Typical conversation between feminist and non feminist, on aspects of our society that are affected by feminism : 1. Non feminist criticises feminism 2. Feminist claims non feminist is bitching about mens' role in society, and says this is lauhable because men have always had the best of it in society 3. Non feminist points out that a) that's not really the case b) it has no besring anyway on assessing today's society and roles 4. Feminist says non feminist is probably a serial rapist
Btw Lenny, I might be wrong, but your reference above to, "Black lives matter", looks like it might be a reference to a thread on the general chat board on this site, in which a poster made a series of unfounded and invalid accusations against me. You might even be trying to blackmail me or threaten me in some way with it. Who knows. For your information though, the comments on that thread originate from a thread several months ago, in which I criticised the length of Adam Johnson's prison sentence, arguing that it was a disproprtionately heavy punishment for his crime. For your information, I made exactly he same comments, and raised exactly the same arguments, when the matter was discussed right here on the Spurs board, when nobody made the type of accusations against me that the poster has made in the thread referred to above, and when in fact the majority of posters on the Spurs board who took part in the discussion, indicated their agreement with me. So, just for the avoidance of doubt, your reference above is of no concern to me whatsoever
Okay - I really need to address this. I am not trying to threaten you or blackmail you. Please read that last sentence carefully and more than once. I am not aware of any comments you've made elsewhere about Black Lives Matter or Adam Johnson. I've not come on this site much at all over the summer and barely ever check out any non-football-related thread. I'll say this once more too: You really need to read what people have actually said. Time and time again in this thread you have totally and utterly misconstrued what I have said, claimed that I'm saying things I'm not etc. To take one obvious example you said that I was claiming that only old men and young women can get jobs as TV presenters. This is despite me saying very clearly, in at least two posts, words that totally negate that assertion. You have put words into my mouth over and over again as you play out your arguments with some fictitious representation of a feminist that suits your agenda. You have not engaged with what I've actually said (as PNP has done) but instead gone off on polemics about what "feminists say/do/want/think". Here's the most recent example of your utterly misrepresenting/misunderstnding/not properly reading me: I did not call you a serial rapist. Here's what I said: "Tell you what. You can keep pretending that everything I say is part of a unified, extreme, no-brain movement where everyone agrees with whatever the least intelligent Tweeter who cries "sexist" which saves you the time of reading what I write and thinking about it if you let me assume that you're part of an organized, unified bunch of mysogynistic MRAs who whine like children, spout vile fantasies about women and high-five one another as they talk about which dumb bitch they'd most like to rape next." Now - do you see what I'm doing there? Do you see how I'm not saying that you're a rapist?! Do you see that?! You see how I'm so pissed off with your not actually engaging with me but instead engaging with some group whose ideas you already know and despise and pretending that I am them that I am saying "How would it be if I did the same to you?" But you would rather carry on with your "this is what conversations with feminists always end up like" self-fulfilling prophecy. ****ing madness. I've not mis-represented anything you said about the lawyers case. You have repeatedly used the word "entrapment" and said that the barrister's comments "appeared to be deliberately solicited". I will leave others to judge how that sounds though I still live in hope that you might be able to step back and see for yourself. You have said that feminists are only feminists because they're not all as attractive as one another and some are just jealous of others who are more attractive. You said it. It's written down. It's ****ing stone-age man stuff. I dunno what you said about Adam Johnson. I hate to say it but there's every chance that I'll agree with you. I think, as a society, we're a bit ****ed up about sex. I think that we are also a bit ****ed up about how we think and treat sex-crime. To the point that maybe loads of it which is now called a crime is a massive over-reaction and that which is a crime is treated in a fairly hysterical way. Two of the great hysterias of our time are terrorism and *****philia. Sorry if that is not what I'm supposed to say as one of those evil, vindictive feminists. Just pretend I said something else and respond to that if you want. Yesterday (or the day before?) I genuinely thought you were looking to actually talk about this stuff and I had no problem discussing it with you even though it seemed clear that we were coming at it from different perspectives. But by the end of yesterday I realised that you just wanted to sound off some well-worn rants and use me as the "dumb feminist who must think that x". You were clearly not reading what I was saying and I decided not to bother engaging with you as much as possible. I do hope we can still exchange decent comments and messages about football once the season gets under way. I have not left this exchange thinking that you are some terrible person who is a rapist and who I want to threaten or blackmail. I just think you're wrong about some stuff and need to ****ing well listen to others and think about what they say a bit more. Stay safe.
I'm honoured that you've absolved me but I note that you've moved on without considering it necessary to apologise for your inaccurate allegations which arose entirely from your misinterpretation of my posts
Very well said. Think you went off on one too rob and are a bit more closed mind. I have enjoyed this debate though and its been interesting to see this particular argument about how patriarchal society has generated what we have in society. Im pretty conservative and living in london there is as little discrimination as you can get in terms of finding people who are open minded and getting a job, at least in my industry and at my level. Obviously i cannot speak about the upper levels like directors ceos traders etc. Maybe my views would change in a different place if because if people didn't fit into a stereotype and their chances were affected. Take lenny and his outrage at the marketing of toys at kids. I don't see this as sexism, i see this as companies aiming their products at their target market. Has society imbued this on us or do girls just gravitate towards that? I have 2 nieces that are 3 and 6. One is a little "tomboy". She never wore dresses always wears blue or green although shes more open to dresses. She loves starwars, being a knight, transformers, big hero 6 and buzz light year. My brother gets her loads of legos, she has a dino decorated room and got a light sabre for a birthday present. The other one is very girly, and this was before she had contact with other kods her age and impressionable. In fact she played with my 6 year old niece. As far as I'm aware her mums never pushed her to be "girly", she just naturally was (is advertising really that effective, seeing a white girl wearing/holding a toy? We are chinese). My point being if you raise your child as individuals and tell them to ignore conventions except for things like manners and just accepting who they are. To not full for peer pressure (easier said than done), then it will lead to a better society. As for breaking through at senior management level, being famous, you have 0 chance in the western world if you are chinese. Is that because people are racist, maybe but i put it down to 3 things, unless you set it up yourself, upper management, film directors will always go for the safe option generally. Its human nature. To hire someone new, not go for sex sells, pretty young actors of both sides is pretty rare and risky. I think these are factors rather than people being inherently racist/sexist. Plus its all about networking, either you know and are friendly with these people or you have managed to have a big hit
OK. Wow. I just had a look at the Black Lives Matter thread that Rob mentioned. Wow. Just wow. Take a look for yourself if you have a strong stomach and want to see how, apparently Rob was really keeping himself in check during this conversation: http://www.not606.com/threads/black-lives-matter.333680/ I only skimmed the first 6/7 pages but I really hope that the social pressure of political correctness or whatever the hell will do it will not will not make **** like what's on that thread ever welcome on this board. Ever. **** that. I don't come on this board for that kind of stuff. I always thought this board was a fair bit better than many other football message boards and I hope to God it stays that way.
Items 1 and 3 are an exact description of your posts. Items 2 and 4 have not come up except in your imagination.
Lenny each board has it's own rules and moderators, you are aware I'm sure that no such thread could exist on the Spurs board with our present moderation. I think we have a great bunch of posters because we do not allow personal abuse. Your current debate, while heated, has retained a high level of civility and that's how we will keep it.
Yeah it's not so much the personal abuse as all the talk of what a thick bunch of ****s blacks are and Rob's comment about how they've never invented anything or the video of black people saying stupid stuff on gameshows etc etc. **** me - that is some proper nasty **** and the people on that thread were clearly nasty ****s who were really, really thick. It was like a dystopian vision of how JA606 might look after a decade or so of a white supremacist regime being in power whose main policy was to keep ****wits in a constant supply of super-strength cider so they can be in a good mood when they're asked to go out on the streets and kick some pakis' heads in.
This is starting to go nowhere tbh, because it takes me up to several paragraphs to demonstrate a point, and you one line to say my post doesnt exist. As for 4, I quoted his accusation a couple of comments ago, so that's just a further demonstration that youre not reading thr comments youre commenting on. Him suggesting that im a serial rapist doesnt bother me in the slightest, but i comsider myself entitled to use it as an example of what happens when someone dares to argue with a feminist
I think lenny was using satire robs. He basically said since you view him as this feminist etc etc should he then see you as a white middle aged rapist. He wasnt calling you one directly
[QUOTE="RobSpur, post: 9567806, member: 1025869 Him suggesting that im a serial rapist doesnt bother me in the slightest, but i comsider myself entitled to use it as an example of what happens when someone dares to argue with a feminist [/QUOTE] Only no one suggested you were a serial rapist on this thread ... maybe you repeatedly saying you have been accused of something when you haven't been is contributing to this thread going nowhere
The point is that no-one called you a serial rapist and it doesn't matter how many times you claim that someone did it doesn't change the facts.
Rob. I've already said it a few times. You're gonna need to read what people write. You're making yourself look pretty silly now. Seeing the company you choose to keep and the level of discussion you're used to elsewhere is very, very enlightening.
I do think the first part though, so that means he assumes i'm a rapist. Look, I don't want to spoil the chat with this, I'm jist pointing it out. If you guys think it's a normal thing that a rational person would write, that's up to you.
