| Dulfite said: You said stuff before starting 1. So I'll respond to each thought in order: 1) My original response wasn't written to tick you off, but simply point out how some of the language you used could be interpreted as sexist. That wasn't mean shouting at you, or calling you a sexist for the rest of your life. I was simply pointing out something I thought would be helpful for you to see, another perspective. If you don't want to change your OP language that is fine and your right. 2) I never said women murder babies for the fun of it. Women are extremely stressed before, during, and especially after the procedure. Nothing about it is fun and I never suggested women enjoy it, so please don't slander me. 3) Regarding giggling, that isn't subjective. Babies giggle in the womb, and hiccup, and jump and do all sorts of other fun things. They are figuring out life in there and all the fun little things they can do. And sadly, despite all those wonderful indications that they are human, the needle still comes. 4) Regarding the 42% that are conservative feminists... But what does that mean? My wife is a 1/2nd wave feminist, but not a 3rd wave feminist. She hates abortion as much as I do. So again, what do those 42% even mean? I read a poll recently that indicated men are, by a majority, supportive of abortion. That same poll indicated women, by a majority, aren't supportive of abortion rights. Does that mean the majority of women aren't feminists simply because they don't adhere to 3rd wave ideology? Feminism is an unclear term in today's society as to what it means. 5) I never claimed to have evidence that this site was left leaning. It's just the feel I get when reading and making posts. I could absolutely be wrong here, but it is my opinion nonetheless. And Super Court Justices aren't the best proof of a sites political leaning. The electorate are usually okay with whoever a SC nominee is, as they aren't as politically charged as Congress or Executive members. That hearing was about personal stuff, and hardly about political issues or prior court cases, so people had to make a gut decision about who to believe. One side had no witnesses or evidence. It's innocent until proven guilty here, thankfully. 6) I won't pretend to know anything about waves of feminism in other countries. I speak purely on an American perspective. |
Alright, I think I'm up to finishing my response to this post now. What follows should be seen as a direct continuation of my first reply thereto before.
5) It's remarkable to me that you view sexual violence as just "personal stuff" rather than as a crime. You also talk like Brett Kavanaugh was on trial for his life or something and thus deserved a presumption of innocence. In reality, the alternative to his confirmation was for Mr. Kavanaugh to retire to a life of luxury unimaginable to you and I, crying all the way to his mansion with only his family, friends, servants, and the entire Republican Party for comfort. Cry me a river.
No, when you're simply seeking a promotion like that to a lifetime post, you don't deserve such presumptions of innocence, you deserve the chance to clear your name beyond reasonable doubt, and he failed to in my book. (What Mr. Kavanaugh proved to me in his testimony was that he could barely control his faculties while sober, let alone drunk.) I was personally against giving someone who was realistically a sexual criminal the power to help shape what rights and protections the women of this country will and will not have going forward. So were the vast majority of Americans. So were NOT the vast majority of VGC users, in contrast.
I guess that's all I had to add to point 5. Just couldn't resist commenting on the Brett Kavanaugh case.
Last edited by Jaicee - on 08 September 2020
