A woman's rage

[ChristineM]

I quoted you. I just didn't use the quote function. You are too lazy to read nor confirm anything against your bias. However I will make the effort.







The last is you falling of the wagon and hitting your head. I told you to read what was posted. You didn't. Instead you continue to bury yourself by your own laziness and stubbornness. Try again silly NPC.

Nope, that is me quoting your posts. You want post numbers too?


Such a shame when people are too full of themselves to admit to their own posts.

 

[Shaul]

Actually, if you bother to check back through the thread you will find most posters are favourable to the OP, and its link. Only 4 or 5 reject it.

And women are still getting raped, how many sick men are there?

Yes if kicking someone in the nuts saves a woman or girl (or women or girls) being raped, you object to that?

And men are still getting raped by women too, how many sick women are there?

Do I object to men getting kicked in the testicles? Of course I do. There is no excuse for rape. It is wrong. There is no justification for it. Period. There is no excuse for kicking a man in the testicles. It is wrong. There is no justification for it. Period.

I do see you’ve let your mask slip. Before you just wanted men to imagine being kicked repeatedly in their testicles. Now you write it should actually be done.

Any person that thinks men should be kicked in their testicles repeatedly is beyond the pale. Such behavior is criminal, unjustifiable, uncivilized and evil.

 

[Shad]

Nope, that is me quoting your posts. You want post numbers too?

Wrong try again. I clearly showed you lost track of the conversation and you are too stubborn to admit it like a child. I quoted the section I was talking about to be specific thus can use the function to see each post. You blunder has been demonstrated. Now accept it and move.

Go for it. Post the numbers. It will not change anything as I am right and provided evidence. *Yawn Silly NPC

Such a shame when people are too full of themselves to admit to their own posts.

Nonsense as you messed up yet your ego refuses to admit it. Try again.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

And men are still getting raped by women too, how many sick women are there?

Do I object to men getting kicked in the testicles? Of course I do. There is no excuse for rape. It is wrong. There is no justification for it. Period. There is no excuse for kicking a man in the testicles. It is wrong. There is no justification for it. Period.

I do see you’ve let your mask slip. Before you just wanted men to imagine being kicked repeatedly in their testicles. Now you write it should actually be done.

Any person that thinks men should be kicked in their testicles repeatedly is beyond the pale. Such behavior is criminal, unjustifiable, uncivilized and evil.

You would be against kicking a guy in the nuts even as self-defense?

 

[Estro Felino]

 

[Shaul]

You would be against kicking a guy in the nuts even as self-defense?

Yes, but I wouldn’t fault someone that did it if they felt that was their only means of self defense.

 

[Shad]

Yes, but I wouldn’t fault someone that did it if they felt that was their only means of self defense.

Is this an application of force point or something else? Just curious

 

[ChristineM]

And men are still getting raped by women too, how many sick women are there?

Do I object to men getting kicked in the testicles? Of course I do. There is no excuse for rape. It is wrong. There is no justification for it. Period. There is no excuse for kicking a man in the testicles. It is wrong. There is no justification for it. Period.

I do see you’ve let your mask slip. Before you just wanted men to imagine being kicked repeatedly in their testicles. Now you write it should actually be done.

Any person that thinks men should be kicked in their testicles repeatedly is beyond the pale. Such behavior is criminal, unjustifiable, uncivilized and evil.

Yes they are, on a considerably lesser scale but that is another subject and you are welcome to start a thread on it.

Correct, both wrong, with no excuse for either, so the comparison is valid on that point

I do see you are deliberately misrepresenting me. But i dont expect you to understand. I said i see nothing wrong if it educates some men about rape, that is far from inciting wholesale abuse. And please be aware, some men do get excitement and fulfilment out of being abused.

Hooray, i think you are getting it, By the same token, any man who thinks it ok to a abuse and rape a woman repeatedly (or even just once) is beyond the pale. Such behaviour is criminal, unjustifiable, uncivilised and evil. So once again the comparison stands up.

 

[ChristineM]

Wrong try again. I clearly showed you lost track of the conversation and you are too stubborn to admit it like a child. I quoted the section I was talking about to be specific thus can use the function to see each post. You blunder has been demonstrated. Now accept it and move.

Go for it. Post the numbers. It will not change anything as I am right and provided evidence. *Yawn Silly NPC



Nonsense as you messed up yet your ego refuses to admit it. Try again.

You made a statement to massage your ego, at no time did you clearly show anything

Stubborn??? Projection.

You did what? It makes no difference to the order of your posts... Or mine

Post #285, then in post #288 you denied your claim of #285, then in post #295 you went into theatrics in a failed attempt to deny that you posted #285.

I am thinking here that we are diametrically opposed to what actually represents fact.

 

[Revoltingest]

No fallacy The idea is to further the recognition that rape, not only is a crime but it hurts, far worse and for much longer than a kick in the nuts.

Why should i not avoid american politics? I am not american, i dont really care about American politics. I do care about at least some of the less empathetic men recogniseing the consequences of rape

I must point out that we who are empathy challenged (not generally referring to guys) understand the consequences of things we’re told. But it’s still not natural for me to express this or offer sympathy. So I suspect that this is often seen as unsympathetic or not understanding.

 

[ChristineM]

I must point out that we who are empathy challenged (not generally referring to guys) understand the consequences of things we’re told. But it’s still not natural for me to express this or offer sympathy. So I suspect that this is often seen as unsympathetic or not understanding.

Not at all, it is understood and accepted that many men are lacking in or have difficulty expressing empathy. That does not mean they cannot tell chalk from cheese.

 

[Estro Felino]

Not at all, it is understood and accepted that many men are lacking in or have difficulty expressing empathy. That does not mean they cannot tell chalk from cheese.

Finally u've admitted it. Thank you.
Gender war.

 

[ChristineM]

Finally u've admitted it. Thank you.
Gender war.

I have a long standing commitment to this admission and you have no comprehension of why, there is no finally involved

 

[Sunstone]

...but I think dominant women represent you perfectly.

Dominant males want dominant women. Weak males want even weaker women. Or haven't you noticed?

 

[ChristineM]

In my thread you accused me of misogyny (or bias against women).
I would never accuse you of misandry...but I think dominant women represent you perfectly.

Yes, because of your comments on that thread... I am not a mind reader, i can only go off what you post.

I am more into equality than dominance but you are welcome to your opinion.

 

[Estro Felino]

Worth-watching.

 

[Shad]

You made a statement to massage your ego, at no time did you clearly show anything

Thanks for evidence you refuse to read what I post.

Stubborn??? Projection.

Nope as I quoted your mistake twice and you refuse to read either post. Try again

You did what? It makes no difference to the order of your posts... Or mine

The order does make a difference. It is called a conversation. I say X, you respond to X. That how conversation works.

Post #285, then in post #288 you denied your claim of #285

Nope. Wrong again as you are so incompetent you can not read what you nor I post.

No fallacy, show where i referenced support for the kav/ford thing. Dont worry, ill wait.

Your claim. My response was as follows

I never mentioned nor claimed you did. I said you ignored what was in the article. Thanks for being dishonest.

Point, response, then you not reading a damn thing.

then in post #295 you went into theatrics in a failed attempt to deny that you posted #285.

Nope I had to correct you as you are too dumb to read posts and comprehend what is posted. Ty again.

I am thinking here that we are diametrically opposed to what actually represents fact.

Nope. I quoted what I said twice. You can not read anything that shows you are wrong. Try again.

 

[ChristineM]

Thanks for evidence you refuse to read what I post.



Nope as I quoted your mistake twice and you refuse to read either post. Try again



The order does make a difference. It is called a conversation. I say X, you respond to X. That how conversation works.



Nope. Wrong again as you are so incompetent you can not read what you nor I post.



Your claim. My response was as follows



Point, response, then you not reading a damn thing.



Nope I had to correct you as you are too dumb to read posts and comprehend what is posted. Ty again.



Nope. I quoted what I said twice. You can not read anything that shows you are wrong. Try again.

So sad the evidence does not agree with you.

I have posted that evidence, several times

Whereas you have posted incredulous foot stomping and nothing in the way of validation

Unless you have anything new then im done with you.

 

[Shad]

So sad the evidence does not agree with you.

Actually it does. Hence why I quoted the specific posts while you didn't.

I have posted that evidence, several times

Nope. You cited a post number without reading the posts at all.

Whereas you have posted incredulous foot stomping and nothing in the way of validation

Nope. I provide the specific points which you messed up. Try again

Unless you have anything new then im done with you.

Bye Felicia

 

[ChristineM]

Actually it does.



Nope. You cited a post number without reading the posts at all.



Nope. I provide the specific points which you messed up. Try again



Bye Felicia

That is untrue and you know it, i cited posts and numbers, you cited nothing but incredulous opinion

Bye Homer