I find this... | |||
| Funny. | 10 | 16.39% | |
| Absurd. | 20 | 32.79% | |
| Scary. | 16 | 26.23% | |
| Sexist. | 7 | 11.48% | |
| Indifferent/comments... | 8 | 13.11% | |
| Total: | 61 | ||
kirby007 said:
pics or it didnt happen |
Sorry, don't have proof, don't know if you'd want proof either.
VGPolyglot said:
Well, here's my Trump card then: I've had oral sex with males before. |
but just in saying that you are discriminating on sex...
" with males" what are you doing here? singling males out from females right?
furthermore, heterosexuality is the most common form of sexuality, which means that typically females select for males and males select for females
which means ultimately that they make the judgement that for sexual/relationship purposes the other sex is preferable to their own sex, which is discrimination on the basis of sex or sexism
o_O.Q said:
but just in saying that you are discriminating on sex... " with males" what are you doing here? singling males out from females right? furthermore, heterosexuality is the most common form of sexuality, which means that typically females select for males and males select for females which means ultimately that they make the judgement that for sexual/relationship purposes the other sex is preferable to their own sex, which is discrimination on the basis of sex or sexism |
What are you even going on about now?
VGPolyglot said:
What are you even going on about now? |
"because there is still sexism that exists"
i was addressing this point you made and i'm saying that its dumb to think that sexism is something you can get rid of with sexual partner selection and sexual segregation in sports as obvious examples
furthermore that's the core idea that the topic this thread is based on revolves around - that if we got the laws right we could eradicate sexism and men and women would magically become equal
o_O.Q said:
the point i'm making is that if that is the stated aim(which has been accomplished for decades) and the group is more active now than ever then clearly there's a disconnect between the stated aim and the current activity of the group how is this not obvious? how is it not obvious that this is the reason for making this argument?
" In that case I would am very much for the rights women lack in the middle east -countries like Afghanistan where women are not allowed to go out on their own without their husband/son/brother or else they face legal consequences... or worse." feminists for the most part in the west support islam which is the ideological foundation that causes women to be mistreated in those areas...
"But for American women, I think they need to be educated on their rights and be encouraged to use them." and what rights are women neglecting? |
It hasn’t been accomplished for decades in other countries. Not sure why you’re so US focused. I’m not focused on the US here, especially since even the article in the OP is European in origin. I’m speaking broadly. So no, it hasn’t been accomplished in many areas.
Feminists for the most part, eh? I expect a study that shows that. That just looks like something you pulled from your ass.
Who knows, I don’t know every woman in America. But to brush up on your rights is never a bad idea. Why do assume it is neglect rather than just keeping them educated?
| justinian said: Trust me, it is going to get far, far worst. It's the new religion. It will soon be an offense to offend anyone. Everyone will have a "problem" that they will claim has been abused. Like someone claiming mental illness, which everyone seems to be suffering from these days, even if they are not. I have seen it. I know it. I had to spend a day in court for research. "You can't talk to me like that, I have -insert illness here-". "It's an offense to talk to me like that". |
Oh yeah... it will surely be far worst.
Neel Kolhatkar made some "funny" videos about what the future holds for our children
Flilix said:
What else would they have to do? If someone refuses to pay a high fine, jailtime is the logical consequence. |
The jail in that case would be for not paying the fine, and not for just saying something offensive for a police officer.
Rogerioandrade said:
The jail in that case would be for not paying the fine, and not for just saying something offensive for a police officer. |
Indeed. He doesn't have to go to jail if he pays the fine.
o_O.Q said:
"because there is still sexism that exists" i was addressing this point you made and i'm saying that its dumb to think that sexism is something you can get rid of with sexual partner selection and sexual segregation in sports as obvious examples furthermore that's the core idea that the topic this thread is based on revolves around - that if we got the laws right we could eradicate sexism and men and women would magically become equal |
>Sex segregation
>Eliminating sexism...
Pick one... This is really the reason why "women's only" stuff makes me snort at how pedantic it is. They think they are creating safe spaces for women, rather than infantilizing them by implying they are unable to take care of themselves... Just to justify the horrific performance of their authorities...
Flilix said:
Indeed. He doesn't have to go to jail if he pays the fine. |
Unless this is true, then he wouldn't have to go to jail at all. That said, I'd like to see the charges: If one of them is "disrespect towards a police officer" then the fine's valid. You can mess with a man or woman. You don't mess with the badge. Ever... Unless your badge has the words "Guardia Civil"... XD
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
