"when Rush Limbaugh called one woman a "slut", he was made as a big boogyman/villain on that alone, however when an angry mob of feminists break laws and violate human rights, all while aggressively aggravating men to prevent freedom of speech and to censor the speech at the Toronto university, the mainstream media seemed to just accept it and not make it an issue."
1st- One happened in the US, the other in Canada. Why would the US media cover it? Your comparing apples and oranges.
2nd-Rush Limbaugh is one of the many unelected leaders/loudmouths for the republican party. Sandra Fluke was a private citizen invited to testify before congress. Limbaugh abused the hell out of his safe, comfortable position behind the microphone to call her a slut on a three day rant. Fluke showed more class and balls than Limbaugh. If your mother, wife, or daughter received that kind of abuse for testifying I'm sure you' have a very different opinion of Limbaugh.
Are you telling me that feminists in the UK have not taken issues in other countries, in other cultures, and because they are from a different area that not talking about it is not avoiding it...? With that mentality the feminists have no room to speak, nor does the media, of any issue outside of America.
That being said, the issue came about "Purely" on the "slut" comment, if they took issue with him for other reasons on his beliefs, that is fine, but making an issue that large based on the word "slut" is moronic, especially how they somehow made it that him calling "one" woman a slut somehow made him say it in regards to "all" women, which didn't happen.
Don't use the "if your mother" excuse, I absolutely hate that. You are trying to use an emotional argument to try and waver my stance, and it says you have only been for for a month or so, so I'll fill you in on the common knowledge: emotional arguments don't work on me.
That being said, the issue wasn't that he was "justified" in saying it, it was the comparison of two situations where one is on a higher scale of hostility to a certain gender than the other, and yet the one lower on the scale got more attention due to their gender, not the actual situation.
Ofcourse, ofcourse. The famous "I iz smart, u iz not" line. No, I addressed your points with valid responses. You being too inept to refute them is not the opposition showing incapability to use logic.
Sorry, but this line is repeated too much by idiots and feminists alike. You think you can just make the conclusion that you are right and I am wrong based on your say so?
This is you simply unable to refute the response to your response, nothing more. Don't insult my intelligence with your drivel.
Difference between me and you is that when I seen you are being wrong, I explained why. You, oh, you seem to think stating someone is wrong makes it so. Willing to take part in the discussion when you "thought" your response wouldn't have a rebuttal to go with it, now backing out with no explanation as to why the opposition is wrong while your opposition does just that, all while trying to claim it is the "opposition" in which logic fails on.
Don't respond to me if you can't be finish what you started. To many of you asshats that are overly confident that seem to think that confidence is justified in their refusal to continue the discussion "they" initiated simply because they can't understand how conversations go.
Here's some kryptonite for you, K? "Prove I am wrong". I know, right? Fucking crazy, thinking there is need of proof of being right and your opposition wrong...Imbecile.
Yes, the person telling you to present your position and prove your point is wanting to only speak. Nice "logic" there. Something tells me our standards of "logic" differentiate, so much so that your comment about logic, from your standpoint of what it seems to be, isn't all that insulting now that I think about it.
"Also, I lack the time, patience, and interest to deal with insolent people who like to cloud and muddle issues."
Then shut up and don't initiate. You say "I" am the one that is only interested in being heard, yet here you are backing out of the situation because I didn't agree with you and offered rebuttals.
"Agree with me or you are wrong and I am taking my ball and myself home".
"Insolent". Oh, wow. Surprise, surprise. You act like an arrogant asshat, attempt to insult me, then all of a sudden when I meet your negativity with my own, oh lord, I am "insolent".
Sorry, but you are beneath me on this type of thing, you just are. You're too hypocritical, not to mention inept (don't try and insult my intelligence with the "I lack the patience and don't have the time" line, you and I both know you bit off more than you could chew, and that is shown by how you seem to have the time and patience to read my response and then respond to that response with why you are not going to keep on the discussion you initiated. Again, don't take me for the fool you are.
You can't prove your point, so you have no point. You know that logic thing you spoke of? Well, by my terms, if you can't prove something, then you're wrong. I don't know if that complies with "your" idea of what logic is, but that certainly is the standard for anyone that understands logic.
"Just like Limbaugh, when you must resort to name calling you have lost the debate. Try not to be so emotional."
Name calling is just a blunt form of insulting, a behavior "you" initiated with this comment: "Yeah, logic doesn't seem to work well on you either."
You think you can give that behavior then cry when it is returned? Sorry, once again you have displayed yourself the utter moron you are. You initate conversations, then back out the second your points are refuted, claiming that the opposition is the wrong one all while being incapable of proving so under the excuse of not having the time or patience (which again, you read my whole comment and responded, showing you do), initiate the insulting, then say "No, no, you lost, you insulted me. Wah."
You lost. Unless you prove me wrong, you have nothing to offer. Do not respond to me and waste that "precious" time and patience, it'll do you the favor of not wasting your time thinking you can prove yourself correct while not actually proving your point, and it will save me the horror of having to read it and have someone that thinks that is how rational people think they can belittle the intelligence of others.
You have no room to speak of logic, and do me a favor and don't respond to me again, not just here, anywhere. The results will be the same, you starting something, me proving you wrong, you backing out while claiming you are right like a child.
Is it normal to hate females so much that I am embarressed to be one?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
"when Rush Limbaugh called one woman a "slut", he was made as a big boogyman/villain on that alone, however when an angry mob of feminists break laws and violate human rights, all while aggressively aggravating men to prevent freedom of speech and to censor the speech at the Toronto university, the mainstream media seemed to just accept it and not make it an issue."
1st- One happened in the US, the other in Canada. Why would the US media cover it? Your comparing apples and oranges.
2nd-Rush Limbaugh is one of the many unelected leaders/loudmouths for the republican party. Sandra Fluke was a private citizen invited to testify before congress. Limbaugh abused the hell out of his safe, comfortable position behind the microphone to call her a slut on a three day rant. Fluke showed more class and balls than Limbaugh. If your mother, wife, or daughter received that kind of abuse for testifying I'm sure you' have a very different opinion of Limbaugh.
--
[Old Memory]
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-4
-4
Are you telling me that feminists in the UK have not taken issues in other countries, in other cultures, and because they are from a different area that not talking about it is not avoiding it...? With that mentality the feminists have no room to speak, nor does the media, of any issue outside of America.
That being said, the issue came about "Purely" on the "slut" comment, if they took issue with him for other reasons on his beliefs, that is fine, but making an issue that large based on the word "slut" is moronic, especially how they somehow made it that him calling "one" woman a slut somehow made him say it in regards to "all" women, which didn't happen.
Don't use the "if your mother" excuse, I absolutely hate that. You are trying to use an emotional argument to try and waver my stance, and it says you have only been for for a month or so, so I'll fill you in on the common knowledge: emotional arguments don't work on me.
That being said, the issue wasn't that he was "justified" in saying it, it was the comparison of two situations where one is on a higher scale of hostility to a certain gender than the other, and yet the one lower on the scale got more attention due to their gender, not the actual situation.
--
CozmoWank
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
4
4
Yeah, logic doesn't seem to work well on you either.
You can rationalize your arguments all you want, they still lack a deeper understanding of the situation.
--
[Old Memory]
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-2
-2
Ofcourse, ofcourse. The famous "I iz smart, u iz not" line. No, I addressed your points with valid responses. You being too inept to refute them is not the opposition showing incapability to use logic.
Sorry, but this line is repeated too much by idiots and feminists alike. You think you can just make the conclusion that you are right and I am wrong based on your say so?
This is you simply unable to refute the response to your response, nothing more. Don't insult my intelligence with your drivel.
Difference between me and you is that when I seen you are being wrong, I explained why. You, oh, you seem to think stating someone is wrong makes it so. Willing to take part in the discussion when you "thought" your response wouldn't have a rebuttal to go with it, now backing out with no explanation as to why the opposition is wrong while your opposition does just that, all while trying to claim it is the "opposition" in which logic fails on.
Don't respond to me if you can't be finish what you started. To many of you asshats that are overly confident that seem to think that confidence is justified in their refusal to continue the discussion "they" initiated simply because they can't understand how conversations go.
Here's some kryptonite for you, K? "Prove I am wrong". I know, right? Fucking crazy, thinking there is need of proof of being right and your opposition wrong...Imbecile.
--
CozmoWank
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
3
3
No, the difference between me & you is that you are more interested in being heard than to being open to potentially learning anything.
Also, I lack the time, patience, and interest to deal with insolent people who like to cloud and muddle issues.
Just like Limbaugh, when you must resort to name calling you have lost the debate. Try not to be so emotional.
--
[Old Memory]
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Yes, the person telling you to present your position and prove your point is wanting to only speak. Nice "logic" there. Something tells me our standards of "logic" differentiate, so much so that your comment about logic, from your standpoint of what it seems to be, isn't all that insulting now that I think about it.
"Also, I lack the time, patience, and interest to deal with insolent people who like to cloud and muddle issues."
Then shut up and don't initiate. You say "I" am the one that is only interested in being heard, yet here you are backing out of the situation because I didn't agree with you and offered rebuttals.
"Agree with me or you are wrong and I am taking my ball and myself home".
"Insolent". Oh, wow. Surprise, surprise. You act like an arrogant asshat, attempt to insult me, then all of a sudden when I meet your negativity with my own, oh lord, I am "insolent".
Sorry, but you are beneath me on this type of thing, you just are. You're too hypocritical, not to mention inept (don't try and insult my intelligence with the "I lack the patience and don't have the time" line, you and I both know you bit off more than you could chew, and that is shown by how you seem to have the time and patience to read my response and then respond to that response with why you are not going to keep on the discussion you initiated. Again, don't take me for the fool you are.
You can't prove your point, so you have no point. You know that logic thing you spoke of? Well, by my terms, if you can't prove something, then you're wrong. I don't know if that complies with "your" idea of what logic is, but that certainly is the standard for anyone that understands logic.
"Just like Limbaugh, when you must resort to name calling you have lost the debate. Try not to be so emotional."
Name calling is just a blunt form of insulting, a behavior "you" initiated with this comment: "Yeah, logic doesn't seem to work well on you either."
You think you can give that behavior then cry when it is returned? Sorry, once again you have displayed yourself the utter moron you are. You initate conversations, then back out the second your points are refuted, claiming that the opposition is the wrong one all while being incapable of proving so under the excuse of not having the time or patience (which again, you read my whole comment and responded, showing you do), initiate the insulting, then say "No, no, you lost, you insulted me. Wah."
You lost. Unless you prove me wrong, you have nothing to offer. Do not respond to me and waste that "precious" time and patience, it'll do you the favor of not wasting your time thinking you can prove yourself correct while not actually proving your point, and it will save me the horror of having to read it and have someone that thinks that is how rational people think they can belittle the intelligence of others.
You have no room to speak of logic, and do me a favor and don't respond to me again, not just here, anywhere. The results will be the same, you starting something, me proving you wrong, you backing out while claiming you are right like a child.
Ta.
--
CozmoWank
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
My goodness, your panties seem to be in a bundle.