Thread: I'm not ashamed to admit I hate feminists.

Originally Posted by guerilla

I don't know if you understood my post but it was an example, something to make you take it personal which you did, so now you know how women feel when they are objectified...

I never actually MEANT that statement if you didn't realise it, I don't think all straights should be castrated, because the human race would cease to exist, and because its cruel and inhumane.

So before you jump to conclusions, take time to READ things through.

If that's what you said, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. The problem was you compared it to what was happening to feminists in this thread, and that just isn't the truth. Besides, I already know what it feels like to feel personal about something. But usually when it isn't meant to be personal, I step back and use logic to run the situation, not my emotions. Right now though, I'll admit I've made this personal. Seeing as how logic will not be taken into consideration by Minervas, it's obvious that I can't use it to my advantage.

The only thing you can use to your advantage here snoops is that others more silly than you agree you are not being petty. Me and guerilla are just tired of nonsense and you want to keep going on about stuff that doesn't matter. Neither men or women are inferior and that is what it boils down to. I am not the one without the logic as I understand this and can move on.

Why didn't you say that in the first place so the conflict could have been avoided then? Seems simple enough to me.

Ok good. I thought it went without saying it was so simple.

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

Seismosaur why randomly mention the word capitalism in a feminist thread.

It called an analogy. You use similar circumstances, etc. to better get a point across.

Government/Economic paradigms worked rather well here, so I used them.

And as I said: Women will never "run the world[Society]" because humans are patriarchal.

Men will always be "in charge" because male is the dominant sex.

Periodendofstorysorrytryagainthisthreadisclosenow.

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

Grass is green and this is true yet it's not the topic we are discussing so you don't need to mention it unless you have a grass fetish or in this case strong men fetish.

I was responding to something Half/Dreaming and Taosaur were discussing. Learn to read.

Originally Posted by Korittke

There's neither a body nor a child so none of that has any relevance.

lol, umm, lets see, then what is inside it? And the second point has relevance weather the baby is fully developed or not, way to tip toe around it.

No Korittke's right.

There is no body. Just a glob of cells that MIGHT form a functioning human being.

so, when its a fetus its still not a body? and that still doesnt address the second point

It isn't a fetus.

at what point is it officially a fetus and no longer a developing set of cells?

When it has a form. Usually takes months.

Abortions occur within the first month.

well, I can see where some people would still think that ok, but I cant. as soon as the egg and sperm join the process has begun, we would probably run around that all day so Im gonna leave it at that. However, what about the second point, as long as the father isnt a dead beat runaway that is.

it's interesting, that it's really obvious which respondants are male and female.

Originally Posted by AnDUHrew

it's interesting, that it's really obvious which respondants are male and female.

Well take a guess at what I am then

Originally Posted by tkdyo

well, I can see where some people would still think that ok, but I cant. as soon as the egg and sperm join the process has begun, we would probably run around that all day so Im gonna leave it at that. However, what about the second point, as long as the father isnt a dead beat runaway that is.

At that point it is a clump of cells... it is not even conscious. The reason why abortions are legal to around 20 weeks is because it is around that time that the developing brain begins to become active, and thus is likely to be conscious.

Men will always be "in charge" because male is the dominant sex.

You are confusing the male tendency to take control of things and be dominant with the actual ability to have power and the ability to be in charge and dominant. Also that is not necessarily an advantage to be in that position. In charge can have burdens and lead to restrictions and it all comes from knowledge not from the gender of being a male. Knowledge enables you to get into any position and it would be absurd to suggest males are more knowledgeable than the female gender and basically is saying females are inferior/less capable. Physical strength does not equal dominance it is an aspect of man. Like the female aspects ability to have babies. If you ever tried marshal arts you already understand why strength doesn't always help. In some cultures it was the men considered useless because they couldn't have babies so they were not 'dominant and in charge'. I'm not saying men are useless just pointing out your unbalanced thinking and how it would look from the other side. The truth is each gender needs the other and are equally Dependant. Your use of the word 'dominant' suggest there is some advantage in being male but this is not true each gender while different has equal advantages.

Well said Phoenix, very well said...


I do admit I may cross the line from time to time in these kind of arguements but, I can't seem to control my emotions if you haven't noticed

But like MP said above, we both need each other, men and women, without one there cannot be the other, but stating that men will 'always' be in charge is just wrong.


I don't think men will 'always' be in charge, you see more and more women taking office around the world, offices of power...the german prime minister is a woman, we had a woman running for president in the us...etc

Eventually one day governments will be somewhat around 50/50 male and female, an equal rule, which would be the ideal world in my opinion. I admit, this is a male dominated society, and our governments and police and military are generally male driven and male run. I think one day most of this will change, you'll see more female roles in society as time goes on.

Speaking of military, Aren't women allowed in combat yet?
(im not sure of that subject thats why I ask)

It's a slow an gradual shift to an 'equalist' society, but it will get there like it or not guys, the women will start to be more in control, and we will have a little less, balancing things out finally, after 16,000 years of men ruling

Originally Posted by tkdyo

well, I can see where some people would still think that ok, but I cant. as soon as the egg and sperm join the process has begun, we would probably run around that all day so Im gonna leave it at that.

I assume you have absolutely no justification for that statement, yes? Because I've never actually heard one (a valid one, mind you).

Why is a cell that's made from a sperm cell and an egg cell morally superior to... a skin cell? They're practically identical except the skin cell is specialized whereas the conjoined cell is basically a stem cell.

Also, abortions can happen several months after conception and I don't think that it's a problem, seeing that even then it's still just a larger batch of cells with no specifically human individual characteristics. Like the woman's leg. A woman should be allowed to cut off her leg, hence she should be allowed to cut off other parts of her body.

Originally Posted by guerilla

Well take a guess at what I am then

You are a woman.

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

You are confusing the male tendency to take control of things and be dominant with the actual ability to have power and the ability to be in charge and dominant. Also that is not necessarily an advantage to be in that position. In charge can have burdens and lead to restrictions and it all comes from knowledge not from the gender of being a male. Knowledge enables you to get into any position and it would be absurd to suggest males are more knowledgeable than the female gender and basically is saying females are inferior/less capable. Physical strength does not equal dominance it is an aspect of man. Like the female aspects ability to have babies. If you ever tried marshal arts you already understand why strength doesn't always help. In some cultures it was the men considered useless because they couldn't have babies so they were not 'dominant and in charge'. I'm not saying men are useless just pointing out your unbalanced thinking and how it would look from the other side. The truth is each gender needs the other and are equally Dependant. Your use of the word 'dominant' suggest there is some advantage in being male but this is not true each gender while different has equal advantages.

Stupid post is stupid.

Your confusing "in charge" with being the president.

Also, "dominant" means you, well, dominate. I never said there was "an advantage" you're putting words in my mouth. What I speak is simple fact. Saying this is somehow unfair is moronic because you make it out to be somehow advantageous. There is no conspiracy, humans are simply patriarchal. This is why men are head of their home, and not the woman (Though there are cases, but I'm talking in general. Feminists don't really count because most are lumberdykes and might as well be reverse-chauvinists); you don't necessarily need to be smart nor knowladgeable to be male or dominate, you silly girl.

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

There is no conspiracy

Where did that come from lol. Conspiracy, that is worse than your random use of the word capitalism. This is to do with knowing that neither gender is inferior.

Guerilla is not a women just because he agrees doesn't mean he has to be female.

It's okay Phoenix, you can call me a woman all you want, to me its a compliment

Are you really that ignorant?

You're treating human society like a huge conspiracy to short change women.

Grow up.

i make it rain; as far as korittike (or whatever his name is) goes, i told it like it is. if he wanted people to post nice things about him, he would have to try to be a lot nicer and not post all of the negative and disrespectful stuff he spouts. and in terms of sarcasm on my part directed at him, what goes around comes around.