid. She has a history of jumping into threads and posting drive-by insults rather than actually participating in the discussion, so I returned her insults and gave her the short shrift she deserved.
See this right here? It’s called mockage. It’s the typical go-to liberal response when presented with evidence not in agreement with the party line. It’s not called rebuttal, nor argument, nor refutation. But it’s supposed to be all those things, with an additional dose of extrapolation thrown in to imply the target of said mockage has made some ridiculous claim he never made (so everything was good).
I’m hip to it though and am immune, so mock away all you want Hector, but don’t kid yourself that you’ve scored some sort of point.
And now I have to leave. I’ve gotta go to Whole Foods to pick up some healthy groceries. You guys oughtta be happy about that at least, right?
Well, yeah, but there’s always the coming back part …
No, I mean they oughtta be happy that I’m going to a hippie liberal place to buy organic food.