|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 23 2013 17:03 Danglars wrote:
The citizens of Utah have a right to decide what is and is not a marriage in their state, and that aim has been thwarted without a vote. Some states have already voted in gay marriage, and that vote needs to be protected also from justices that happen to be opposed to it. Or, perhaps the honorable poster would not disagree with a justice striking down a gay marriage law in a state with a majority supporting gay marriage?
The judge has just done what's his job. He has interpreted the law, in this case the Constitution:
(CNN) -- It was joyful mayhem Friday night in the county clerk's office in Salt Lake City, Utah, after a federal judge struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage, saying the law "conflicts with the United States Constitution's guarantees of equal protection and due process under the law."
[...]
"Accordingly, the court finds that these laws are unconstitutional,"
And if i'm not completely mistaken people don't have the right to vote other people's constitutional rights away.
|
United States43607 Posts
On December 23 2013 11:02 stuhowell wrote:
Also, if you're going to make fun of somebody for having 20k posts, you should have less than 5k yourself.
User was banned for this post.
Given Moltke was once expelled from dorms at university for assaulting a female student, was physically disciplined by his mother well into his adult life and got into a physical fight with his own mother I think post count is probably not the thing to go after him on regarding his relationship with the opposite sex. Not that we should make this personal, just that if we are going to do personal attacks post count is an odd one to go with.
|
On December 24 2013 04:29 TheFish7 wrote:
Her argument was that men are not obsolete. The last bit about what men created was just a pejorative for effect.
Was it also just for pejorative effect when she said this?
And without strong men as models to either embrace or (for dissident lesbians) to resist, women will never attain a centered and profound sense of themselves as women.
Does anyone actually think this makes sense? Women need men around in order to feel like women? What even is a dissident lesbian?
Or what about this?
Over the past century, it was labor-saving appliances, invented by men and spread by capitalism, that liberated women from daily drudgery.
Women have actually invented lots of things, including many "labor-saving appliances," which shouldn't be surprising.
I don't understand why people are defending Paglia She's either a moron or a troll, and she's not doing anything to advance the interests of women by writing this rubbish.
|
United States43607 Posts
Paglia thinks being a lesbian is about resisting men. Presumably being a straight man is about resisting men too.
|
On December 24 2013 04:59 Mercy13 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2013 04:29 TheFish7 wrote:
Her argument was that men are not obsolete. The last bit about what men created was just a pejorative for effect.
Was it also just for pejorative effect when she said this? Show nested quote +And without strong men as models to either embrace or (for dissident lesbians) to resist, women will never attain a centered and profound sense of themselves as women. Does anyone actually think this makes sense? Women need men around in order to feel like women? What even is a dissident lesbian? Or what about this? Show nested quote +Over the past century, it was labor-saving appliances, invented by men and spread by capitalism, that liberated women from daily drudgery. Women have actually invented lots of things, including many "labor-saving appliances," which shouldn't be surprising. I don't understand why people are defending Paglia She's either a moron or a troll, and she's not doing anything to advance the interests of women by writing this rubbish.
And without strong men as models to either embrace or (for dissident lesbians) to resist, women will never attain a centered and profound sense of themselves as women.
This does make some sense, depending on how you interpret it; without a strong man to embrace a woman would go through life with an inadequate life/sexual partner, her physical and emotional needs could not be fulfilled, and thus she could never attain a centered and profound sense of self. The same exact thing could be said about a man, without a (insert adjective of choice) woman to embrace, a (straight) man would go through life without his emotional or physical needs being fulfilled and thus could not attain a profound sense of self as a man.
I don't think she means to say that women have not ever invented anything, she is just seeking to remind the audience that not all men are evil creatures trying to chain them into the kitchen.
I agree that much of her essay is rubbish, but you all are looking at it inside of a vacuum. The argument was being made to refute the argument that men are obsolete in this day and age. How does one refute such an illogical argument? Seems to me she is just trying to point out that men have done great things over the years, and that without men they would be left in an Isle of Lesbos scenario with no real life partners left.
|
There is actually an argument that men are obsolete? lolwut. I wouldn't say it goes either way, but if anything, it's safe to say that statement couldn't be further from the truth. The fact that such an argument even exists is one of many points that exhibit just how delusional a good many feminists are. To declare that billions of people are obsolete for no reason but gender, and nothing to prove the point, is ludicrous to the point that I'm surprised this wasn't pulled from some comedy skit.
I will say nothing based on personal experience, because at the very least 60% of girls I've met are literally braindead twats. If I wasn't a graduate engineering student, that percentage would be much higher. A slight tangent: I've read that 10% of engineers in the US are women, and women in computer science related fields (my area) is declining, as per a couple years ago. A bit worrisome to say the least.
|
On December 24 2013 05:40 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
There is actually an argument that men are obsolete?
Retarded whiteknights who think that pandering to nutjob feminists will get them laid... or they're actually insane enough to believe what they're saying.... idk brother ;s
|
On December 24 2013 05:40 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
There is actually an argument that men are obsolete? lolwut. I wouldn't say it goes either way, but if anything, it's safe to say that statement couldn't be further from the truth. The fact that such an argument even exists is one of many points that exhibit just how delusional a good many feminists are.
I will say nothing based on personal experience, because at the very least 60% of girls I've met are literally braindead twats. If I wasn't a graduate engineering student, that percentage would be much higher.
your logic:
someone said something dumb -> a good many feminists are delusional
also:
my anecdotal evidence and personal opinion shows over half the female population are literally vaginas that have suffered brain death.
|
United States43607 Posts
On December 24 2013 05:40 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
There is actually an argument that men are obsolete? lolwut. I wouldn't say it goes either way, but if anything, it's safe to say that statement couldn't be further from the truth. The fact that such an argument even exists is one of many points that exhibit just how delusional a good many feminists are.
I will say nothing based on personal experience, because at the very least 60% of girls I've met are literally braindead twats. If I wasn't a graduate engineering student, that percentage would be much higher.
Everyone in this topic has been collectively arguing that anyone who says that is retarded, but arguing over the reasons why.
|
On December 24 2013 05:45 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2013 05:40 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
There is actually an argument that men are obsolete? lolwut. I wouldn't say it goes either way, but if anything, it's safe to say that statement couldn't be further from the truth. The fact that such an argument even exists is one of many points that exhibit just how delusional a good many feminists are.
I will say nothing based on personal experience, because at the very least 60% of girls I've met are literally braindead twats. If I wasn't a graduate engineering student, that percentage would be much higher. your logic: someone said something dumb -> a good many feminists are delusional also: my anecdotal evidence and personal opinion shows over half the female population are literally vaginas that have suffered brain death.
Reading comprehension is useful my friend.
Personal opinion: I specifically stated I am not basing anything on personal opinion, because it would be heavily biased. It's unfortunate to see you missed that.
My supposed logic: I wasn't going off of one thing, as I made clear. There's maybe been a million and one silly things I've heard from feminists that made me facepalm. To imply that there aren't quite a few feminists who even slightly adopt any sort of principles leaning on the sexist side is absurd. They certainly do exist, and in bulk. And then there are many who aren't sexist. The above statement is certainly not an isolated incident and doubtfully a belief isolated to one person, among many other events and beliefs (which are fortunately less absurd), is my point. Meanwhile, when some idiot Christian from Hicksville says something stupid in front of a camera, TL covers Christianity and its 2 billion followers in hellfire, just to give some perspective heh.
On December 24 2013 05:46 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2013 05:40 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
There is actually an argument that men are obsolete? lolwut. I wouldn't say it goes either way, but if anything, it's safe to say that statement couldn't be further from the truth. The fact that such an argument even exists is one of many points that exhibit just how delusional a good many feminists are.
I will say nothing based on personal experience, because at the very least 60% of girls I've met are literally braindead twats. If I wasn't a graduate engineering student, that percentage would be much higher. Everyone in this topic has been collectively arguing that anyone who says that is retarded, but arguing over the reasons why.
Yeah I got that. It's just the fact that such a declaration was seriously presented is mind-blowing. I guess I'm also a little surprised that this didn't cause some kind of trouble. Switch the gender around, and you'll have a huge uproar. In all honesty, I think it is a statement so lacking in rationality and knowledge on even the basic physical attributes of the necessity of both genders (reproduction being the most obvious), not even getting into the emotional, societal, economic, technical, and many other attributes of humanity and society, that it warrants some headscratching and chuckling and little more.
|
On December 24 2013 06:03 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2013 05:45 ComaDose wrote:On December 24 2013 05:40 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
There is actually an argument that men are obsolete? lolwut. I wouldn't say it goes either way, but if anything, it's safe to say that statement couldn't be further from the truth. The fact that such an argument even exists is one of many points that exhibit just how delusional a good many feminists are.
I will say nothing based on personal experience, because at the very least 60% of girls I've met are literally braindead twats. If I wasn't a graduate engineering student, that percentage would be much higher. your logic: someone said something dumb -> a good many feminists are delusional also: my anecdotal evidence and personal opinion shows over half the female population are literally vaginas that have suffered brain death. Reading comprehension is useful my friend. Personal opinion: I specifically stated I am not basing anything on personal opinion, because it would be heavily biased. It's unfortunate to see you missed that. My supposed logic: I wasn't going off of one thing, as I made clear. There's maybe been a million and one silly things I've heard from feminists that made me facepalm. To imply that there aren't quite a few feminists who even slightly adopt any sort of principles leaning on the sexist side is absurd. They certainly do exist, and in bulk. And then there are many who aren't sexist. The above statement is certainly not an isolated incident and doubtfully a belief isolated to one person, among many other events and beliefs (which are fortunately less absurd), is my point. Meanwhile, when some idiot Christian from Hicksville says something stupid in front of a camera, TL covers Christianity and its 2 billion followers in hellfire, just to give some perspective heh.
please explain how the statement: "at the very least 60% of girls I've met are literally braindead twats" is not based on personal opinion. even if prefaced by saying "I will say nothing based on personal experience" E: you have diluted your other point to making it not worth responding to (or posting in the first place).
|
On December 24 2013 06:16 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2013 06:03 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On December 24 2013 05:45 ComaDose wrote:On December 24 2013 05:40 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
There is actually an argument that men are obsolete? lolwut. I wouldn't say it goes either way, but if anything, it's safe to say that statement couldn't be further from the truth. The fact that such an argument even exists is one of many points that exhibit just how delusional a good many feminists are.
I will say nothing based on personal experience, because at the very least 60% of girls I've met are literally braindead twats. If I wasn't a graduate engineering student, that percentage would be much higher. your logic: someone said something dumb -> a good many feminists are delusional also: my anecdotal evidence and personal opinion shows over half the female population are literally vaginas that have suffered brain death. Reading comprehension is useful my friend. Personal opinion: I specifically stated I am not basing anything on personal opinion, because it would be heavily biased. It's unfortunate to see you missed that. My supposed logic: I wasn't going off of one thing, as I made clear. There's maybe been a million and one silly things I've heard from feminists that made me facepalm. To imply that there aren't quite a few feminists who even slightly adopt any sort of principles leaning on the sexist side is absurd. They certainly do exist, and in bulk. And then there are many who aren't sexist. The above statement is certainly not an isolated incident and doubtfully a belief isolated to one person, among many other events and beliefs (which are fortunately less absurd), is my point. Meanwhile, when some idiot Christian from Hicksville says something stupid in front of a camera, TL covers Christianity and its 2 billion followers in hellfire, just to give some perspective heh. please explain how the statement: "at the very least 60% of girls I've met are literally braindead twats" is not based on personal opinion. even if prefaced by saying "I will say nothing based on personal experience" E: you have diluted your other point to making it not worth responding to (or posting in the first place).
I said personal experience, not personal opinion. There's quite a difference LOL! Please learn to read dude. I stated that I wasn't going to base my opinion/what I was saying based on "personal experience". And then I explained why I would not base things on personal experience. When I said I will say nothing based on personal experience, I meant in regards to my sentiments and opinion. It seems that everyone but you understood this haha! I guess I should apologize for not putting in 10-20 more words to make myself absolutely clear to trolls or fools. Please excuse me for that XD. And again, using the word "because", I explained why I will not base any further statements or argument based on personal experience in order to explain to the reader the reasoning for the part before the "because". If I did base my opinion on my personal experience, I would be horribly biased. Fortunately, this is not the case. Despite my relatively poor experience, I do not have a poor opinion. Quite the opposite of a negative opinion really. I hope that makes it clear.
Anyways, I don't even see what you're arguing about. You seem to be in a pissy mood and were just waiting for an opportunity to have a row with someone, and the opportunity was presented as the result of what I can only imagine was your intentional miscomprehension of simple statements. Well, I think the case is closed.
|
JudicatorHammurabi:
I specifically stated I am not basing anything on personal opinion
JudicatorHammurabi:
I said personal experience, not personal opinion
alright so ill work on my reading comprehension and you can work on your memory.
you said "I will say nothing based on personal experience" then said your personal experience, which was just your opinion on people you've met. which was massively offensive and prejudice. basically you just wanted a place to post how much you hate women and you found it so case closed imo.
|
On December 24 2013 04:13 KwarK wrote:Paglia's argument was that women should be grateful to men for creating the world they live in. That was the argument being made. Show nested quote +The modern economy, with its vast production and distribution network, is a male epic, in which women have found a productive role—but women were not its author. Surely, modern women are strong enough now to give credit where credit is due! Men created it all, women were not the authors. Modern women should be grateful that men created it. You agreed with me that that argument was indecent, you just don't seem to have read the quote I was referring to because it makes exactly that argument.
Well yes women should be grateful that men built the "vast production and distribution network."
The same way men should be grateful that women wiped their asses and taught them to read and kissed their ouchies and all that.
Obviously to some people men get more credit for doing that stuff than women do for doing that other stuff but I don't see where one is more important than the other.
|
On December 24 2013 06:52 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +JudicatorHammurabi:
I specifically stated I am not basing anything on personal opinion alright so ill work on my reading comprehension and you can work on your memory. you said "I will say nothing based on personal experience" then said your personal experience, which was just your opinion on people you've met. which was massively offensive and prejudice. basically you just wanted a place to post how much you hate women and you found it so case closed imo.
HAHAHAHA!!!! Okay, I was suspicious at first, but thanks for proving all along that you were just trying to troll. My apologies, my dear troll, for crushing your attempt at trolling as convincingly as the Mongols conquered Baghdad. The fact that you have become so desperate as to make such a most ludicrous assertion is simply damning.
Yeah, I totally wanted a place to post how much I hate women (sarcasm), despite posting nothing related to hating women. In reality, it was implied I like women. To have a high opinion of people despite poor experience on a personal statistic is uncommon, I must agree. If anything, it only proves the contrast, that I love women 
I mean, almost half of my friends are women. Half the people in the world are women. I prefer the company of women more to men in many regards (non-sexual, mind you). I've certainly had quite a lot in the sexual regard as well, so it's not like I'm bitter about that (nor would I be were that not the case). At this time, I practically have a girlfriend atm and have had gf's in the past. I'm happier I had a sister instead of a brother. Many of my better friends, especially when it comes to the concept of understanding or serious talk, are girls, and I'm proud of that. My early life pretty much only had women in it besides an uncle and it was pretty good. I mean, how can you possibly claim that I hate women simply because I stated that the majority I've met were people I'd rather not deal with? I could go on for hours on how wrong and stupid your assertion (based on nothing but a bad attempt at trolling) is, but I'm starting to see a trend here... and, if I can predict it, I assume you will not realize it, and instead go further in your attempts to troll or insult me 
Also, if I hated anything, I have significantly better places both on the internet and IRL to post / talk about it than here LOL XD. Move along eh. Find other pastures in which to conduct your trolling.
|
On December 24 2013 04:29 TheFish7 wrote:Her argument was that men are not obsolete. The last bit about what men created was just a pejorative for effect. Show nested quote +On December 23 2013 17:03 Danglars wrote:On December 23 2013 14:50 zlefin wrote:
Unelected justices? There's a reason they aren't done by direct election.
One of the foremost purposes of the judicial branch is to protect the rights of the minority, who are by definition, a MINORITY, and thus have a hard time prevailing in a popular vote.
There is nothing sad about judges doing their duty to protect minorities. That is a core part of our constitution and working as intended. There's a reason justices interpret laws to the case at hand instead of writing laws out of whole cloth. You're surrendering the principle of self-government to appointed men by a handful or by a single person, removing representation. They also cannot be removed by the population they govern, and in this case, write laws for. The government has long been in the business of subverting or reinforcing traditional norms ... look no further than no-fault divorce, polygamy, or drinking alcohol. The citizens of Utah have a right to decide what is and is not a marriage in their state, and that aim has been thwarted without a vote. Some states have already voted in gay marriage, and that vote needs to be protected also from justices that happen to be opposed to it. Or, perhaps the honorable poster would not disagree with a justice striking down a gay marriage law in a state with a majority supporting gay marriage? The legislature doesn't write the laws, they interpret them, and they are appointed by elected officials so representation is there. That's actually the core job of the legislature. To write and vote on laws. Do not confuse the legislature with the judicial branch aka the courts or we're going to get nowhere.
|
The will of the people should not triumph if that will is to go after a smaller portion of the people.
|
On December 24 2013 04:48 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2013 17:03 Danglars wrote:
The citizens of Utah have a right to decide what is and is not a marriage in their state, and that aim has been thwarted without a vote. Some states have already voted in gay marriage, and that vote needs to be protected also from justices that happen to be opposed to it. Or, perhaps the honorable poster would not disagree with a justice striking down a gay marriage law in a state with a majority supporting gay marriage?
The judge has just done what's his job. He has interpreted the law, in this case the Constitution: Show nested quote +
(CNN) -- It was joyful mayhem Friday night in the county clerk's office in Salt Lake City, Utah, after a federal judge struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage, saying the law "conflicts with the United States Constitution's guarantees of equal protection and due process under the law."
[...]
"Accordingly, the court finds that these laws are unconstitutional,"
And if i'm not completely mistaken people don't have the right to vote other people's constitutional rights away.
US vs. Windsor was decided by one justice, 5-4. I have to presume that you're simultaneously okay with justices striking down gay marriage laws duly voted on by the people's representatives. In this, and other, cases it came down to one justice voting one way. So if the next ruling on a law comes out against gay marriage, I'll have to suppose you're also very supportive of it -- judges doing their job by interpreting the law.
|
On December 24 2013 05:15 TheFish7 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2013 04:59 Mercy13 wrote:On December 24 2013 04:29 TheFish7 wrote:
Her argument was that men are not obsolete. The last bit about what men created was just a pejorative for effect.
Was it also just for pejorative effect when she said this? And without strong men as models to either embrace or (for dissident lesbians) to resist, women will never attain a centered and profound sense of themselves as women. Does anyone actually think this makes sense? Women need men around in order to feel like women? What even is a dissident lesbian? Or what about this? Over the past century, it was labor-saving appliances, invented by men and spread by capitalism, that liberated women from daily drudgery. Women have actually invented lots of things, including many "labor-saving appliances," which shouldn't be surprising. I don't understand why people are defending Paglia She's either a moron or a troll, and she's not doing anything to advance the interests of women by writing this rubbish. Show nested quote +And without strong men as models to either embrace or (for dissident lesbians) to resist, women will never attain a centered and profound sense of themselves as women. This does make some sense, depending on how you interpret it; without a strong man to embrace a woman would go through life with an inadequate life/sexual partner, her physical and emotional needs could not be fulfilled, and thus she could never attain a centered and profound sense of self. The same exact thing could be said about a man, without a (insert adjective of choice) woman to embrace, a (straight) man would go through life without his emotional or physical needs being fulfilled and thus could not attain a profound sense of self as a man. I don't think she means to say that women have not ever invented anything, she is just seeking to remind the audience that not all men are evil creatures trying to chain them into the kitchen. I agree that much of her essay is rubbish, but you all are looking at it inside of a vacuum. The argument was being made to refute the argument that men are obsolete in this day and age. How does one refute such an illogical argument? Seems to me she is just trying to point out that men have done great things over the years, and that without men they would be left in an Isle of Lesbos scenario with no real life partners left.
I think you are putting words in her mouth (and ignoring some of the things she did say) in order to make her seem reasonable, and I don't understand why. It seems to me like she has determined that she can sell a lot of books and get a lot of followers by being a "feminist" lesbian who panders to conservatives. She's basically a Miley Cyrus of academia - she makes outrageous statements in order to get people to talk about her.
If you want to refute the illogical argument that men are obsolete, you might want to start by pointing out why it is illogical. I'm actually not familiar with that argument, but on the face of it it seems like nonsense to me. You don't need to write outrageous statements to refute it, unless your goal is to create controversy rather than adding anything meaningful to the discussion.
|
On December 24 2013 07:14 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2013 06:52 ComaDose wrote:JudicatorHammurabi:
I specifically stated I am not basing anything on personal opinion JudicatorHammurabi:
I said personal experience, not personal opinion alright so ill work on my reading comprehension and you can work on your memory. you said "I will say nothing based on personal experience" then said your personal experience, which was just your opinion on people you've met. which was massively offensive and prejudice. basically you just wanted a place to post how much you hate women and you found it so case closed imo. HAHAHAHA!!!! Okay, I was suspicious at first, but thanks for proving all along that you were just trying to troll. My apologies, my dear troll, for crushing your attempt at trolling as convincingly as the Mongols conquered Baghdad. The fact that you have become so desperate as to make such a most ludicrous assertion is simply damning. Yeah, I totally wanted a place to post how much I hate women (sarcasm), despite posting nothing related to hating women. In reality, it was implied I like women. To have a high opinion of people despite poor experience on a personal statistic is uncommon, I must agree. If anything, it only proves the contrast, that I love women I mean, almost half of my friends are women. Half the people in the world are women. I prefer the company of women more to men in many regards (non-sexual, mind you). I've certainly had quite a lot in the sexual regard as well, so it's not like I'm bitter about that (nor would I be were that not the case). At this time, I practically have a girlfriend atm and have had gf's in the past. I'm happier I had a sister instead of a brother. Many of my better friends, especially when it comes to the concept of understanding or serious talk, are girls, and I'm proud of that. My early life pretty much only had women in it besides an uncle and it was pretty good. I mean, how can you possibly claim that I hate women simply because I stated that the majority I've met were people I'd rather not deal with? I could go on for hours on how wrong and stupid your assertion (based on nothing but a bad attempt at trolling) is, but I'm starting to see a trend here... and, if I can predict it, I assume you will not realize it, and instead go further in your attempts to troll or insult me Also, if I hated anything, I have significantly better places both on the internet and IRL to post / talk about it than here LOL XD. Move along eh. Find other pastures in which to conduct your trolling.
You're adorable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
