Why men won't marry you

[elohiym]

You few seriously don't understand that this is the going rate in ALL these discussions. Same turnout everytime- and I'M the one that has something wrong with me?
:chuckle:

Have you considered that ALL these discussions seem to turn out the same every time because you are in the discussions posting the same "anti-feminist" crap every time?

 

[Rusha]

Not guilty.

Same here.

And yet a better example ... how about Betty Broderick?

According to Traditio, a spouse that cheats deserves a beating, which of course, is a violent reaction.

Under the "reaping what you sow" wolf-pack mentality, did Daniel T. Broderick III, (the slimy adulterer) and his second wife, Linda (Kolkena) Broderick (the floozy) fall under the category of *deservedness*?

 

[Rusha]

Have you considered that ALL these discussions seem to turn out the same every time because you are in the discussions posting the same "anti-feminist" crap every time?

SHUSH ... you feminist!!!

 

[Crucible]

Have you considered that ALL these discussions seem to turn out the same every time because you are in the discussions posting the same "anti-feminist" crap every time?

Only because, in these discussions, it's always about defending women. Men's issues always take a backseat, or are watered down. At best, they are always assumed to be part of their own problems.

This is not the case with women's issues- there is never an accountability factor. With that, men are made to take accountability there as well.

And I find that preposterous. I know why it is the way it is, and it has everything to do with the feminized mindset of present culture. To be honest, I'm tired of sitting around pretending like there isn't some gigantic looming elephant on these matters and so I point it out.

And as per usual, I'm called a misogynist. The way I see it, I am the one that is about equality- you all aren't. I treat women like human beings with a brain capable of taking responsibility- and not children thereof that are unable to do such.

 

[ok doser]

I treat women like human beings with a brain capable of taking responsibility...

there's ample evidence to suggest that many women here aren't

 

[elohiym]

Oh. THAT website was something else. Those were some full-fledged retards.

I suspect some of them are "victims" of Poe's Law and other forms of influence, e.g. social proof. The author of those articles seems like he's scamming stupid men who see themselves as victims of women.

 

[Rusha]

Only because, in these discussions, it's always about defending women. Men's issues always take a backseat, or are watered down.

Oh you mean like on the Elo's thread "Male rights issues"? The thread I contributed to but you completely ignored?

Why not just admit that the only time you are interesting in discussing men's rights is when it corresponds with bashing women?

 

[ClimateSanity]

there's ample evidence to suggest that many women here aren't

A stripper has no responsibility for her actions.

 

[Rusha]

I suspect some of them are "victims" of Poe's Law and other forms of influence, e.g. social proof. The author of those articles seems like he's scamming stupid men who see themselves as victims of women.

No doubt that reading a fellow whiner has helped them immensely.

 

[Rusha]

A stripper has no responsibility for her actions.

The male viewer has no responsibility for his actions.

There actually are real men who do not care for strippers and pornography and are actually responsible enough to just say no.

 

[Crucible]

Oh you mean like on the Elo's thread "Male rights issues"? The thread I contributed to but you completely ignored?

Why not just admit that the only time you are interesting in discussing men's rights is when it corresponds with bashing women?

Yeah, the real issues that men face were completely cut out. It was about things in which women have to take little accountability for. It was preposterous for that to count as some prime acknowledgement of men's problems.
When you want to admit the inequalities and biases within domestic courts, or 90% of the homeless being men whilst there being exponentially more shelters for women- and among other things, let me know.

 

[Rusha]

The male viewer has no responsibility for his actions.

There actually are real men who do not care for strippers and pornography and are actually responsible enough to just say no.

Yeah,

Agreed!

 

[CabinetMaker]

You're missing my point. Saying "Boo, I disagree" isn't a legitimate argument.



The husband witnessed it. The cheating wife witnessed it. Her lover witnessed her. Her lover's friends witnessed it. And I'm sure other people probably came over and saw the situation from time to time.

At any rate, the need for witnesses is to establish the matter of fact, and what I am currently talking about is, as I have said, "a grievous, public and ongoing" outrage against her husband. The matter of fact simply isn't in question.

At any rate, I'm simply not interested in having a discussion about the juridical practices of the Jews. Last I checked, I don't live in the middle east, nor was I engaging in a theological discussion.



Again, you're simply misunderstanding me. Your point is irrelevant. Regardless of her motivations, the woman in question was guilty of committing, as I have said before, "a grievous, public and ongoing" injustice against her husband. There simply is no question as to whether the woman in question deserved to be beaten, perhaps even to death. It's clearly the case that she did.

And again, need I remind you of the results of the case? If I recall correctly, the wife and her lover murdered the husband.

Had the husband been legally enabled and encouraged to exact vengeance, everyone would have been better off. Society would have at least one less malefactor around, and would still have had a decent, hard-working citizen at its disposal.

I think you don't want to have certain discussions add you are ill equipped to deal with them.

We have courts for dealing with this kind of stuff because what you advocate would result in incredible injustice. You attempt to make a case for your position using an example that actuality fails to support yourargument. What makes you think that the husband in question would have beat his wife when he wasn't even able to walk out his own front door?

What you advocate is actually the antithesis of justice.

 

[ClimateSanity]

you horrible horrible person!

how dare you suggest that any woman could ever do anything worthy of incarceration or the death penalty!



in the old days, he would have been beaten - by your father, uncles, brothers

and his behavior would have changed

you wouldn't have been divorced

your kids would have had a two parent household

Nooooooooooo!!!!! You monster!! Don't you know women have the right to destroy families and rob men of everything???

 

[elohiym]

And yet a better example ... how about Betty Broderick?

Guilty.

 

[bybee]

There are limits to what one can get when extracting ones philosophy of society and law from a comic book.

Men of violence are sad creatures. Men who hit women and children are downright pathetic impotent children in an adult body. The adult variant of lying down and kicking and screaming when they dont get candy at the store.

Amen Brother!

 

[elohiym]

Why not just admit that the only time you are interesting in discussing men's rights is when it corresponds with bashing women?

He's certainly given me that impression.

 

[ok doser]

Men of violence are sad creatures.

feel free to tell him he's a sad creature :idunno:

 

[Rusha]

Guilty.

I agree. Even though her husband and his mistress-second wife were low life, bottom of the bucket scum, she left the children without either parent.

 

[bybee]

feel free to tell him he's a sad creature :idunno:

Typical, deliberate misrepresentation on your part.