# What if the gender roles were reversed?



## Kobo

‪Catherine Kieu Castrates Husband‬‏ - YouTube

Would it still be "fabulous"?


----------



## Runs like Dog

Only if you were a Sudanese Muslim


----------



## Closer

Hmmm... Nah, nope. I can't imagine being a woman. I appreciate my masculinity and what the Almighty Divine endowed me with.

Not happening.


----------



## Entropy3000

Very F'd up. This would not have been fabulous if the man mutiliated his wife who filed for divorce. No one would be laughing. It would not be PC to even hint that this was funny.

Why is this so funny? Really? It has come to this now.


----------



## Deejo

Broads ...


----------



## Entropy3000

Deejo said:


> Broads ...


:rofl:

Wondermous


----------



## AbsolutelyFree

I'll agree that a lot more people would be upset if the roles were reversed. 

I don't know, it was comedy. It isn't that terrible.


----------



## Entropy3000

If she gets off with a light sentence I think it would be a very good idea if there were laws put in place to curb the trend if you catch my drift. She was charged with torture and aggravated mayhem. WTF? Is this not more serious than that? Really?


----------



## Entropy3000

205. Aggravated Mayhem. A person is guilty of aggravated mayhem when he or she unlawfully, under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the physical or psychological well-being of another person, intentionally causes permanent disability or disfigurement of another human being or deprives a human being of a limb, organ, or member of his or her body. For purposes of this section, it is not necessary to prove an intent to kill. Aggravated mayhem is a felony punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for life with the possibility of parole.

206. Torture. Every person who, with the intent to cause cruel or extreme pain and suffering for the purpose of revenge, extortion, persuasion, or for any sadistic purpose, inflicts great bodily injury as defined in Section 12022.7 upon the person of another, is guilty of torture. The crime of torture does not require any proof that the victim suffered pain.

206.1. Torture is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for a term of life. 

----------

So I looked this up.


----------



## Lon

Yikes, quite inappropriate to be making fun of this situation. What are these "women?" thinking, "Why should the dog suffer?" People need to think a little before open their mouths, especially when your audience is millions of people.


----------



## Catherine602

It should be attempted murder. The law need to be changed. Cut such a vascular area is not like cuttin off an arm. He nearly died. It is so horrible. I can not believe that the producers allowed those women to speak so carelessly of this crime. 

But why is it so easy to make fun of this and why is the reaction of so many women unsympathetic. There seems to be a deep fount of hostility and anger towards men. I think it is because of the crimes against woman and children reported in the media. 

The utter lack of laws to keep pedophiles locked away forever. The impression is that the lax laws seem to be because of male control of the judiciary. These men get light sentices and they are known to be incurable . 

. Why is there no war on child moleters, sex offenders? Women have been instrumental in getting strong rape laws enacted. It was an uphill battle. Domestic abuse, difficult to get male dominated law enforcement to prosecute men who abuse women. The sex trade, manipulating underage girls into porn. 

The tourist industry that caters to men traveling to South East Asia to have sex with enslaved children and young boys and girls. If any one cared about this depravity it would be easy to stop. There is the perception that any law that involves curtailing male sexual freedom is difficult or impossible to enact. 

There is also the preception that Men seem to be very protective of thier sexual entitlements even if it is harmful to others. 

The porn industry objectifies women and has abusive practices but it is those factors are either minimized or denied. There is very little sympathy or concern for women who face the unrealistic sexual expectation by men who get their sex education from porn. It's called spicing things up. It hard to accept that it is not code for act like that porn actress and not yourself. 

I have read very unsympathetic comment by men when women accuses a man of rape or sexual assault. The same for the release of private sex tapes of women released by a bf - I have never once read a any critisizem of the bf but but a rush to see the tape and glee at the humiliation of the women. They are called ****s for making the film. 

There is no reason to be find attempted murder funny. The fact that there is laughter may be emblematic an apparently intractable differences in our perception of what is acceptable sexual behavior. 

It is frightening to consider that if you are a woman or child and you are unlucky enough to be targeted by a sexual predator that your life is forever changed. But the predator gets a year or two in jail if he is caught and he gets out to distroy more lives. This effects the life of every woman on the planet thorougout her life. 

That may be the reason some women are so unsympathetic. It may be the feeling that if men had the same worries about being sexually violated as women, they would be more interested in enacting laws to protect the vulnerable. Just a thought or two . .
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Catherine602

Entropy3000 said:


> If she gets off with a light sentence I think it would be a very good idea if there were laws put in place to curb the trend if you catch my drift. She was charged with torture and aggravated mayhem. WTF? Is this not more serious than that? Really?


I agree but I think the law should cover all sexual assult. It is about time. It cutting off a man penis is a cause for new laws than pedophilia and sexual predation are long overdue for new laws. Sexual preditors should receive life with out parole. I would not support a law that just addresses the violation of men and not the violation of woman and children. 

What do we value as a society? It's reflected in what we find punishable. It you thonk that stiffer senticing needs to be enacted to curtail the practice of penis amputation how about laws to put sexual preditors behind bars for life. That would prevent the destruction of millions of lives..

If she gets a few years like a pedophiles, would that be fair enough. If not then all of the sentencing guidelines need changing not just the ones protecting male genitals.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## morituri

Catherine602,

I take it by sexual predators you are also including women like the female teachers who have seduced and slept with middle school aged boys. Am I right?


----------



## Deejo

Let's keep this somewhere within the horizon line of the original post, which is pretty straightforward.

Were this a panel of men making jokes about the sexual mutilation of a woman ... none of them would still have jobs. And deservedly so.


----------



## Entropy3000

Deejo said:


> Let's keep this somewhere within the horizon line of the original post, which is pretty straightforward.
> 
> Were this a panel of men making jokes about the sexual mutilation of a woman ... none of them would still have jobs. And deservedly so.


I agree totally. They would be chastized by society and never work again in the industry.


----------



## Catherine602

morituri said:


> Catherine602,
> 
> I take it by sexual predators you are also including women like the female teachers who have seduced and slept with middle school aged boys. Am I right?


Why would I leave them out? Do you think I am being unfair to men by pointing out facts? It is a touchy subject and seems to be heresy to discuss it within earshot of men. But it reality for me. So why cant i say it? Why does it make me automatically unfair as you are no doubt hinting at? I advanced a reason for the attitude of these women. It is well with in the the subject of the thread I thought if not, I am certain that one of the able moderators will remove it if it is imflammatoty. 

ALL predation by people of either sex on people of either sex, need to be punished swiftly and resolutely. OK. Even those female teacher and all women who prey on young boys and manipulate them. I would not want that to happen to my son.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Catherine602

Entropy3000 said:


> I agree totally. They would be chastized by society and never work again in the industry.


That may happen if enough people demand it. Calls should be made to the network. Insensitivity on a much smaller scale has gotten people fired. I think their firing should be demanded. This should open a serious dialogue about what is going on in our society. 

Are these women reflecting your values if not call the network and get friends and neighbors to do the same. I think someon should start a thread and encourage people to act. Find out who to communicate with and what to write. 

I don't understand why there has been no outcry. Why is it that men don't call the network out on this? Women would. how could the produces stand by a listen to this and not think how horribly wrong it is? I don't understand - that was the first I saw of it it did not seem to make a ripple in the news. 

It's unacceptable and needs to be faced head on.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Entropy3000

Catherine602 said:


> That may happen if enough people demand it. Calls should be made to the network. Insensitivity on a much smaller scale has gotten people fired. I think their firing should be demanded. This should open a serious dialogue about what is going on in our society.
> 
> Are these women reflecting your values if not call the network and get friends and neighbors to do the same. I think someon should start a thread and encourage people to act. Find out who to communicate with and what to write.
> 
> I don't understand why there has been no outcry. Why is it that men don't call the network out on this? Women would. how could the produces stand by a listen to this and not think how horribly wrong it is? I don't understand - that was the first I saw of it it did not seem to make a ripple in the news.
> 
> It's unacceptable and needs to be faced head on.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


You know, you are probably right.


----------



## morituri

Catherine602 said:


> I advanced a reason for the attitude of these women.


What you did was sanitized their inhumane behavior by bringing something up that may not have any bearing on the situation simply because they are women.


----------



## 827Aug

I am appalled at those females finding humor in that. Quite frankly they should have their show cancelled. It doesn't matter whether the victim is male or female. It's wrong to find humor in the suffering of a human being.


----------



## Deejo

Catherine602 said:


> That may happen if enough people demand it. Calls should be made to the network. Insensitivity on a much smaller scale has gotten people fired. I think their firing should be demanded. This should open a serious dialogue about what is going on in our society.


Here is the link to assist in the effort that you outline, for anyone that wishes to make a 'reasonable' comment about such conduct. 
Show: The Talk, date of air, 7/14

Feedback Form on CBS


----------



## okeydokie

women are protected from scrutiny from these types of actions because society places strong emphasis on the history of their mistreatment by men. the mindset is men are owed based on the past, its reparation of sorts. it doesnt bother me as i think these supposedly successful and intelligent women looked positively foolish. for the record, my wife wants this woman severed from society for life, i like that. but make no mistake, there are alot of women who giggle at this ultimate act of getting back at a man.


----------



## Trenton

Considering I have trouble literally hurting a fly, I can't relate to a woman who hurts anyone/anything.

I can find humor in the absurdity of life though. It's always helped me. Even being pro woman's rights, I can find humor in the "Iron my shirt biatch" sign that is being held at the back of a woman's right's protest. No doubt it is a cut at the many women who have fought for women's rights (whether you believe in them or not). It's still really funny. 

I get that humor can become taboo after such tragedies as 9/11 or when a grotesque, cruel crime has taken place, but for me it's always been a way to deal with overwhelming emotions.

Does this make the joke I thought was funny on the boards of robo-bobbit seem really horrible? Perhaps not since in that case he went on to make porn and make fun of himself?

Sigh.

So I don't condone the woman who did this nor would I ever consider such an act and would like to see her brought up on charges, obviously; but I don't think using humor to express the dynamics and issues between women is wrong either, nor do I think this will lead to the acceptance of men getting their penises cut off.

My problem here is that this may not be far enough after the fact and I wouldn't want the man who suffered here to be made to feel worse than he already does. So I find a problem with the timing of the humor because if it's actually hurting the victim (not just offending as humor always risks offense), I don't think it's right.


----------



## Deejo

Robo-bobbit IS funny. It would stop being funny if you and Amp actually created, marketed, and promoted it's use. Dark and off-color humor is fine. I can joke about the _idea_ of having one's junk cut off under humorous circumstances. Nor do I believe that women have smaller brains.

Issue is, they were laughing and joking about an actual event. Projecting the circumstances surrounding the 'act' are immaterial. Do you doubt for a moment had that been a panel and audience of men giggling and laughing about a woman having her breasts or clitoris cut off that they would have resoundingly and in no uncertain terms, been censured, if not fired?


----------



## okeydokie

Deejo said:


> Do you doubt for a moment had that been a panel and audience of men giggling and laughing about a woman having her breasts or clitoris cut off that they would have resoundingly and in no uncertain terms, been censured, if not fired?


ask Imus


----------



## Trenton

Deejo said:


> Robo-bobbit IS funny. It would stop being funny if you and Amp actually created, marketed, and promoted it's use. Dark and off-color humor is fine. I can joke about the _idea_ of having one's junk cut off under humorous circumstances. Nor do I believe that women have smaller brains.
> 
> Issue is, they were laughing and joking about an actual event. Projecting the circumstances surrounding the 'act' are immaterial. Do you doubt for a moment had that been a panel and audience of men giggling and laughing about a woman having her breasts or clitoris cut off that they would have resoundingly and in no uncertain terms, been censured, if not fired?


OK, fair enough and on point I agree.

I do have a follow up question though, why act to cross this gender double standard and not all the others? Is it fair to pick and choose which double standards we think are OK and which are not?

Why choose to be outraged over this and not others that negatively effect women more so than men?


----------



## okeydokie

Trenton said:


> OK, fair enough and on point I agree.
> 
> I do have a follow up question though, why act to cross this gender double standard and not all the others? Is it fair to pick and choose which double standards we think are OK and which are not?
> 
> Why choose to be outraged over this and not others that negatively effect women more so than men?


example of media laughing at women who are disfugured by a man? 

btw, i would be calling for severe and horrible punishment for any man who does so.


----------



## Catherine602

Deejo said:


> Here is the link to assist in the effort that you outline, for anyone that wishes to make a 'reasonable' comment about such conduct.
> Show: The Talk, date of air, 7/14
> 
> Feedback Form on CBS


I thought the name of the show was the view? Am I wrong? 

Everyone reading this thread MUST write in. if women want men to understand us we cannot let this go unchallenged. Men will probably not say anything except to hurt silently. I think it is the nature of men to suck it up. I am more convience of that than ever now. If I were a man in that studio while these women were laughing the station would have blinked off when I pulled the plug. 

If you have a good man in your life, son, cousins, uncles speak up for them. Don't let this go. This has to sting men and then to be hampered by a code of what men should and should not do is disturbing. 

I asked my husband to look at the video. He watched for a few minuites and said the women were stupid. I said, is that's it, aren't you upset don't you want to write in? He thought that it was useless and a waste of time. He said something to the effect that he thinks women are at times kind and nurturing but at other times hateful. He says he does not understand but he has no intention of wasting time on these stupid women.

In a way I see his point. To make such fun is a sign powerlessness. If these women really felt a sense of their position to positively influence the human condition they would not have made light of this. They talked liked a bunch of hens instead of responsible human beings. 

Sad that women in such influential positions use it to perpetuate the perception that women are light headed and talk a good deal but have no real pricipals when it comes to compassion and empathy. These women dont represent me or the way i think and its an insult to have them potrayed as such. They could have used the airtime to really make a difference but they are too dumb and self-absorbed to anything but a gaggle of airheads. Next week they will be complaining about the latest injustice but to me they are a joke and a shame.

That's that. The subject is closed with my husband he does not seem to think it is a big deal. I think it is on principal and it will not be forgotten by the average man. I don't understand but I will write in if it is the correct site and I advise all to do so.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## morituri

Trenton said:


> OK, fair enough and on point I agree.
> 
> I do have a follow up question though, why act to cross this gender double standard and not all the others? Is it fair to pick and choose which double standards we think are OK and which are not?
> 
> Why choose to be outraged over this and not others that negatively effect women more so than men?


Because there has been a crusade to sensitize men for the wrongs committed against women such that if a man's show had been aired showing men laughing at the story of a woman whose face or any part of her body had been horribly mutilated, there would have been such a backlash not only by feminists groups, but by many other women that the show would have been canceled and anybody involved in it would have been blacklisted - As it should be. As a father of two daughters I would have been going ballistic.

What is the issue here is the *hypocrisy* of some women who demand to be treated like human beings but their humanity towards others is only reserved to their gender.


----------



## Deejo

Trenton said:


> OK, fair enough and on point I agree.
> 
> I do have a follow up question though, why act to cross this gender double standard and not all the others? Is it fair to pick and choose which double standards we think are OK and which are not?
> 
> Why choose to be outraged over this and not others that negatively effect women more so than men?


I'm not outraged. I'm interested.
I have no issue cherry-picking my double standards. In this case, you have a panel of women with a public platform. They ARE responsible for what they say and how they say it. That's the end of the line for me. I don't want 'Women' to acknowledge my deep emotional hurt over the thought of being robo-bobbitized, I want _those_ women to be held accountable for their conduct just as male broadcasters would be.

Odds are the conversation would have had a much different tenor had the man stopped his wife from cutting off his penis and putting it in the garbage disposal, and instead punched her in the face in an effort to disarm her and defend himself. Had they posted a picture of that woman with two black eyes, the entire scenario would take on a very different cast, wouldn't you agree? Once again, context is everything.

Although I am able to acknowledge in the scheme of things that no one paid this much attention because no one watches or gives a sh!t what any of the 'ladies' on 'The Talk' have to say. Small brains or no.


----------



## Entropy3000

Deejo said:


> I'm not outraged. I'm interested.
> I have no issue cherry-picking my double standards. In this case, you have a panel of women with a public platform. They ARE responsible for what they say and how they say it. That's the end of the line for me. I don't want 'Women' to acknowledge my deep emotional hurt over the thought of being robo-bobbitized, I want _those_ women to be held accountable for their conduct just as male broadcasters would be.
> 
> Odds are the conversation would have had a much different tenor had the man stopped his wife from cutting off his penis and putting it in the garbage disposal, and instead punched her in the face in an effort to disarm her and defend himself. Had they posted a picture of that woman with two black eyes, the entire scenario would take on a very different cast, wouldn't you agree? Once again, context is everything.
> 
> Although I am able to acknowledge in the scheme of things that no one paid this much attention because no one watches or gives a sh!t what any of the 'ladies' on 'The Talk' have to say. Small brains or no.


I have a problem with their attitude because it perpetuates it. Makes it ok to feel this way. Even encourages it. 

I also do not have a double standard with this. If the clip was of men giggling over the mutiliation of a woman I would see this as criminal in itself.


----------



## Trenton

okeydokie said:


> example of media laughing at women who are disfugured by a man?
> 
> btw, i would be calling for severe and horrible punishment for any man who does so.


Nah, I'm talking other double standards that are excused by man's gender difference.


----------



## Lon

Call me a pacifist if you will, but I think we, as individuals that compose a society, are responsible for not tolerating any kind of violence of destruction to another human's body.

There are of course gray areas, self-defense, war, fiction and depiction etc. But to me it will always be wrong to glorify it, which is why I get so disgusted at movies and media that portray realistic violence and make it funny (a la pulp fiction - sorry don't find grey matter sprayed on the window funny). When its made to be not realistic or over the top, such as Robert Rodriguez grindhouse stuff I can somehow tolerate it a little more. And if it is in the context of "saving private ryan" I can also see the reason for portaying violence. But what is really clear is that when it is real life there is absolutely nothing funny about this.


----------



## Trenton

Deejo said:


> I'm not outraged. I'm interested.
> I have no issue cherry-picking my double standards. In this case, you have a panel of women with a public platform. They ARE responsible for what they say and how they say it. That's the end of the line for me. I don't want 'Women' to acknowledge my deep emotional hurt over the thought of being robo-bobbitized, I want _those_ women to be held accountable for their conduct just as male broadcasters would be.
> 
> Odds are the conversation would have had a much different tenor had the man stopped his wife from cutting off his penis and putting it in the garbage disposal, and instead punched her in the face in an effort to disarm her and defend himself. Had they posted a picture of that woman with two black eyes, the entire scenario would take on a very different cast, wouldn't you agree? Once again, context is everything.
> 
> Although I am able to acknowledge in the scheme of things that no one paid this much attention because no one watches or gives a sh!t what any of the 'ladies' on 'The Talk' have to say. Small brains or no.


I don't think it would have been a story had he defended himself physically. That happens all the time. It's a story and people want to talk about it because it doesn't happen all the time.

I've thought about it and don't really find it offensive or care about it. I don't care if it's not PC. The only concern I'd have is for the actual man who actually suffered the abuse. I don't like that they could be so thoughtless about his experience.

I don't watch that show, I can't imagine caring what these women have to say. I'd love to see Bill O'Reilly fired and The Colbert Report declared to be real news but I don't see that happening anytime soon either. ha ha ha

It appears to me that men complain they are being feminized and there is a double standard, women claim they are being objectified and there is a double standard. The more I think about it the less I care. Work to change it or shut up. So many bigger fish to fry.


----------



## Kobo

Great discussion. 

To answer my own question, if they were men making light of a similar attack on a woman by a man they would be on suspension today and terminated/resigned on Thursday. 

Someone asked for a reason why most Men aren't outraged and trying to get these ladies tossed. My opinion is:

1. A lot of men are taught or learn on their own that life ain't fair
2. Men are just recently starting to see themselves as a collective group (think men's rights). Most Men's groups have been historically by issues: Guns, race, politics, etc. I personally think the "walk away wife" syndrome combined with the divorce laws has brought this shift about. 


The more concerning thing to me is the response of the audience. Now we can say "like mines" much like what you would find on Howard Stern but I have to wonder if my wife would be having a joyous time in the audience.


----------



## Lon

Kobo said:


> The more concerning thing to me is the response of the audience. Now we can say "like mines" much like what you would find on Howard Stern but I have to wonder if my wife would be having a joyous time in the audience.


Yeah I found it "interesting" and kind of disturbing that when the camera was panning the ladies in the audience most were laughing out loud, didn't notice any aghast faces or women displaying any kind of disagreement with the humor of the topic. Is it simply mob behavior, or is there something about this situation that most women simply find amusing? Either way I think its a little sick... One thing I used to respect about my stbxw (not sure if she's changed) is she wasn't afraid to go against the mob and tell them how it is, perhaps that one voice in the crowd is often enough to bring them back to reality, and maybe what was missing from the studio that day.


----------



## MGirl

The only thing watching the clip did for me was turn my stomach. I couldn't even watch the entire clip because I was too _horrified_ that these ladies are *laughing* at what happened. I honestly don't understand how anyone can find humor in this. I really don't. I generally try to empathize and see things from another point of view, but I can't even do it here. It's just sick. I don't even want to empathize with anyone who can laugh at someone else's pain and suffering.

And yes, if the gender roles were reversed, this coverage would never have been tolerated.


----------



## Entropy3000

Deejo said:


> Here is the link to assist in the effort that you outline, for anyone that wishes to make a 'reasonable' comment about such conduct.
> Show: The Talk, date of air, 7/14
> 
> Feedback Form on CBS


I went ahead and provided my feedback. The only real feedback that would have any impact would be for a sponsor to get involved and state that they do not wish to be associated with this. Unfortunately, their ratings probably went up.


----------



## Deejo

Trenton said:


> The more I think about it the less I care. Work to change it or shut up. So many bigger fish to fry.


We agree.


----------



## Sennik

Catherine602 said:


> That may happen if enough people demand it. Calls should be made to the network. Insensitivity on a much smaller scale has gotten people fired.[/i][/size]


That was quite frankly the most disgusting behavior on broadcast TV that I have seen in a very VERY long time. 

In my comments to CBS I said I expected heads to roll.

Of course Julie Chen is probably insulated somewhat, since she *is* Les Moonves' current wife.

Oh, and Sara Gilbert, the woman who brought up the reverse, pitched the show and is one of the producers. She very well likely knew what would be coming. IMO her 'counter point' was contrived to say 'hey we WERE balanced' after all.

Just plain disgusting. 

They should be ashamed.


----------



## Cara

I understand why people are having such fun with this, but I do not find any humor in it, personally. 

Sexual violence by women on men is always treated as a big joke in the media. There was a case here in Wisconsin last year about a few women who found out the guy they thought was their exclusive mate was actually dating all of them. They lured the guy to a hotel room, bound him & tortured him which included gluing his genitels. The news here had a field day & the women recieved a slap on the wrist, as opposed to what would have happened to men who had tortured a woman.

I don't understand why sexual violence by women on men isn't taken seriously. Like the woman on the show said, nobody would be laughing if it was a man who mutilated his wife's vagina if she filed for divorce. 

I don't really have a problem with all of the joking about this situation as I assume it is rooted in peoples sexual insecurities, but I would find it facinating to hear an explanation of this inconsistancy by someone educated about the psychology involved here.


----------



## okeydokie

i seriously think this act deeply appeals to some womens sense of revenge for years of repression by men, simple as that


----------



## Catherine602

okeydokie said:


> i seriously think this act deeply appeals to some womens sense of revenge for years of repression by men, simple as that


But O the problem with this way of thinking is that individuals are attacted for the real or imagined wrongs by their group. MOST agree that it was an injustice to intern Japanese- Am during wwII. 

Logic points to the fallacy of the argument that the overwhelming majority of sex crimes are committed by men therefore all men are sexual predators. I dont know the exact stats but a very small proportion of men commit sex crimes. It is not only illogical but immoral to target an individual for wrongs by a group. 

I would not want it for me why is it OK for my fellow man. A person is either for justice and fair treatment for all or they should shut up. Thinking that justice only benefits the group that they belong to means that they side with people who are unjust to them. 

Second major point - I am re- reading "To kill a mocking bird". One of the prominent themes in the book is that if you don't practice a personal code of ethics in your life, regardless of the consequences, then your morally destitute and a fraud. The same thing here. I could not face the duplicity of posting in favor of justice for women if I laugh about injutice to men. 

It is that simple. 

Not accusing you O just making a point.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## morituri

A violent, unprovoked attack on one human being, male or female, it is an attack on ALL.


----------



## Trenton

Catherine602 said:


> But O the problem with this way of thinking is that individuals are attacted for the real or imagined wrongs by their group. MOST agree that it was an injustice to intern Japanese- Am during wwII.
> 
> Logic points to the fallacy of the argument that the overwhelming majority of sex crimes are committed by men therefore all men are sexual predators. I dont know the exact stats but a very small proportion of men commit sex crimes. It is not only illogical but immoral to target an individual for wrongs by a group.
> 
> I would not want it for me why is it OK for my fellow man. A person is either for justice and fair treatment for all or they should shut up. Thinking that justice only benefits the group that they belong to means that they side with people who are unjust to them.
> 
> Second major point - I am re- reading "To kill a mocking bird". One of the prominent themes in the book is that if you don't practice a personal code of ethics in your life, regardless of the consequences, then your morally destitute and a fraud. The same thing here. I could not face the duplicity of posting in favor of justice for women if I laugh about injutice to men.
> 
> It is that simple.
> 
> Not accusing you O just making a point.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


"And if I laugh at any mortal thing, 'Tis that I may not weep." 
Lord Byron

A personal code of ethics is nothing if all you do to warm yourself up that it exists is write to a station and tell them there is an injustice with what is being said and demand the firing of obnoxious women trying to make light of a situation that was pretty horrible. They use a woman's struggles and feelings to elicit laughter and entertain. It is done all the time.

The same is true for the image that I referred to with the ironing of the shirt statement but in reverse.

These are more statements towards the conundrum of our gender differences than they are a show of low moral standards.

So often people are confused between what is their own injustice and what is human injustice. In fact, I think it's the biggest problem humanity has.

If you want to fight to change something it's advisable to fight to change an actual injustice rather than a show of honesty and emotion masked in humor by either sex. There are plenty injustices to be had.

It reminds me of Tipper Gore and her campaign to make rock music censored for our children or Nancy Reagan's "Just Say No" campaign--futile attempts to find meaning in the ordinary and expected that completely discounted the importance of the ebb and flow of what was causing the flow to bubble up to begin with.


----------



## Entropy3000

morituri said:


> A violent, unprovoked attack on one human being, male or female, it is an attack on ALL.


Yup


----------



## Catherine602

Trenton said:


> "And if I laugh at any mortal thing, 'Tis that I may not weep."
> Lord Byron
> 
> A personal code of ethics is nothing if all you do to warm yourself up that it exists is write to a station and tell them there is an injustice with what is being said and demand the firing of obnoxious women trying to make light of a situation that was pretty horrible. They use a woman's struggles and feelings to elicit laughter and entertain. It is done all the time.
> 
> The same is true for the image that I referred to with the ironing of the shirt statement but in reverse.
> 
> These are more statements towards the conundrum of our gender differences than they are a show of low moral standards.
> 
> So often people are confused between what is their own injustice and what is human injustice. In fact, I think it's the biggest problem humanity has.
> 
> If you want to fight to change something it's advisable to fight to change an actual injustice rather than a show of honesty and emotion masked in humor by either sex. There are plenty injustices to be had.
> 
> It reminds me of Tipper Gore and her campaign to make rock music censored for our children or Nancy Reagan's "Just Say No" campaign--futile attempts to find meaning in the ordinary and expected that completely discounted the importance of the ebb and flow of what was causing the flow to bubble up to begin with.


I have no idea what this means. If I don't understand it then I doubt if more that 2 or at the most 3 people do. I think that simplicity is the product of a uncluttered mind. 

Are you saying that words alone have no power. Then why quote Byron. Only the words of dead poets have meaning and impact? History is replete with simple people who made a powerful impact on the world with words.

Rosa Parks, a black domestic worker comes to mind. No poet or person of any note. However, her "no" reverberated throughout the world. 

In fact, the very nature of the incident we are discussing demonstrates the powerful impact of words. If these women had expressed compassion for this man instead of heaping derision on him, they may have swayed the assembly of women to temper thier glee. 

Or, maybe your comments were directed to my words. If so, there is no reason for me to comment.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Kobo

It's excuse making. A male poster would be lynched by both female and male posters on this board for basically saying " they were just joking" if the roles were reversed. In fact this thread is missing a few of our favorite female posters who would have wrote 3 thesis statements and tied it back to porn before it was all said and done. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Trenton

Catherine602 said:


> I have no idea what this means. If I don't understand it then I doubt if more that 2 or at the most 3 people do. I think that simplicity is the product of a uncluttered mind.
> 
> Are you saying that words alone have no power. Then why quote Byron. Only the words of dead poets have meaning and impact? History is replete with simple people who made a powerful impact on the world with words.
> 
> Rosa Parks, a black domestic worker comes to mind. No poet or person of any note. However, her "no" reverberated throughout the world.
> 
> In fact, the very nature of the incident we are discussing demonstrates the powerful impact of words. If these women had expressed compassion for this man instead of heaping derision on him, they may have swayed the assembly of women to temper thier glee.
> 
> Or, maybe your comments were directed to my words. If so, there is no reason for me to comment.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Laughter is sometimes a way of getting out our most intense emotions. That's what I get from that quote. If the women were being honest, they were expressing their own intense emotions. Are they correct? -or- Do they need correcting? I don't think either will change the injustices you feel.

I went on to say, and I'll try again, a fierce reaction to words like this on television is more a symptom than an actual injustice. We tell kids to "Just Say No to Drugs", we tell women to not express deep feelings of resentment they feel towards men, we tell men not to express deep resentments they feel towards women. Where is the actual injustice that is causing the emotions that are leading to the symptoms?


----------



## Entropy3000

So women rejoicing in the cutting off of a man's penis is just being truthful.

Don't shoot the messenger. You guys are so hated we rejoice when just any guy has his penis cut off and thrown in the garbage disposal. Not even a rapist. Just a guy.

This is a mainstream persepctive of many if not most women?

Sweet!

The problem I have with it is that it becomes a further culture of hate that has nothing to do with injustices, but rather becomes expected behavior. A culture of hate of men from young women learning from their older mothers and sisters. Way past pitiful. Not even knowing why they hate.


----------



## Syrum

Entropy3000 said:


> So women rejoicing in the cutting off of a man's penis is just being truthful.
> 
> Don't shoot the messenger. You guys are so hated we rejoice when just any guy has his penis cut off and thrown in the garbage disposal. Not even a rapist. Just a guy.
> 
> This is a mainstream persepctive of many if not most women?
> 
> Sweet!
> 
> The problem I have with it is that it becomes a further culture of hate that has nothing to do with injustices, but rather becomes expected behavior. A culture of hate of men from young women learning from their older mothers and sisters. Way past pitiful. Not even knowing why they hate.


I really don't think so, I don't think women rejoyce in this and I personally find it revolting.

However I feel societal standards are set by men. 

I don't know too many women who weren't prayed on by men, not saying all men are bad but it takes just a few. There is still a lot of **** shaming and there is a lot of woman bashing, "what was she doing there, she deserved it " etc.

Statistically speaking if you have a daughter and she makes it to her 40's without being assualted or raped you should be amazed, and that's just really sad. the conviction rate is so low it's just a huge joke that women's issues are taken seriously.

Women are belittled and shown to be nothings all the time, and it is justified, women are just sexual objects.

I think now in this age of equality :rofl: that when some women have the chance they behave in the exact manner that was taught to them, they take it.

I don't think it's right, but I have a never supplying list of mistreatment of women. If men want change they need to demand that all people including women, be treated as people first, that all people be treated with humanity and kindness.

Don't just be outraged by the example of it happening to men, be outraged all the time.


----------



## Runs like Dog

How is this different from cases of statutory rape? Older woman, teen boy - high fives all around or at worst, hot teacher goes to jail for three years. Older man, teen girl? Headfirst into an industrial shredder. 

On the other hand though, women kill their kids in cold blood a lot more than dads do. A dad will snap and shake his baby to death or beat him or her to death in a fit of rage. Susan Smith, strapped her kids in her car, drove to a reservoir, pushed it in the water, made up a story about being carjacked and held to it ever after being convicted of double murder 30-life.

See also Darlie Routier or Diane Downs. Both women simply murdered their kids because they were an inconvenience to them. Could be psychopathic but perhaps not. Not sure about Casey Anthony whether she's a psychopath or not. She might be. I'm not sure the 'classic' definitions are useful in these cases. They killed their kids and only their kids. It could have been 'spur of the moment' or planned and plotted out. They don't appear to have a solid motive and didn't have a solid plan for getting away with it. If anything they all appear to share a delusion not about their children but about some kind of great life they could have without their kids. Why they don't just give them away though, that's the mystery. 

She's not Andrea Yates who was CLEARLY suffering from severe psychotic delusions and depression psychosis when she drowned her 5 kids. I blame her husband for that. 

And Julie Schenecker? Wow. Shoots her 13 year old son in head twice, in her minivan, drives home, gets out goes upstairs shoots her 16 year old daughter in the head from behind then in the face. Sent to the emergency ward while in prison for a 'preexisting medical condition'? Ummm I thinking organic brain disease/damage.


----------



## Syrum

Runs i think you will find that actually statistically speaking if women murder their children they are far more likely to get a harsh sentence, because juries are not kind to women who kill their children, it outrages and repulses them, more so then when men do it. Women are held to a different standard in this regard.

As for the pleading insane or using the mentally ill defense most women are advised absolutely against it, because juries almost never ever ever buy it, even when there is an absolute undoubtedly clear history of it.

As for older men being convicted in stat rape cases, conviction rates are seriously low. I have also seen some people counter with "but some girls are very sexual and they chase these guys"


----------



## Entropy3000

Syrum said:


> I really don't think so, I don't think women rejoyce in this and I personally find it revolting.
> 
> However I feel societal standards are set by men.
> 
> I don't know too many women who weren't prayed on by men, not saying all men are bad but it takes just a few. There is still a lot of **** shaming and there is a lot of woman bashing, "what was she doing there, she deserved it " etc.
> 
> Statistically speaking if you have a daughter and she makes it to her 40's without being assualted or raped you should be amazed, and that's just really sad. the conviction rate is so low it's just a huge joke that women's issues are taken seriously.
> 
> Women are belittled and shown to be nothings all the time, and it is justified, women are just sexual objects.
> 
> I think now in this age of equality :rofl: that when some women have the chance they behave in the exact manner that was taught to them, they take it.
> 
> I don't think it's right, but I have a never supplying list of mistreatment of women. If men want change they need to demand that all people including women, be treated as people first, that all people be treated with humanity and kindness.
> 
> Don't just be outraged by the example of it happening to men, be outraged all the time.


No one takes up for men. There is no outrage for men.

We are talking about a person who had their gentials cut off and thrown in a garbage disposal.


----------



## Syrum

Entropy3000 said:


> No one takes up for men. There is no outrage for men.
> 
> We are talking about a person who had their gentials cut off and thrown in a garbage disposal.


Well let's talk about how often men need taking up for and by whom.

Most men are hurt by other men statistically speaking.

Men should be outraged by that.

Men hold the balance of power in society, control the media etc...

I find people just as flippant about the suffering of women, and in fact when women's suffering is highlighted, it becomes a "what about what happens to men?" discussion.

Men need to be outraged about all suffering and set an example to society about how all people should be treated.


----------



## Entropy3000

Syrum said:


> Well let's talk about how often men need taking up for and by whom.
> 
> Most men are hurt by other men statistically speaking.
> 
> Men should be outraged by that.
> 
> Men hold the balance of power in society, control the media etc...
> 
> I find people just as flippant about the suffering of women, and in fact when women's suffering is highlighted, it becomes a "what about what happens to men?" discussion.
> 
> Men need to be outraged about all suffering and set an example to society about how all people should be treated.


No, lets not talk about statistics. Lets talk about this one man.

Human rights occur one individual at a time. This one man had his genitals cut off. He is made further fun of on a public forum. He is not a statistic. He has his own rights. You fight injustice wherever it is found. Each and every time.

There is no defense for this. There was no public show making fun of a woman being raped.

I was equally apalled when the woman in Libya was raped. You would not see me making fun of this.

This man did not deserve to have his genitals cut off because others in the world were unjust.

So lets fire the man who is responsible for this show. Who is that man? Who is the producer. It may or may not be a man. I think it would be sexist to assume it is a man.

So I need to apologize because I see a problem with this show.

Men die everyday around the world doing exactly that. In recent years more women give their lives as well. I live in the US. I rejoice in whatever freedom can be gained any where in the world. Lets give some folks some real credit for what they do to free others from oppression and the rule of men treating women badly. At least give western men some credit. Women have gained rights steadily year after year. With this hard earned equality comes further responsibility.


Hey, I am just a man. I am not multi-tasking. I am all about fixing one problem at a time. Seriously. If the video was about a woman being mutilated I would have been all over that.

And yes Syrum, I respect your opinion so no disrespect intended.


----------



## Catherine602

Syrum said:


> I really don't think so, I don't think women rejoyce in this and I personally find it revolting.
> 
> However I feel societal standards are set by men.
> 
> I don't know too many women who weren't prayed on by men, not saying all men are bad but it takes just a few. There is still a lot of **** shaming and there is a lot of woman bashing, "what was she doing there, she deserved it " etc.
> 
> Statistically speaking if you have a daughter and she makes it to her 40's without being assualted or raped you should be amazed, and that's just really sad. the conviction rate is so low it's just a huge joke that women's issues are taken seriously.
> 
> Women are belittled and shown to be nothings all the time, and it is justified, women are just sexual objects.
> 
> I think now in this age of equality :rofl: that when some women have the chance they behave in the exact manner that was taught to them, they take it.
> 
> I don't think it's right, but I have a never supplying list of mistreatment of women. If men want change they need to demand that all people including women, be treated as people first, that all people be treated with humanity and kindness.
> 
> Don't just be outraged by the example of it happening to men, be outraged all the time.


I tried to point this out in a previous post. But it got very angry responses. I did not say that the cruel attitude towards thus individual man was justufied. Someone wanted to know why so many women are apt to think this amusing and not tragic. 

I explained that every women lives in fear of being sexually assaulted, date rapped, used for sex, manipulated by preditors. Rapes and assult are so common on my campus that a task force was formed, a rape support center was formed and women can request a golf carts for travel after dark. I was tricked by a man when I was 15 yo it was devastating. 

But I still do not think it a story about mutilation of men is funny. I still don't want men or women to feel the untter sense of deep darkness and shock I felt at 15 yo. I blamed myself and wanted to die. I am certain this mans mental state is in worse than I was. I came out still able to experience sexual pleasure but he had that taken away. 

I am not watering down what this women did of sanitizing, what ever that means, it as one poster said. I am just giving an idea of some of the things that effect us that's all. Not demonizing men as a group. A man saved my life, my husband. That makes me love men - a woman can always find a good man who loves and offers his love to heal, if she is smart she will let him. . some women are not so smart.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Entropy3000

You know what?

This topic has actually been a very good one in my opinion. Anytime we get this lively a discussion of passionate replies I think it is a good thing. 

I am guilty as anyone in talking past other folks. No one here is making fun of this guy. I think folks are trying to explain why the current environment is fertile for this show to be the way it was.
Many of us were asking why and are shooting the messenger.

Ok, fine. I hear what is being said. Really. I do think this show is a symptom of greater problems. Maybe that is all anyone is saying. 

As a guy I think the show is F'd up and they should be called on it.

It is not freakin funny. Neither are the other horrible things that happen all over the globe countless times a day.


----------



## Entropy3000

Runs like Dog said:


> How is this different from cases of statutory rape? Older woman, teen boy - high fives all around or at worst, hot teacher goes to jail for three years. Older man, teen girl? Headfirst into an industrial shredder.
> 
> On the other hand though, women kill their kids in cold blood a lot more than dads do. A dad will snap and shake his baby to death or beat him or her to death in a fit of rage. Susan Smith, strapped her kids in her car, drove to a reservoir, pushed it in the water, made up a story about being carjacked and held to it ever after being convicted of double murder 30-life.
> 
> See also Darlie Routier or Diane Downs. Both women simply murdered their kids because they were an inconvenience to them. Could be psychopathic but perhaps not. Not sure about Casey Anthony whether she's a psychopath or not. She might be. I'm not sure the 'classic' definitions are useful in these cases. They killed their kids and only their kids. It could have been 'spur of the moment' or planned and plotted out. They don't appear to have a solid motive and didn't have a solid plan for getting away with it. If anything they all appear to share a delusion not about their children but about some kind of great life they could have without their kids. Why they don't just give them away though, that's the mystery.
> 
> She's not Andrea Yates who was CLEARLY suffering from severe psychotic delusions and depression psychosis when she drowned her 5 kids. I blame her husband for that.
> 
> And Julie Schenecker? Wow. Shoots her 13 year old son in head twice, in her minivan, drives home, gets out goes upstairs shoots her 16 year old daughter in the head from behind then in the face. Sent to the emergency ward while in prison for a 'preexisting medical condition'? Ummm I thinking organic brain disease/damage.


All of those are tragic and not at all funny.


----------



## morituri

Syrum said:


> Runs i think you will find that actually statistically speaking if women murder their children they are far more likely to get a harsh sentence, because juries are not kind to women who kill their children, it outrages and repulses them, more so then when men do it. Women are held to a different standard in this regard.
> 
> As for the pleading insane or using the mentally ill defense most women are advised absolutely against it, because juries almost never ever ever buy it, even when there is an absolute undoubtedly clear history of it.
> 
> As for older men being convicted in stat rape cases, conviction rates are seriously low. I have also seen some people counter with "but some girls are very sexual and they chase these guys"


I think you're wrong about that statistically speaking women are dealt harsher than men when it comes to heinous crimes.



> 2001 study by David Mustard, of the University of Georgia, called “Racial, Ethnic and Gender Disparities in Sentencing: Evidence from the US Federal Courts.” ((The Journal of Law and Economics, vol. 44, no. 1, pages 285-314. Pdf link.)) Mustard’s study appears better-designed than other sentencing studies I’ve read. His sample is large and comprehensive: he essentially includes every federal sentence handed down for three consecutive years (1991 through 1993) in his analysis. Rather than focusing only on sex or on race, he simultaneously controls for the effects of race, sex, U.S. citizenship, and class on federal sentencing. (Legally, none of those four factors are supposed to have an effect on what sentence a judge hands down.)
> 
> The results aren’t pretty. Especially for drug crimes and for bank robberies, being white is a big advantage if you’re being sentenced for a federal crime:
> 
> Bank robbery and drug trafficking exhibit the largest black-white differentials. Blacks receive 9.4 and 10.5 months longer than whites in bank robbery and drug trafficking, respectively. The percentage difference is greatest for those convicted of drug trafficking, where blacks are assigned sentences 13.7 percent longer than whites. The aggregate Hispanic-white difference is driven primarily by those convicted of drug trafficking and firearm possession/trafficking, the only two crimes with significant Hispanic coefficients. For these two crimes, Hispanics receive 6.1 and 3.7 additional months compared to whites, or 8.0 percent and 7.0 percent longer in percentage terms.
> 
> Note that Mustard’s analysis only compared felons who were convicted for the same crime. So the above sentencing disparities do not include the infamous disparities caused by the much harsher sentences given for crack cocaine possession (usually a Black crime) than for powder cocaine possession (usually a white crime).
> 
> *Being a woman is an even larger advantage for bank robbers*:
> 
> The female-male difference is statistically significant for all six categories, the largest of which is for bank robbery, where females receive 21.6 months less than males.
> 
> Although the bank robbery differential was largest, women received a break on sentencing compared to men across the board. ((Mustard’s report didn’t include a discussion of the death penalty, but it appears that women are less likely to receive the death penalty than similarly-situated men. See, for example, Victor L. Streib (2006), *“Rare and Inconsistent: The Death Penalty For Women,”* Fordham Urban Law Journal, Vol 33 pp 609.))
> 
> I was particularly surprised that controlling for dependents didn’t significantly alter the male/female difference – so the sentencing disparity is apparently not being caused by judges taking mercy on single mother defendants.
> 
> Class made a significant difference, but mainly for the very poor. That is, people who earned less than $5,000 a year get fewer breaks in sentencing than people who earn more than $5,000 a year; but there doesn’t appear to be much difference in the sentences given those who earn $10,000 a year and those who earn $50,000. An exception was sentencing for fraud: “Those with incomes greater than $50,000 receive significantly shorten sentences for fraud.”
> 
> Finally, being a U.S. citizen leads to lighter sentencing across the board.
> 
> Having no high school diploma resulted in an additional sentence of 1.2 months. Income had a significant impact on the sentence length. Offenders with incomes of less than $5,000 were sentenced most harshly. This group received sentences 6.2 months longer than people who had incomes between $25,000 and $35,000. Those with U.S. citizenship receive lower sentences by about 1.7 months, perhaps because they take advantage of their greater knowledge about the court systems and legal representation. Age is positively related to the sentence length. [...]
> 
> The income and education results could be generated if people with higher levels of education and income use their resources to obtain more favorable sentences. However, if offenders utilize education and income to reduce their sentences, the impact is limited. The marginal productivity of income in hiring legal resources diminishes quickly after income hits a minimum threshold, because individuals with the highest incomes do not receive reductions in sentence length.
> 
> According to Mustard’s analysis, most of the sentencing disparities are caused by judges departing from the official sentencing guidelines; when judges decide to take mercy on a felon and offer a very light sentence – or to not sentence the felon to prison at all – they are significantly more likely to do so if the felon is not poor, is white, is female, and is a U.S. citizen.
> 
> Another study, by Max Schanzenbach of the Northwestern University School of Law, ((Max M. Schanzenbach, “Racial and Gender Disparities in Prison Sentences: The Effect of District-Level Judicial Demographics” (April 2004). American Law & Economics Association Annual Meetings. American Law & Economics Association 14th Annual Meeting. Working Paper 4. Pdf link.)) looked at sex disparities in sentencing according to the sex of the judge. He found that, for serious crimes, female judges did not give harsher sentences to men, but male judges did:
> 
> The greater the percentage of female judges on a district’s bench, the smaller the gender disparity. These results are hard to square with the suggestion that unobserved accomplice status or blameworthiness is behind the gender disparity. At the very least, male and female judges view the dangerousness, accomplice status, or blameworthiness of female offenders differently.
> 
> The female offender/percent female judge effects [...] were not evident at all in the category of less serious crimes. (There was some evidence in the case of less serious crimes that more Democratic districts treated men and women alike when granting downward departures.) However, paternalistic views about the dangerousness or blameworthiness of female offenders may well be most evident in the case of serious crimes.
> 
> Schanzenbach also found that racial and ethnic disparities were only slightly decreased, or not decreased at all, in districts with more black and hispanic judges. However, he argues that this finding does not prove a lack of racial and ethnic bias in sentencing, only that if such bias exists, it’s not dependent on the race or ethnicity of the judge.


And the following is of interest as well:



> *Defendant's gender affects length of sentence*
> 
> A study of 300 simulated court cases shows that experienced judges, jury members, prosecutors, police officers, and lawyers make decisions and convict defendants differently depending on whether they are men or women and what the defendant looks like. Eyewitnesses to crimes are also affected by these factors. This is especially pronounced if there is an extended period of time separating the crime and the testimony. This is what Angela S. Ahola, Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, shows in her dissertation.
> 
> In her study of simulated short criminal cases, Angela S. Ahola shows that gender and appearance affect our judgments of personality, occupation, morals, and reliability and create a frame of reference for our behavior. Among other things, it was shown that judges and lay assessors both assessed and judged accused individuals of the same gender as themselves more severely than the opposite gender. On the other hand, prosecutors, lawyers, police officers, and law students, regardless of their own gender, evaluated male defendants more harshly than women defendants. What's more, among female members of this category, that is, those without a convicting role in the legal process, differences were seen in their evaluations depending on the looks of the accused.
> 
> "Most people have a need to get some conception of people they meet in everyday life. This is normal in everyday life. But if the same preconceptions, or so-called harmless everyday conceptions, play a role in the system of justice, this means that people are not equal before the law. In that case, we lose part of the fundamental security that a functioning rule-of-law society provides," says Angela S. Ahola.
> 
> Angela S. Ahola also demonstrates that it is not only people within the justice system that are affected. A study of eyewitnesses to a fictive crime shows that male perpetrators are judged more severely than equally violent female perpetrators. If two weeks goes by after the witnessing of the crime, gender plays an even greater role. A man will be judged even more sternly than a woman, which means that when our memory does not serve, we tend to remember more in accordance with the image, or stereotype, we have in our minds.
> 
> Photographic evidence also turned out to have a reinforcing effect in judgments. In the part of the study where psychology students were asked to play the role of lay assessors and judges, perpetrators accused of murder or arson were judged more harshly if the evidence was illustrated by crime victim injury photographs. Angela S. Ahola maintains that these findings may be of importance regarding whether photographic evidence should be used in court, considering what an impact it can have.
> 
> "With these findings, the dissertation can be of practical use for our understanding of how the Swedish (and/or other countries) system of justice can be affected as regards witness testimony, assessment of evidence, and sentencing," says Angela S. Ahola.
> 
> Title of dissertation: Justice needs a blindfold: Effects of defendants' gender and attractiveness on judicial evaluation. The dissertation is available for download as a PDF at urn:nbn:se:su:diva-38639: Justice needs a blindfold : Effects of defendants.


----------



## Catherine602

I guess we can go round and round playing out grievances like Dueling Banjos parallel musical cords. . 

Always separate cords with no harmonizing culmination. Unnerving. 

@ Entrophy how can you say that there is not one to stick up for men? Read over the thread again and you tell me. When support is not ackowledged it makes me feel hopeless, defeated and confused. Why is the sympathy expressed by some of the female posters ignored? A gracious acceptance would go a long way for me. My love language is words of affirmation - not begging - just saying. 

Do you think that any positive expression by women is meant to placate and erase all grievances. I can assure you that a few words of support can't do that. 

Tell me what you need to hear to make you sure that there are many women who cringe at this evil?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## morituri

Catherine,

I think what irked me were that some of the 'supportive' comments by some of the women members here came of sounding insincere because they always had the 'but men do....' added to them. It's like an apology where the person offering it is also adding 'but...' which is no apology at all.

It's bad enough that there is so much inhumanity among men but when women also display that kind of inhumanity, the human race's worthiness to exist comes seriously into question.


----------



## Catherine602

morituri said:


> Catherine,
> 
> I think what irked me were that some of the 'supportive' comments by some of the women members here came of sounding insincere because they always had the 'but men do....' added to them. It's like an apology where the person offering it is also adding 'but...' which is no apology at all.
> 
> It's bad enough that there is so much inhumanity among men but when women also display that kind of inhumanity, the human race's worthiness to exist comes seriously into question.


I see what you mean. Yes I agree. It's like offering a false apology amounts to nothing, giving with one hand and taking away with the other. Almost better to have said nothing. 

My husband said something similar to what you are saying. Women are symbolically the caretakers and the softening influence on male raw energy. What happens if both genders are hardcore? 

Now I am talking about the archetypal male energy as in building, creating, directing, and competion Vs. archetypal female soft energy. We are a team- nothing gets done without combined complementary energy. 

All is not doom and gloom if this insenitive response stirs these feelings in people on TAM then it is happening all over. There will be a tipping point. Seems like nothing is happening but it's like a lever - need enough force to get things going and when it starts it's like an avalanche. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## AFEH

Catherine602 said:


> I see what you mean. Yes I agree. It's like offering a false apology amounts to nothing, giving with one hand and taking away with the other. Almost better to have said nothing. _Posted via Mobile Device_


You’ve got it, well said Catherine.


----------



## Entropy3000

Catherine602 said:


> I guess we can go round and round playing out grievances like Dueling Banjos parallel musical cords. .
> 
> Always separate cords with no harmonizing culmination. Unnerving.
> 
> @ Entrophy how can you say that there is not one to stick up for men? Read over the thread again and you tell me. When support is not ackowledged it makes me feel hopeless, defeated and confused. Why is the sympathy expressed by some of the female posters ignored? A gracious acceptance would go a long way for me. My love language is words of affirmation - not begging - just saying.
> 
> Do you think that any positive expression by women is meant to placate and erase all grievances. I can assure you that a few words of support can't do that.
> 
> Tell me what you need to hear to make you sure that there are many women who cringe at this evil?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


No, no, no. I did not mean on this forum. I thought you have been quite eloquent for sure. I meant in our culture, that it seems it is not PC to worry about men any more. Men are passe. And yes I puprosely over stated my case.

Sorry, I was not clear. I hate when I do that.


----------



## Entropy3000

Catherine602 said:


> I see what you mean. Yes I agree. It's like offering a false apology amounts to nothing, giving with one hand and taking away with the other. Almost better to have said nothing.
> 
> My husband said something similar to what you are saying. Women are symbolically the caretakers and the softening influence on male raw energy. What happens if both genders are hardcore?
> 
> Now I am talking about the archetypal male energy as in building, creating, directing, and competion Vs. archetypal female soft energy. *We are a team- nothing gets done without combined complementary energy.
> *
> All is not doom and gloom if this insenitive response stirs these feelings in people on TAM then it is happening all over. There will be a tipping point. Seems like nothing is happening but it's like a lever - need enough force  to get things going and when it starts it's like an avalanche.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


OMG. I grok!! Well said dear lady. This is at my center. I truly believe this has to be the case.


----------



## MisguidedMiscreant

These "women" should all be fired or, better yet, sent to sensitivity training. This is a human issue but, if feminists want actual men(not the manginas that they've whipped into lapdogs) to see things their way, they have to see it ours or we'll continue to go our own way. Respect is a two way street. I would call for a person's head if he did mutilate anyone's body or the person that was laughing about it on television. This is why things have become progressively worse between men and women and western society. Think about a young man that sees things like this in the media, he's either going to develop a lack of self worth or a great deal of resentment that may develop into hatred towards women. Neither is a great outcome for society.


----------



## Kobo

Syrum said:


> I really don't think so, I don't think women rejoyce in this and I personally find it revolting.
> 
> However I feel societal standards are set by men.
> 
> I don't know too many women who weren't prayed on by men, not saying all men are bad but it takes just a few. There is still a lot of **** shaming and there is a lot of woman bashing, "what was she doing there, she deserved it " etc.
> 
> Statistically speaking if you have a daughter and she makes it to her 40's without being assualted or raped you should be amazed, and that's just really sad. the conviction rate is so low it's just a huge joke that women's issues are taken seriously.
> 
> Women are belittled and shown to be nothings all the time, and it is justified, women are just sexual objects.
> 
> I think now in this age of equality :rofl: that when some women have the chance they behave in the exact manner that was taught to them, they take it.
> 
> I don't think it's right, but I have a never supplying list of mistreatment of women. If men want change they need to demand that all people including women, be treated as people first, that all people be treated with humanity and kindness.
> 
> Don't just be outraged by the example of it happening to men, be outraged all the time.



First, I'm sorry but if this is how you see your plight in life you must have a lot of pain going on. 

From what I see in my day to day life woman are making great strides forward. My last 2 supervisors have been female. My wife is about to receive a huge promotion. I see women opening businesses, leading households, graduating college at increasing rate, and getting Masters degrees at a rate that I believe has surpassed men. 

As a Black man I can sit here and say look at all the crap we've put up with througout the years in the US (Slavery, Jim Crow, Lynching, Unable to vote, Manditory minimums for crimes likely to be commited by Blacks, etc) or I can see that I'm a 3 time homeowner, have been employed since 18, Make more than 80% of population, Married for 12 years, Have 2 children that are doing great in school, live in the number 1 school district in my state, and I'm surrounded by a bunch of people that look like me and are doing as well or better. Now which one of these views helps me to move forward and which one holds me back?


Second, the question isn't regarding the violence it is about the reaction of women on stage and in the audience of this show. What is your stance on their reaction and what would your stance be if genders on the show were reversed.


----------



## Syrum

I think my point was totally missed. My point was that it is a terrible reaction and not "Look at all the bad things that have happened to women" more "this may be why they react that way"

Moreover I don't feel as a woman I am currently being held back, (however many factors do ensure certain things are not available to me or may be more likely to happen to me) that's not even what this discussion is about, however the reality for most women is very different to the one you describe.


----------



## Trenton

Ridiculous.

I know, why don't we all get on a bus/plane and stalk Casey Anthony and tell her what an evil person she is while we're at it. Let's see if that changes things...

Keep focusing on the symptoms rather than the problem. Hey, it's a helluva lot easier and will always help you justify your anger and feel comfortable in your beliefs.

If you think it will prevent a culture of hate, errrr. OK.


----------



## morituri

Trenton said:


> Ridiculous.
> 
> I know, why don't we all get on a bus/plane and stalk Casey Anthony and tell her what an evil person she is while we're at it. Let's see if that changes things...


I think that there are enough enraged people already looking for her to gun her down. So I think I'll just sit myself down with a cool drink and just watch the tube for news of someone doing an 'Osama Bin Laden' on her. Should be great seeing her bullet riddled body all over the tube so we can laugh at it like those cackling hens from the 'Talk'.

:gun: Casey Anthony



> Keep focusing on the symptoms rather than the problem. Hey, it's a helluva lot easier and will always help you justify your anger and feel comfortable in your beliefs.
> 
> If you think it will prevent a culture of hate, errrr. OK.


Don't worry, the matriarchy is coming soon to replace the evil patriarchy. The chopping of men's penises will become a constitutional right for every woman. :woohoo:


----------



## Kobo

Trenton said:


> Ridiculous.
> 
> I know, why don't we all get on a bus/plane and stalk Casey Anthony and tell her what an evil person she is while we're at it. Let's see if that changes things...
> 
> Keep focusing on the symptoms rather than the problem. Hey, it's a helluva lot easier and will always help you justify your anger and feel comfortable in your beliefs.
> 
> If you think it will prevent a culture of hate, errrr. OK.


Didn't know there was a talk show making fun of Caylee Anthony's death and saying it's "fabulous" or that they could think of a justifiable reason for it. Oh my bad just another attempted excuse for the observed behavior in the link.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

I was going to stay out of this but this fever pitch is getting ridiculous. This isn't the "matriarchy" or "feminists" or any other group you want to blame. This was a nutjob who permanently injured her husband and she deserves whatever is coming to her.
Let's stop the bs of gender wars and whatever path this thread is going down. Jesus.


----------



## Kobo

Syrum said:


> I think my point was totally missed. My point was that it is a terrible reaction and not "Look at all the bad things that have happened to women" more "this may be why they react that way"
> 
> Moreover I don't feel as a woman I am currently being held back, (however many factors do ensure certain things are not available to me or may be more likely to happen to me) that's not even what this discussion is about, however the reality for most women is very different to the one you describe.



No it's not what this discussion is about but its what you attempted to creep into the discussion. 



Syrum said:


> "I don't know too many women who weren't prayed on by men, not saying all men are bad but it takes just a few. There is still a lot of **** shaming and there is a lot of woman bashing, "what was she doing there, she deserved it " etc.
> 
> Statistically speaking if you have a daughter and she makes it to her 40's without being assualted or raped you should be amazed, and that's just really sad. the conviction rate is so low it's just a huge joke that women's issues are taken seriously.
> 
> Women are belittled and shown to be nothings all the time, and it is justified, women are just sexual objects."
> 
> 
> Syrum said:
> 
> 
> 
> The question is what if the gendors were reversed. I still haven't seen you answer that but maybe I missed it.
Click to expand...


----------



## Kobo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> I was going to stay out of this but this fever pitch is getting ridiculous. This isn't the "matriarchy" or "feminists" or any other group you want to blame. This was a nutjob who permanently injured her husband and she deserves whatever is coming to her.
> Let's stop the bs of gender wars and whatever path this thread is going down. Jesus.


Nope. The post is about what would happen if the gendor roles were reversed and men were talking on a talk show about a woman that got her genetalia butchered. The bs gender wars wouldn't start if people answered the original point truthfully instead of trying to reason as to why the woman felt the reaction was a good one or whether or not men attack women more than the other way around.


----------



## Trenton

Kobo said:


> Didn't know there was a talk show making fun of Caylee Anthony's death and saying it's "fabulous" or that they could think of a justifiable reason for it. Oh my bad just another attempted excuse for the observed behavior in the link.


My point is that addressing complex needs of single parents or emotional problems faced by those going through a divorce is a better solution than crucifying the rare and heinous acts of a handful of extreme, horrifying crimes (man or woman).

Did the women on that show address complex needs? No. Because it's not what the mobs of people want. They want to talk about these issues and have an outlet to gain comfort/outrage or any other emotion for _their _ own long held beliefs/issues.


----------



## Trenton

Kobo said:


> Nope. The post is about what would happen if the gendor roles were reversed and men were talking on a talk show about a woman that got her genetalia butchered. The bs gender wars wouldn't start if people answered the original point truthfully instead of trying to reason as to why the woman felt the reaction was a good one or whether or not men attack women more than the other way around.


That show wouldn't happen because abuse to women is common place. This IS a story because it RARELY happens.

The bs gender wars wouldn't start if you began to look at women as people instead of bitter pussies walking around with the sole intent of chopping your penis off.


----------



## Kobo

Trenton said:


> That show wouldn't happen because abuse to women is common place. This IS a story because it RARELY happens.
> 
> The bs gender wars wouldn't start if you began to look at women as people instead of bitter pussies walking around with the sole intent of chopping your penis off.


Once again, What would happen if the gendor roles on the show were reversed? If you won't answer the question then say you won't.


----------



## Lon

Trenton said:


> That show wouldn't happen because abuse to women is common place. This IS a story because it RARELY happens.
> 
> The bs gender wars wouldn't start if you began to look at women as people instead of bitter pussies walking around with the sole intent of chopping your penis off.


I say bull. This is a story because the producers of the show thought it's outrageous and funny that a man got his penis chopped off and destroyed, and think its a hilarious justification for crossing a psycho woman.


----------



## Lon

Once again, they found an easy target for the entertainment industry to dehumanize.


----------



## Trenton

Kobo said:


> Once again, What would happen if the gendor roles on the show were reversed? If you won't answer the question then say you won't.


I did answer the question. You don't like the answer.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Role reversal? You think if a woman got her breasts chopped off by her husband that Howard Stern wouldn't make some comment about getting "better" implants. Or Opie and Anthony wouldn't be all over it? 
So as a woman, would it be acceptable for me to hold those three men responsible for all men and lump them in as all being the same, thinking the same and acting the same? The "patriarchy" if you will.
No. For the same reason those moronic women don't represent me and my beliefs.
But no, let's turn this in to something uglier than it already is.


----------



## Kobo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Role reversal? You think if a woman got her breasts chopped off by her husband that Howard Stern wouldn't make some comment about getting "better" implants. Or Opie and Anthony wouldn't be all over it?
> So as a woman, would it be acceptable for me to hold those three men responsible for all men and lump them in as all being the same, thinking the same and acting the same? The "patriarchy" if you will.
> No. For the same reason those moronic women don't represent me and my beliefs.
> But no, let's turn this in to something uglier than it already is.


I don't know. Did they? 

I'm not holding anyone responsible for anything. I am asking the question: What would the response be if the gender roles were reversed the show. The answer to that question requires no more than 2 sentences at the most. You're making it harder than it has to be.


----------



## Kobo

Trenton said:


> I did answer the question. You don't like the answer.


I take that as "I won't answer the question but will continue to talk around it". Thanks


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Kobo said:


> I don't know. Did they?
> 
> I'm not holding anyone responsible for anything. I am asking the question: What would the response be if the gender roles were reversed the show. The answer to that question requires no more than 2 sentences at the most. You're making it harder than it has to be.


If it was reversed, it would be treated the same way. Mocked by a select few idiots and crucified by the rest. The Julie Chen's and Howard Stern's of the world appeal to the lowest common denominator. Rational people look at this for what it is and don't use it as a punchline in jokes.


----------



## Deejo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Role reversal? You think if a woman got her breasts chopped off by her husband that Howard Stern wouldn't make some comment about getting "better" implants. Or Opie and Anthony wouldn't be all over it?
> So as a woman, would it be acceptable for me to hold those three men responsible for all men and lump them in as all being the same, thinking the same and acting the same? The "patriarchy" if you will.
> No. For the same reason those moronic women don't represent me and my beliefs.
> But no, let's turn this in to something uglier than it already is.


Both broadcasters you cite have been censured, fined, or fired for exactly the reasons being discussed.

The question is STILL quite simple ... do you believe this panel of women should be held to the same standard, as their male counterparts, who would be punished, or was the nature of their discussion 'acceptable'?


----------



## morituri

Kobo,

Did you ever watch the show 'Taxi' from the late 70's?

If you do, do you remember the episode where Reverend Jim (Christopher Lloyd) needed to get his taxi driver's license and accompanied by his fellow cabies to 'help' him to pass the writtent test?

He got stuck on the question 'What does the yellow light mean?' and his fellow cabies answered back 'slow down'. Reverend Jim repeated the question slowly 'whhhaaatt dooeess thhheee yeeellllow liiight meeaaan?' and the cabies once more gave him the answer 'slow down'.

Well it seems that when it comes to your question, Trenton is Reverend Jim:rofl:


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Deejo said:


> Both broadcasters you cite have been censured, fined, or fired for exactly the reasons being discussed.
> 
> The question is STILL quite simple ... do you believe this panel of women should be held to the same standard, as their male counterparts, who would be punished, or was the nature of their discussion 'acceptable'?


They have been censured and fined but not fired. You are talking Imus and that was racial.
YES, they should be fined/censured and/or fired! Do you think any of those morons will be? Hell, Chen is married to Moonves. That's what makes it even more disturbing. The "protection" if you will. Same as how Sirius protects Stern.


----------



## Kobo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> If it was reversed, it would be treated the same way. Mocked by a select few idiots and crucified by the rest. The Julie Chen's and Howard Stern's of the world appeal to the lowest common denominator. Rational people look at this for what it is and don't use it as a punchline in jokes.


Thank you for answering. I disagree. They would be suspended and then fined. 

There is no crucification in this case. In the reverse, Women's rights groups would use it as an example of men not taking violence against women seriously and so on. I'm still waiting on the follow up news story. I see a yahoo answers post, a reddit post, and a couple of other things. I'll search again tonight.


----------



## Kobo

morituri said:


> Kobo,
> 
> Did you ever watch the show 'Taxi' from the late 70's?
> 
> If you do, do you remember the episode where Reverend Jim (Christopher Lloyd) needed to get his taxi driver's license and accompanied by his fellow cabies to 'help' him to pass the writtent test?
> 
> He got stuck on the question 'What does the yellow light mean?' and his fellow cabies answered back 'slow down'. Reverend Jim repeated the question slowly 'whhhaaatt dooeess thhheee yeeellllow liiight meeaaan?' and the cabies once more gave him the answer 'slow down'.
> 
> Well it seems that when it comes to your question, Trenton is Reverend Jim:rofl:



Didn't see that episode but this thread is just another example of how we communicate or better yet don't communicate at times.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Kobo said:


> Thank you for answering. I disagree. They would be suspended and then fined.
> 
> There is no crucification in this case. In the reverse, Women's rights groups would use it as an example of men not taking violence against women seriously and so on. I'm still waiting on the follow up news story. I see a yahoo answers post, a reddit post, and a couple of other things. I'll search again tonight.


They already charged her with among other things, aggrevated mayhem which carries a life sentence. She is being crucified and rightfully so. 
All you want to do is stir the pot and not see it for what it is. A heinous crime that is being universally condemned.


----------



## Deejo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> They have been censured and fined but not fired. You are talking Imus and that was racial.
> YES, they should be fined/censured and/or fired! Do you think any of those morons will be? Hell, Chen is married to Moonves. That's what makes it even more disturbing. The "protection" if you will. Same as how Sirius protects Stern.


Opie and Anthony were fired, from both the Boston and New York markets.
They were suspended for 30 days from XM. In response, XM subscribers, unsubscribed ... in droves. 

I don't listen to Stern, and never listened to O&A when they were local.

Stern has been fined repeatedly.

If 'The Talk' is making money? Ain't nuthin gonna happen. If it isn't and they want to dump the hostess' contracts? The network will appalled, and act accordingly.

Ed Schultz was suspended for calling conservative talk show host, Laura Ingraham a 's1ut'. 

And that's the way it should be.


This isn't about a holistic approach to resolving gender issues of value and respect. It's about consequences, and recognizing that when gender issues of value and respect are flagrantly disregarded in broadcasting ... consequences should follow.


----------



## Sennik

Kobo said:


> Thank you for answering. I disagree. They would be suspended and then fined.
> 
> There is no crucification in this case. In the reverse, Women's rights groups would use it as an example of men not taking violence against women seriously and so on. I'm still waiting on the follow up news story. I see a yahoo answers post, a reddit post, and a couple of other things. I'll search again tonight.


EXACTLY :iagree:

The media establishment appears to be acting as a protection too. CBS has already pulled that episode from their streaming list (but left the rest). The biggest media 'bleep' I have seen with regard to outrage is a blog on the Washington Post. Not exactly earth shattering.

Hell, the Gilbert Gottfried AFLAC firing got more first page mentions on MSM websites than this. 

What *should* be happening is apologies from the network, the hosts and firing(s) and better MSM coverage.

What we are getting instead is silence from CBS, sweeping it under the rug reporting wise, and continued blathering by the same dimwits with no consequences.

Disclaimer: If CBS does the right thing I'd be more than happy to give them props, but I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## Runs like Dog

None the less; underage boy + teacher, someone's mom, etc. usually results in a minor infraction unless drugs or alcohol were involved. Other way around, it's the tumbrel cart and the national razor.


----------



## Entropy3000

Trenton said:


> Ridiculous.
> 
> I know, why don't we all get on a bus/plane and stalk Casey Anthony and tell her what an evil person she is while we're at it. Let's see if that changes things...
> 
> Keep focusing on the symptoms rather than the problem. Hey, it's a helluva lot easier and will always help you justify your anger and feel comfortable in your beliefs.
> 
> If you think it will prevent a culture of hate, errrr. OK.


I would be all over anyone making fun of the childs murder.

If someone was laughing about a small child in a garbage bag. That should not be accepted.


----------



## Entropy3000

Runs like Dog said:


> None the less; underage boy + teacher, someone's mom, etc. usually results in a minor infraction unless drugs or alcohol were involved. Other way around, it's the tumbrel cart and the national razor.


Yes


----------



## Sennik

Therealbrighteyes said:


> They already charged her with among other things, aggrevated mayhem which carries a life sentence. She is being crucified and rightfully so.
> All you want to do is stir the pot and not see it for what it is. A heinous crime that is being universally condemned.


We are not talking about what the legal establishment is doing to her. 

We are talking about the double standard of how insensitive remarks over the public airwaves are dealt with.


----------



## Kobo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> They already charged her with among other things, aggrevated mayhem which carries a life sentence. She is being crucified and rightfully so.
> All you want to do is stir the pot and not see it for what it is. A heinous crime that is being universally condemned.


I am speaking about the show and it's host not being crucified, Not the attacker. Stir what pot? This thread was posted in the Men's Clubhouse. If I wanted to stir the pot I would have posted in the Ladies lounge or at the very least the General relationships forum. Stiring the Pot is Trenton coming to the Men's Clubhouse and postiing about "The Biology Excuse".


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Deejo said:


> Opie and Anthony were fired, from both the Boston and New York markets.
> They were suspended for 30 days from XM. In response, XM subscribers, unsubscribed ... in droves.
> 
> I don't listen to Stern, and never listened to O&A when they were local.
> 
> Stern has been fined repeatedly.
> 
> If 'The Talk' is making money? Ain't nuthin gonna happen. If it isn't and they want to dump the hostess' contracts? The network will appalled, and act accordingly.
> 
> Ed Schultz was suspended for calling conservative talk show host, Laura Ingraham a 's1ut'.
> 
> And that's the way it should be.
> 
> 
> This isn't about a holistic approach to resolving gender issues of value and respect. It's about consequences, and recognizing that when gender issues of value and respect are flagrantly disregarded in broadcasting ... consequences should follow.


They were fired because they encouraged a couple to have sex in church not because of any stunts they pulled regarding women. I'm not arguing with you here. These wenches SHOULD be fired/fined/sanctioned just as Opie and Anthony, Stern, Imus, et al should be.
Why do I feel like I am being attacked? I never said these chicks didn't deserve all that is coming to them! I said they won't get it because Chen is married to meglomaniac Les Moonves who is wringing his hands and delighting with glee that everybody is talking about this. He is the firm believer that any publicity is good publicity.
Wanna hurt him where it counts? Stop watching anything on CBS. Wanna hurt ABC for footing the bill for Casey Anthony's defense...stop watching ABC.
Nope, instead the best course of action is to spend 8 pages talking about this.


----------



## Entropy3000

Kobo said:


> Nope. The post is about what would happen if the gendor roles were reversed and men were talking on a talk show about a woman that got her genetalia butchered. The bs gender wars wouldn't start if people answered the original point truthfully instead of trying to reason as to why the woman felt the reaction was a good one or whether or not men attack women more than the other way around.


One or more of these men would be fired and would be shamed for a long time to come. Their careers would be in jeopardy. There would be apologies from every where.

SPONSORS would force the issue.

Actually I think the real accountability is on the producer of this episode.


----------



## Grayson

Times like this, it can be difficult to be a proponent of the First Amendment.

Do the panel and audience of the show have the right to be horribly, innapropriately tasteless? Yes, they do. Does that mean that everyone (or even a majority) will agree or even like what they say? No.

If the roles were reversed, though, I agree. If that men's version of The View with **** Clark - The Other Side - were still on the air, a woman was mutilated, and the panel and audience were making light of it, there most certainly would be a tremendous backlash against them.

I wouldn't say that, in either scenario, fines and censures would necessarily be called for. They'd be well within their rights to espouse unpopular speech. I may hate what they said and how they said it, but they shouldn't be penalized for exercising their Constitutional rights unless doing so violated the law or punishable guidelines that they agreed to.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## 4sure

These women laughing and joking are sickening. I couldn't watch the whole clip, had to turn it off. 

I wonder if Sharon would find it funny if some woman cut her sons penis off.

Something is wrong with you if you get mad enough to think about mutilating a man in this way. I have been mad with men before, but it has never entered my mind to do something like this.

And yes if a group of men were laughing, and joking about a man smacking a woman around all he!! would break out. In fact Sharon was so upset, and said bad things about Chris Brown when he beat Rihanna. Quote her "what he (Chris) did is unacceptable." But she thinks it's acceptable for this woman to cut her mans penis off, because he filed for divorce.


----------



## CoffeeTime

If roles were reversed, the male cast would be fired. I certainly do not find it funny now but I did laugh when I heard about Bobbitt after I heard about his abuse. It doesn't make it right, abuse by either gender. The story was so shocking at the time (Bobbitt) and to me it was a dark, symbolic irony that a woman tried to cut off a penis to hurt a man the most. Just as men have used their penis to hurt women by cheating, rape, child abandonment etc. Perhaps at the time I did feel less inclined to be empathic while still reeling with my own hurts and loss of my sense of worth caused by men. I am able to feel differently now then in my youth and rather now see this act as truly barbaric and senseless. Just like I see child abandonment and rape being barbaric as well and just as damaging to the mind, soul and body. It does not matter what gender someone is, abuse and mutilation are horrible to endure.


----------



## Entropy3000

Grayson said:


> Times like this, it can be difficult to be a proponent of the First Amendment.
> 
> Do the panel and audience of the show have the right to be horribly, innapropriately tasteless? Yes, they do. Does that mean that everyone (or even a majority) will agree or even like what they say? No.
> 
> If the roles were reversed, though, I agree. If that men's version of The View with **** Clark - The Other Side - were still on the air, a woman was mutilated, and the panel and audience were making light of it, there most certainly would be a tremendous backlash against them.
> 
> I wouldn't say that, in either scenario, fines and censures would necessarily be called for. They'd be well within their rights to espouse unpopular speech. I may hate what they said and how they said it, but they shouldn't be penalized for exercising their Constitutional rights unless doing so violated the law or punishable guidelines that they agreed to.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


We don't get to say anything we want at anytime we want and get to keep our jobs.


----------



## Deejo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Why do I feel like I am being attacked?


Now THAT is a good question.

I'll tell you why. Because we have pretty much the same dynamic going on right here, as took place on 'The Talk' panel.

The conversation is being 'steered'. Disagreement and deflection looks like complicity and endorsement. 

And none of it is true.

I don't believe that any of those ladies advocate sexual mutilation. You aren't going to convince me that Holly Robinson Peete is a misandrist, particularly in light of her work with autistic kids.
Sharon Osbourne made a joke ... pertaining to an entirely different circumstance, and that was the ignition point. The others then became guilty by association in dissociating the actual act of what occurred against the black humor of what some women might imagine. They took something real, and framed it as something unreal ... and humorous. Tragedy being it was NOT unreal.

The last bit is a nod to Trenton's Byron quote. Although, Byron himself was more than a bit of a player ...


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Deejo,
The attacking part is because the way this thread has gone was indended from the get go. Give it a few more pages and the theme will be Feminists: They all want to cut off your penis. Morituri already touched on it and the "matriarchy".
These women deserve to loose their jobs and the woman who mutilated her husband deserves to spend her days in prison. People should boycott CBS and a message should be sent.
Kobo, you posted in the Men's Clubhouse because you know there are a lot of men here licking their wounds from past hurts caused by women. If you wanted to not incite, you would have posted this in the Off Topic forum. 
I'm backing out of this thread now.


----------



## Sennik

Deejo said:


> Now THAT is a good question.
> 
> I'll tell you why. Because we have pretty much the same dynamic going on right here, as took place on 'The Talk' panel.
> 
> The conversation is being 'steered'. Disagreement and deflection looks like complicity and endorsement.
> 
> And none of it is true.
> 
> I don't believe that any of those ladies advocate sexual mutilation. You aren't going to convince me that Holly Robinson Peete is a misandrist, particularly in light of her work with autistic kids.
> Sharon Osbourne made a joke ... pertaining to an entirely different circumstance, and that was the ignition point. The others then became guilty by association in dissociating the actual act of what occurred against the black humor of what some women might imagine. They took something real, and framed it as something unreal ... and humorous. Tragedy being it was NOT unreal.
> 
> The last bit is a nod to Trenton's Byron quote. Although, Byron himself was more than a bit of a player ...


Deejo, 
I'm not sure about Sharon. She had this to say to ETOnline last month...in reference to Arnold Schwarzenegger's infidelity..

'''I would have chopped his willy (penis) off. Arnie's willy would have been down the disposal unit spinning around, that's where it'd be - and I'd make her clean it up. That mop would have been wrapped around her head.'' 

Ironic that less than a month later she would be gleefully mocking just such a case.


----------



## Grayson

Entropy3000 said:


> We don't get to say anything we want at anytime we want and get to keep our jobs.


Thus the portion of my post that reads, "...unless doing so violated the law or punishable guidelines that they agreed to." What happened on the show was not the equivalent of shouting, "Fire!" in a crowded theater, no matter how tasteless it may have been. So it falls back to whether or not they violated any laws or performance/content guidelines of their employment. I think it's fair to say no laws were broken, so that just leaves their employment agreement.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Kobo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Deejo,
> Kobo, you posted in the Men's Clubhouse because you know there are a lot of men here licking their wounds from past hurts caused by women. If you wanted to not incite, you would have posted this in the Off Topic forum.
> I'm backing out of this thread now.


That is your opinion and it is incorrect. I posted in the Men's forum because this is a "men's issues" topic. The unequal punishment of men in issues like these. When you gave your answer to the original question I thanked you and disagreed. No attacking. Now when someone intentionally trys to steer the original question off its mark because they don't want to answer truthfully then I will point it out. If that's considered an attack then I'll shoulder that.


----------



## Trenton

Deejo said:


> Both broadcasters you cite have been censured, fined, or fired for exactly the reasons being discussed.
> 
> The question is STILL quite simple ... do you believe this panel of women should be held to the same standard, as their male counterparts, who would be punished, or was the nature of their discussion 'acceptable'?


Ohhhh so that's the question. I don't think any of them should be fired, meaning the guys or the gals. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.


----------



## Kobo

Now this is interesting:

Question: do you believe this panel of women should be held to the same standard, as their male counterparts, who would be punished, or was the nature of their discussion 'acceptable'?


Answer: I don't think any of them should be fired, meaning the guys or the gals. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. 


Now I would like to see who thinks the answer given is an actual answer to the question and who doesn't.


----------



## Trenton

Kobo said:


> Now this is interesting:
> 
> Question: do you believe this panel of women should be held to the same standard, as their male counterparts, who would be punished, or was the nature of their discussion 'acceptable'?
> 
> 
> Answer: I don't think any of them should be fired, meaning the guys or the gals. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
> 
> 
> Now I would like to see who thinks the answer given is an actual answer to the question and who doesn't.


I'm saying the standard is flawed so my answer is neither gender should be held to the standard.

In other words, get over yourselves and lighten up.


----------



## Entropy3000

Grayson said:


> Thus the portion of my post that reads, "...unless doing so violated the law or punishable guidelines that they agreed to." What happened on the show was not the equivalent of shouting, "Fire!" in a crowded theater, no matter how tasteless it may have been. So it falls back to whether or not they violated any laws or performance/content guidelines of their employment. I think it's fair to say no laws were broken, so that just leaves their employment agreement.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


In no way am I referring to Fire ...

People get fired for any number of reasons. Shooting their mouths off perhaps the most common reason. People sign a code of conduct when they are hired.


----------



## Kobo

Trenton said:


> I'm saying the standard is flawed so my answer is neither gender should be held to the standard.
> 
> In other words, get over yourselves and lighten up.


Yeah but that's not an answer to Deejo's question. The answer to Deejo's question is one of three things:

A. No they shouldn't be held to the same standard. 
B. Yes they should be held to the same standard. 
C. The men would not be fired

Your response answers this question:

Should people get fired for the things they say on air?


----------



## Grayson

Entropy3000 said:


> In no way am I referring to Fire ...
> 
> People get fired for any number of reasons. Shooting their mouths off perhaps the most common reason. People sign a code of conduct when they are hired.


Which is what I said.

I would certainly not be surprised, though, to learn that there's a broader sense of what's acceptable in a position such as shows like The Talk and The View, which can be classified as a commentator. If commentators were punished/fined/censured every time they said something that someone found objectionable or downright offensive, they would continually be punished/fined/censured. If one's job is to voice one's opinion, I somehow doubt that voicing an unpopular opinion, in and of itself, is actionable. Now, if it impacts the program's performance (ratings and ability to draw/maintain sponsors), that's another matter.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Trenton

Kobo said:


> Yeah but that's not an answer to Deejo's question. The answer to Deejo's question is one of three things:
> 
> A. No they shouldn't be held to the same standard.
> B. Yes they should be held to the same standard.
> C. The men would not be fired
> 
> Your response answers this question:
> 
> Should people get fired for the things they say on air?


Yes they should be held to the same standard but if the standard is flawed it should be corrected. I wouldn't advocate for the firing of the men or the women. 

I'm not going to advocate for the firing of the women because the men have already been fired and I didn't advocate for their termination either.

My mind is cluttered and all so sometimes I don't speaktheeenglish very well.


----------



## Runs like Dog

We practically hand out medals for parents who don't brutalize and murder their babies now. People are horrible and every day I wake up is a crap shoot whether it wouldn't be better if a huge-ass meteor didn't come and wipe the slate clean.


----------



## okeydokie

i just dont understand how a simple question got so effed up, oh wait, yes i do


----------



## Kobo

Trenton said:


> Yes they should be held to the same standard but if the standard is flawed it should be corrected. I wouldn't advocate for the firing of the men or the women.
> 
> I'm not going to advocate for the firing of the women because the men have already been fired and I didn't advocate for their termination either.
> 
> My mind is cluttered and all so sometimes I don't speaktheeenglish very well.


Thank you for answering.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Kobo

okeydokie said:


> i just dont understand how a simple question got so effed up, oh wait, yes i do


Doesn't it always work like that.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Kobo said:


> Doesn't it always work like that.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Yes, it always works like that. 

I watched the clip (earlier tonight) and the only person saying fabulous and acting like an all around douche was Sharon. The others just looked really uncomfortable. Sara tried to steer the conversation in a different way and Leah looked really nervous. You could tell that they had the wtf thought in their heads. Sharon once again shows herself to be lacking in class and "new money", just as she and her entire family has always been. I take back what I said about Julie and the others. They weren't the ones saying anything about this. Sharon and her chav mouth need to go back to England. We don't need or want her here. 

Now back to double standards, where were all the men up in arms over crap "Dr." Laura said? Your husband cheats on you because you aren't the proper wife to him, he hits you because you incite him and are argumentative, your job is to be a wife and mommy, women that aren't married after 25 are s!uts, the state has a right to tell a woman what to do with her body. Where was the outrage from men? Her show got shut down because WOMEN were up in arms. Who was the largest buyer of her book, The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands.......men. Laura has spewed her bile for the worse part of 20 years. Never seen any backlash from men, other than gay men. 

Sharon Osbourne has a moment of continued stupidity and men here are up in arms. "Dr". Laura spends 20 years telling women we all suck and are 100% to blame for our abuse/being cheated on and all around mistreatment and I don't see the outrage from men. She told a woman that she is responsible for her rape because of what she was wearing, she told another woman that she is responsible for her plight in life because she chose to have children with a "black" man, she told another woman that if she would only shut her mouth, the abuse wouldn't happen. 

An idiotic woman makes a 3 minute crack about a severed penis and the men here are in a tizzy. 

Double standard indeed.


----------



## Kobo

So your saying a media member got canned for saying something improper about women. Who would have thunk it? Where are those women now?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Deejo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Now back to double standards, where were all the men up in arms over crap "Dr." Laura said? Your husband cheats on you because you aren't the proper wife to him, he hits you because you incite him and are argumentative, your job is to be a wife and mommy, women that aren't married after 25 are s!uts, the state has a right to tell a woman what to do with her body. Where was the outrage from men? Her show got shut down because WOMEN were up in arms. Who was the largest buyer of her book The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands.......men. Laura has spewed her bile for the worse part of 20 years. Never seen any backlash from men, other than gay men.


No man in his right mind wants to cross a crazy woman ...


----------



## morituri

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Yes, it always works like that.
> 
> I watched the clip (earlier tonight) and the only person saying fabulous and acting like an all around douche was Sharon. The others just looked really uncomfortable. Sara tried to steer the conversation in a different way and Leah looked really nervous. You could tell that they had the wtf thought in their heads. Sharon once again shows herself to be lacking in class and "new money", just as she and her entire family has always been. I take back what I said about Julie and the others. They weren't the ones saying anything about this. Sharon and her chav mouth need to go back to England. We don't need or want her here.
> 
> Now back to double standards, where were all the men up in arms over crap "Dr." Laura said? Your husband cheats on you because you aren't the proper wife to him, he hits you because you incite him and are argumentative, your job is to be a wife and mommy, women that aren't married after 25 are s!uts, the state has a right to tell a woman what to do with her body. Where was the outrage from men? Her show got shut down because WOMEN were up in arms. Who was the largest buyer of her book The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands.......men. Laura has spewed her bile for the worse part of 20 years. Never seen any backlash from men, other than gay men.
> 
> Sharon Osbourne has a moment of continued stupidity and men here are up in arms. "Dr". Laura spends 20 years telling women we all suck and are 100% to blame for our relationships and I don't see the outrage.
> 
> Double standard indeed.


Brighteyes,

I have two daughters who mean the world to me and for which I would lay my very life for, and the last thing I would like to see is for some a**hole male tv host laughing at the plight of a married woman horrifically mutilated by her husband. I would be just as outraged, if not more, by that because of my daughters.

So cool down your faux indignation.


----------



## Grayson

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Now back to double standards, where were all the men up in arms over crap "Dr." Laura said? Your husband cheats on you because you aren't the proper wife to him, he hits you because you incite him and are argumentative, your job is to be a wife and mommy, women that aren't married after 25 are s!uts, the state has a right to tell a woman what to do with her body. Where was the outrage from men? Her show got shut down because WOMEN were up in arms. Who was the largest buyer of her book The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands.......men. Laura has spewed her bile for the worse part of 20 years. Never seen any backlash from men, other than gay men.


Never having been a listener of hers, I can't really have an opinion one way or the other regarding comments I've not even heard _about_, let alone heard.

From what I HAVE heard on a local radio show discussing her firing several months ago, though, wasn't her ouster, like Imus', the result of racial comments, as opposed to gender comments?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Kobo

Grayson said:


> Never having been a listener of hers, I can't really have an opinion one way or the other regarding comments I've not even heard _about_, let alone heard.
> 
> From what I HAVE heard on a local radio show discussing her firing several months ago, though, wasn't her ouster, like Imus', the result of racial comments, as opposed to gender comments?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Don't spoil all the fun.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Kobo said:


> So your saying a media member got canned for saying something improper about women. Who would have thunk it? Where are those women now?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


She DIDN'T get canned, she took herself off the air under the guise of censorship and free speech and her rights being trampled on. 
Again, where were the men saying "hey, wait a minute?!"


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

morituri said:


> Brighteyes,
> 
> I have two daughters who mean the world to me and for which I would lay my very life for, and the last thing I would like to see is for some a**hole male tv host laughing at the plight of a married woman horrifically mutilated by her husband. I would be just as outraged, if not more, by that because of my daughters.
> 
> So cool down your faux indignation.


I have two sons, ages 18 and almost 14 and the last thing I would ever want is some psycho hurting them!! The OP made it about gender roles. It isn't. It is about some nutjob who mutilated her husband. Period.
Since he brought up role reversal, I brought up Dr. Laura. HE brought up different standards and I pointed out that some get away with it as long as it tows the line. 

Faux indignation? Um, I could not be more disgusted with what this woman did to her husband. She deserves every single thing she has coming to her. I posted that earlier. The OP made this about a gender war and I simply posted that we can find it everywhere. If we get pissed off at Sharon for her disgusting attitude and want to vilify her, then lets get equally pissed off at a woman who blames woman for their own rape, assault and abuse.


----------



## Grayson

Therealbrighteyes said:


> She DIDN'T get canned, she took herself off the air under the guise of censorship and free speech and her rights being trampled on.


...because of racial comments to a (granted, female) black caller, wasn't it?



> Again, where were the men saying "hey, wait a minute?!"


Would it be fair to say, "Probably not listening to her show, and thus unaware of any inappropriate comments that would prompt them to say, 'Hey, wait a minute?'"
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Kobo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> She DIDN'T get canned, she took herself off the air under the guise of censorship and free speech and her rights being trampled on.
> Again, where were the men saying "hey, wait a minute?!"


So she was told to resign and did. I guess that's technically not getting canned for saying something improper about women. As was stated earlier in the thread men are not going to be as outspoken on things like this and there is hardly any out cry at all out there. So let's see in both cases men as a whole remain silent. On the other hand women as a whole are vocal when the offense is against women ( as you stated in your post regarding Dr. Laura) and are silent as a whole in the case of "the talk". So where's the "double standard" again?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Grayson

Kobo said:


> So she was told to resign and did. I guess that's technically not getting canned for saying something improper about women. As was stated earlier in the thread men are not going to be as outspoken on things like this and there is hardly any out cry at all out there. So let's see in both cases men as a whole remain silent. On the other hand women as a whole are vocal when the offense is against women ( as you stated in your post regarding Dr. Laura) and are silent as a whole in the case of "the talk". So where's the "double standard" again?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Just did a quick check. Wikipedia (yes, it can sometimes be unreliable, but the following statements includes two sources cited) has this to say:

_In August 2010, she announced that she would end her syndicated radio show in December 2010, following a controversy caused by her repeated on-air use of a racial epithet while giving advice to an African-American caller._

So, as I was recalling, she left terrestrial radio due to a brouhaha over racial comments, not gender comments.

It appears, however, that she has moved her schtick to Sirius XM. On January 3, 2011. So she was "off the air" for a few weeks, maximum.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## morituri

Therealbrighteyes said:


> I have two sons, ages 18 and almost 14 and the last thing I would ever want is some psycho hurting them!! The OP made it about gender roles. It isn't. It is about some nutjob who mutilated her husband. Period.
> Since he brought up role reversal, I brought up Dr. Laura. HE brought up different standards and I pointed out that some get away with it as long as it tows the line.
> 
> Faux indignation? Um, I could not be more disgusted with what this woman did to her husband. She deserves every single thing she has coming to her. I posted that earlier. The OP made this about a gender war and I simply posted that we can find it everywhere. If we get pissed off at Sharon for her disgusting attitude and want to vilify her, then lets get equally pissed off at a woman who blames woman for their own rape, assault and abuse.


The OP asked a simple question that resulted in answers from some female forum members that appear to be trying to turn the tables - like a cheating spouse does when he/she has been caught red handed -

Horrible things happen every day to people, including the most defenseless of all, children. It is heart breaking to open the news and read another tragedy that has occurred. We learn to deal with it because otherwise we would become emotionally and mentally unglued, not able to function.

What we don't need is people like Sharon Osbourne or those lunatic members of that church in Florida going to to the burials of dead service men and telling their grieving loved ones that their sons and daughters will burn in hell for all eternity simply for being gay. Sharon and the church members represent the worst of humanity.

I just hope that Sharon Osbourne doesn't wake up one day to find that her own son got mutilated like this man she laughed at.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Kobo said:


> So she was told to resign and did. I guess that's technically not getting canned for saying something improper about women. As was stated earlier in the thread men are not going to be as outspoken on things like this and there is hardly any out cry at all out there. So let's see in both cases men as a whole remain silent. On the other hand women as a whole are vocal when the offense is against women ( as you stated in your post regarding Dr. Laura) and are silent as a whole in the case of "the talk". So where's the "double standard" again?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Women are silent? Um, did you take a look at the CBS boards and see who posted there? No woman is silent on this. They are pissed off and rightfully so! Mutilating a person is disgusting. Nobody is silent on this issue, literally nobody and this "chick" deserves every single thing coming to her.
My point was you mentioned double standards. You started it and I am mentioning the flaws in your argument. Double standards exist.


----------



## Trenton

Deejo said:


> No man in his right mind wants to cross a crazy woman ...


Your attempt at putting the Byron quote to work failed. 

My kids would say Epic Fail. 

:rofl:


----------



## Trenton

Just an FYI, Sharon's existence does not revolve around the words she chose on that show. She is an avid supporter of children's causes among many others and I think is overall a very empathetic, strong woman. Again, she was using dirty humor with poor timing to express an undercurrent of how she feels as a woman. It was inappropriate and lacked consideration. It is not the end of the world or the beginning of a culture of hatred and the demise of men as men.

To sum her up or cast her out completely based upon these words is really stinky if you have to cast out all the good a person does in order to do so. In fact, I think it's simple minded. Y'all need to clutter up your minds a little more.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

morituri said:


> The OP asked a simple question that resulted in answers from some female forum members that appear to be trying to turn the tables - like a cheating spouse does when he/she has been caught red handed -
> 
> Horrible things happen every day to people, including the most defenseless of all, children. It is heart breaking to open the news and read another tragedy that has occurred. We learn to deal with it because otherwise we would become emotionally and mentally unglued, not able to function.
> 
> What we don't need is people like Sharon Osbourne or those lunatic members of that church in Florida going to to the burials of dead service men and telling their grieving loved ones that their sons and daughters will burn in hell for all eternity simply for being gay. Sharon and the church members represent the worst of humanity.
> 
> I just hope that Sharon Osbourne doesn't wake up one day to find that her own son got mutilated like this man she laughed at.


I couldn't agree with you more! What I am saying is that the men here who are up in arms over this crime need to also be up in arms over what Laura has to say. She says exactly what this psycho (Sharon) has to say....he deserved it. I won't go in to detail but a friend of mine was raped years ago and she did call "Dr". Laura and the only thing this [email protected] asked my friend was what were you wearing? Jeans. Her response: How tight were those jeans?


----------



## michzz

I think we can all agree that sexual mutilation of either gender is a horrific thing to do and worse to experience.

It's plain evil.

And further, that a lot of people crack jokes about it out of some sick kind of whistling past the cemetery type of response.

It's not gender based, the responses, that is.

The crazy lady who cut off her H's thing deserves to be tossed in jail for life.

Saying that is no commentary on all women--just her.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

michzz said:


> I think we can all agree that sexual mutilation of either gender is a horrific thing to do and worse to experience.
> 
> It's plain evil.
> 
> And further, that a lot of people crack jokes about it out of some sick kind of whistling past the cemetery type of response.
> 
> It's not gender based, the responses, that is.
> 
> The crazy lady who cut off her H's thing deserves to be tossed in jail for life.
> 
> Saying that is no commentary on all women--just her.


Exactly!! A woman who is unstable and nuts. Instead lets make this about all women.  You know you are the smartest man here, right?!


----------



## Entropy3000

Have I missed anything?


Look, I want to go on record that men have given women a bad rap ever since they twisted the whole apple story. Sure she was having a Garden Night Out, GNO and met a snake and came home with an apple that wasn't Adam's. But Adam ate that freaking apple of his own accord!! He owned that. If he had been taking care of business Eve would not have been sneaking around the garden and being chatted up by that snake. Adam was way too Beta for his own good.

So on behalf of Men I want to apologi..... Oh wait. Wrong thread. Sorry.

--------------
I Believe


----------



## morituri

Therealbrighteyes said:


> I couldn't agree with you more! What I am saying is that the men here who are up in arms over this crime need to also be up in arms over what Laura has to say. She says exactly what this psycho (Sharon) has to say....he deserved it. I won't go in to detail but a friend of mine was raped years ago and she did call "Dr". Laura and the only thing this [email protected] asked my friend was what were you wearing? Jeans. Her response: How tight were those jeans?


That is indeed monstrous what "Dr". Laura said to this poor woman friend of yours who was raped and tried reaching to her for help by calling her radio talk show. "Dr" Laura should have been canned for treating her the way she did. 

The one and only time I listened to Dr Laura, I was left with the impression that this woman was very bitter, condescending and contemptuous of her callers. But consider that if Dr Laura had been a man named Dr Laurence and he had spewed that same vile on the airwaves, he would have been gone long before Dr Laura's departure. It could even be argued that it was because she was a woman, that she was allowed to get away with so much fecal matter for so long.

*But let's not kid ourselves either that the owners of these big television conglomerates who produce these shows for women and pay the salaries of female tv show hosts like Sharon Osbourne or Dr Laura are men. Like it or not, the female double standard we rail so much against - including yours truly - is one perpetuated and paid for by members of our own sex.*


----------



## Deejo

Maybe if that crazy chick followed Dr. Laura's advice in the first place and didn't go about hacking off willy's but instead practiced love and devotion to her husband, he wouldn't have wanted to divorce her, thus starting the chain of events leading us to Sharon Osbourne, Lord Byron quotes, and a feisty Viking?


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Entropy3000 said:


> Have I missed anything?
> 
> 
> Look, I want to go on record that men have given women a bad rap ever since they twisted the whole apple story. Sure she was having a Garden Night Out, GNO and met a snake and came home with an apple that wasn't Adam's. But Adam ate that freaking apple of his own accord!! He owned that. If he had been taking care of business Eve would not have been sneaking around the garden and being chatted up by that snake. Adam was way too Beta for his own good.
> 
> So on behalf of Men I want to apologi..... Oh wait. Wrong thread. Sorry.
> 
> --------------
> I Believe[/QUo
> Women are evil based on some fictional story told 3,000 years ago? Okay.
> I am a Christian and I don't believe most of what is written in the bible. I bit the apple and I make no apologizes. By all means, hold all women accountable for all ills done by my gender. I should in turn hold all men accountable for everything done by the male gender, right?


----------



## Deejo

I want my rib back ...


----------



## morituri

Deejo said:


> I want my rib back ...


"I want my baby back, baby back, baby back ribs..."


----------



## Catherine602

Deejo said:


> I want my rib back ...


OK u can have it after I finish sucking all of the BBQ sauce off. :://
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Deejo said:


> Maybe if that crazy chick followed Dr. Laura's advice in the first place and didn't go about hacking off willy's but instead practiced love and devotion to her husband, he wouldn't have wanted to divorce her, thus starting the chain of events leading us to Sharon Osbourne, Lord Byron quotes, and a feisty Viking?


Your only saving grace is Viking. I know you are not. I grant you peace and love. Har, har.


----------



## AFEH

morituri said:


> *But let's not kid ourselves either that the owners of these big television conglomerates who produce these shows for women and pay the salaries of female tv show hosts like Sharon Osbourne or Dr Laura are men. Like it or not, the female double standard we rail so much against - including yours truly - is one perpetuated and paid for by members of our own sex.*


That’s the real stupidity of the women in the audience. The whole thing was orchestrated from the beginning and those women were so stupid and fired up they just couldn’t see it. They were like lambs to the slaughter “Monkey See, Monkey Do".

So when the punch lines came, and they came quick and fast to add to the feeding frenzy, instead of the women in the audience booing those around the table off the stage or staging a mass walk out, those utterly sick and stupid women in the audience went along like a pack and laughed and cheered them on.

Truly sick, very very sick.


----------



## Syrum

morituri said:


> That is indeed monstrous what "Dr". Laura said to this poor woman friend of yours who was raped and tried reaching to her for help by calling her radio talk show. "Dr" Laura should have been canned for treating her the way she did.
> 
> The one and only time I listened to Dr Laura, I was left with the impression that this woman was very bitter, condescending and contemptuous of her callers. But consider that if Dr Laura had been a man named Dr Laurence and he had spewed that same vile on the airwaves, he would have been gone long before Dr Laura's departure. It could even be argued that it was because she was a woman, that she was allowed to get away with so much fecal matter for so long.
> 
> *But let's not kid ourselves either that the owners of these big television conglomerates who produce these shows for women and pay the salaries of female tv show hosts like Sharon Osbourne or Dr Laura are men. Like it or not, the female double standard we rail so much against - including yours truly - is one perpetuated and paid for by members of our own sex.*


:scratchhead: I think I said this many many pages back.

Also if the thread isn't about gender then it's got the wrong title people... Just sayin. 

Again I say this woman is awful, anyone making light of it, is awful, any one who does that to women or men doesn't have enough self awareness to know that they are contributing to a society of apathetic people at best. 

And yes men hold the balance of power, they need to be outraged over this and any ill treatment of men or women, then this behaviour would be inexcusable.


----------



## Kobo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Women are silent? Um, did you take a look at the CBS boards and see who posted there? No woman is silent on this. They are pissed off and rightfully so! Mutilating a person is disgusting. Nobody is silent on this issue, literally nobody and this "chick" deserves every single thing coming to her.
> My point was you mentioned double standards. You started it and I am mentioning the flaws in your argument. Double standards exist.



So posting on the message board of the station that aired the show is what we call crucifying now? Is that all that happened in the issue where you said Dr. Laura got canned, uh I mean resigned for speaking offensively towards women? Still waiting on CNN. Still waiting on my local news to cover it. Still waiting for the outrage to come up on Google when searching for the talk. Nada as of last night. But hey that's the way I figured it would be.


----------



## Kobo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Exactly!! A woman who is unstable and nuts. Instead lets make this about all women.  You know you are the smartest man here, right?!


You are making this about all women. You are the only woman in this thread on the defensive. You have taken this to heart: "I wasn't going to post","Why do I feel attacked", "I'm done with this thread". No one else is. The question was would the response be the same if the gender roles were reversed and men were on daytime TV having a little fun joking about a woman getting her genitals mutilated. You decided to make it more than that. We all know the answer to the question. The fact that you try to dispute this by talking about Dr. Laura (A woman) and how *women *responded when she talked offensively about *women *is the biggest reach I have ever seen.


----------



## Kobo

Syrum said:


> :scratchhead: I think I said this many many pages back.
> 
> Also if the thread isn't about gender then it's got the wrong title people... Just sayin.
> 
> Again I say this woman is awful, anyone making light of it, is awful, any one who does that to women or men doesn't have enough self awareness to know that they are contributing to a society of apathetic people at best.
> 
> And yes men hold the balance of power, they need to be outraged over this and any ill treatment of men or women, then this behaviour would be inexcusable.



No the power to control network programming rest in the advertisors and through them the viewers. Again, The question would the response be the same.... It's not about should it be on TV in the first place. That is a different subject all together.


----------



## Syrum

Kobo said:


> No the power to control network programming rest in the advertisors and through them the viewers. Again, The question would the response be the same.... It's not about should it be on TV in the first place. That is a different subject all together.


I disagree completely. We are shaped by what we see and hear every day, and I'm afraid the message through most media, and dare it I say the pornification of women throughout society tells women their value every day, and the message is loud and clear. If women are reacting with apathy (as I said before) at best, I don't believe they are the cause and quite frankly it's to be expected and it will get worse, both men and women will not value humanity and will feel no empathy for the other.


----------



## Kobo

Syrum said:


> I disagree completely. We are shaped by what we see and hear every day, and I'm afraid the message through most media, and dare it I say the pornification of women throughout society tells women their value every day, and the message is loud and clear. If women are reacting with apathy (as I said before) at best, I don't believe they are the cause and quite frankly it's to be expected and it will get worse, both men and women will not value humanity and will feel no empathy for the other.


So you don't believe that advertisors and the viewers (ratings) through them control whats on network TV? I'm trying to make sure I'm reading this correctly.


----------



## morituri

If anybody's interested, here is the"The Apology".

I couldn't help but noticed how nervous the other women hosts looked, especially when they all turned to look at Sharon Osbourne. Almost like they had gotten a good old fashion tongue lashing by their corporate masters who in turn might have gotten one from the sponsors who pay for the show. If that's the case then :smthumbup:


----------



## Grayson

Kobo said:


> So posting on the message board of the station that aired the show is what we call crucifying now? Is that all that happened in the issue where you said Dr. Laura got canned, uh I mean resigned for speaking offensively towards women?


Not to sound like a broken record, but if we're going to continue using Dr. Laura as a comparison, we should do so accurately. She did not get fired/resign for offensive *gender *comments about women...she resigned following a controversy about repeatedly using a *racial *epithet in a response to a caller.


----------



## Deejo

morituri said:


> If anybody's interested, here is the"The Apology".
> 
> I couldn't help but noticed how nervous the other women hosts looked, especially when they all turned to look at Sharon Osbourne. Almost like they had gotten a good old fashion tongue lashing by their corporate masters who in turn might have gotten one from the sponsors who pay for the show. If that's the case then :smthumbup:


Okay then ... we done?


----------



## Trenton

Deejo said:


> Okay then ... we done?


I don't know. I'd like to see more repentance myself.


----------



## Kobo

Grayson said:


> Not to sound like a broken record, but if we're going to continue using Dr. Laura as a comparison, we should do so accurately. She did not get fired/resign for offensive *gender *comments about women...she resigned following a controversy about repeatedly using a *racial *epithet in a response to a caller.


I understand. That's why I posted "you said".


----------



## Kobo

morituri said:


> If anybody's interested, here is the"The Apology".
> 
> I couldn't help but noticed how nervous the other women hosts looked, especially when they all turned to look at Sharon Osbourne. Almost like they had gotten a good old fashion tongue lashing by their corporate masters who in turn might have gotten one from the sponsors who pay for the show. If that's the case then :smthumbup:


Score 1 for the good guys


----------



## Grayson

Trenton said:


> I don't know. I'd like to see more repentance myself.


For a multi-layered pop culture reference response....

Dr. Gregory House: "As the philosopher Jagger said, 'You can't always get what you want.'"

Dr. Lisa Cuddy: "I looked up that philosopher Jagger. He did say, 'You can't always get what you want.' Turns out he also said, 'If you try sometimes, you get what you need.'"

:smthumbup:


----------



## Grayson

Kobo said:


> I understand. That's why I posted "you said".


Fair enough.


----------



## Trenton

Grayson said:


> For a multi-layered pop culture reference response....
> 
> Dr. Gregory House: "As the philosopher Jagger said, 'You can't always get what you want.'"
> 
> Dr. Lisa Cuddy: "I looked up that philosopher Jagger. He did say, 'You can't always get what you want.' Turns out he also said, 'If you try sometimes, you get what you need.'"
> 
> :smthumbup:


Love House even if I am offended by the way House treats Cuddy (kidding!)


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Kobo said:


> You are making this about all women. You are the only woman in this thread on the defensive. You have taken this to heart: "I wasn't going to post","Why do I feel attacked", "I'm done with this thread". No one else is. The question was would the response be the same if the gender roles were reversed and men were on daytime TV having a little fun joking about a woman getting her genitals mutilated. You decided to make it more than that. We all know the answer to the question. The fact that you try to dispute this by talking about Dr. Laura (A woman) and how *women *responded when she talked offensively about *women *is the biggest reach I have ever seen.


You made it about women, not me. You choose to cherry pick your way through double standards and claim the reaction to Dr. Laura is a reach. Okay. Fine. We agree to disagree.
I stand by what I said. Double standards exist and this isn't one of them. One woman out of 5 who is a known idiot. She isn't the mouthpiece for the network or women. We aren't all sitting back laughing at this situation but apparently you think that.
C'est la vie.


----------



## morituri

Therealbrighteyes said:


> You made it about women, not me. You choose to cherry pick your way through double standards and claim the reaction to Dr. Laura is a reach. Okay. Fine. We agree to disagree.
> I stand by what I said. Double standards exist and this isn't one of them. One woman out of 5 who is a known idiot. She isn't the mouthpiece for the network or women. We aren't all sitting back laughing at this situation but apparently you think that.
> C'est la vie.


As that "great" philosopher Rodney King once said *"People, I just want to say, you know, can we all get along?"*


----------



## Kobo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> You made it about women, not me. You choose to cherry pick your way through double standards and claim the reaction to Dr. Laura is a reach. Okay. Fine. We agree to disagree.
> I stand by what I said. Double standards exist and this isn't one of them. One woman out of 5 who is a known idiot. She isn't the mouthpiece for the network or women. We aren't all sitting back laughing at this situation but apparently you think that.
> C'est la vie.


Nope, you made it about all women. I asked a question.You saw the question and took it personal. I can't help that because it has nothing to do with me. No man on this thread that I can see stated any of the following:

every woman will laugh at the video/show
every woman thinks these hosts are right to laugh
every woman will cut a guys penis off
every woman feels that its Ok too cut a penis off

You chose and continue to choose to see it that way though. Only you can fix that.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Not sure if you read the way this post was going. Read Mori's post about it being the "matriarchy" and assigning this disgusting behavior to women. I didn't make it about anything, just pointed out the double standard. 
Now back on topic, Sharon should be fired. She is disgusting and what she said is beyond awful. Anybody who laughs at anothers pain and suffering deserves nothing but scorn.


----------



## Entropy3000

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Entropy3000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Have I missed anything?
> 
> 
> Look, I want to go on record that men have given women a bad rap ever since they twisted the whole apple story. Sure she was having a Garden Night Out, GNO and met a snake and came home with an apple that wasn't Adam's. But Adam ate that freaking apple of his own accord!! He owned that. If he had been taking care of business Eve would not have been sneaking around the garden and being chatted up by that snake. Adam was way too Beta for his own good.
> 
> So on behalf of Men I want to apologi..... Oh wait. Wrong thread. Sorry.
> 
> --------------
> I Believe[/QUo
> Women are evil based on some fictional story told 3,000 years ago? Okay.
> I am a Christian and I don't believe most of what is written in the bible. I bit the apple and I make no apologizes. By all means, hold all women accountable for all ills done by my gender. I should in turn hold all men accountable for everything done by the male gender, right?
> 
> 
> 
> It was a feable attempt at levity to diffuse some of the intensity only. It is instructive though that this old parable does put the blame for things on the woman. But this discourse seemingly has been going on from ... the start.
> 
> All jokes aside, in the parable what ever it meant, the two made a decision more or less together. That is a good thing in my view. To me, men and women together are greater than the sum of what they are alone. My point is that I do not look at injustice as men vs. women. Never have. I am a reasonably compassionate person and to me an injustice against one is injustice against all. I think that the joking done on this show was wrong but indicative of some deeper attitudes that men and women are going to have to resolve. I am dismayed by this, but it is what it is. My being upset by their actions in no way should be taken that I am not upset about other injustices.
> 
> I have been a recovering Catholic my whole life. My early education has played a role in my values for sure. My Catholic education has also given me a further appreciation of women wearing plaid however. I can't seem to shake that one. But as big of an ego as I have, I just don't consider it possible for me with information given, that any one "religion" provides all the answers for me. So I consider myself agnostic. I do embrace most of the principles of Christianity but not to the exclusion of having an open mind to other beliefs. My point here is that I do not take Adam & Eve literally. We won't even bring up Lilith, though maybe that is more pertinent to TAM. Besides Adam & Eve go beyond Christianity. But if there is a creator, what the heck were they thinking? Is this just subtle perfection? Or is the joke on us? Or both?
> 
> All in all I love women and would not be interested in living on this shiny crazy diamond we call earth without them. There is no amount of discourse on this site that is going to change that or any talk show that will change my mind.
> 
> As cliche as it may seem my wife completes me and together we are very good. I love my wife and daughters more than my own life. I have had to get physical with my step-daughters ex husband because he was an abusive SOB. All I can say is that the judge said I had every right to do what I had to do and there were no laws broken in his view.
> 
> I think you in particular are a really good person and I enjoy your enthusiasm for a discussion no end. Even when it seemingly conflicts with my own views. You do make me think. On important values we surely agree. So it is all good.
> 
> Please continue on.
> 
> Oh and at the bottom, that is my favorite scene from Bull Durham.
Click to expand...


----------



## Entropy3000

Deejo said:


> I want my rib back ...


I love ribs.


----------



## Entropy3000

Trenton said:


> Love House even if I am offended by the way House treats Cuddy (kidding!)


House is awesome


----------



## Kobo

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Not sure if you read the way this post was going. Read Mori's post about it being the "matriarchy" and assigning this disgusting behavior to women. I didn't make it about anything, just pointed out the double standard.
> Now back on topic, Sharon should be fired. She is disgusting and what she said is beyond awful. Anybody who laughs at anothers pain and suffering deserves nothing but scorn.



I'll let morituri explain what he meant. I took it as a quip but maybe he does believe we are moving towards a matriarchy. Don't know. I do know that he also posted "What is the issue here is the hypocrisy of some women who demand to be treated like human beings but their humanity towards others is only reserved to their gender." Key word is "some". Either way it's neither here nor there as you stated that I made it about all women when I clearly did not in most people's eyes.


I agree Sharon should be fired. I also believe her co host should be fired or at the very least reprimanded and sent to sensitivity training.


----------



## morituri

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Not sure if you read the way this post was going. Read Mori's post about it being the "matriarchy" and assigning this disgusting behavior to women.


It was a sarcastic response to how some female forum members were trying to turn this topic around into a woman's plight issue instead of facing the issue of a double standard of male tv hosts getting fired but female tv hosts getting a slap on the wrist for outrageous behavior.

*We can talk about all the double standards that exist in the world until the end of the world, but this thread is specific to this particular one.* If you want to talk about double standards in general, you have the opportunity to create a new thread for that specific topic.


----------



## Catherine602

@AFEH it's called mob mentality common human failing. People behave in groups in ways they would never do on their own. The operative word is people as in men and women. Get you head out of your azz and look it up. You do it all the time and you are a man, see. 

@Kobo you made your point effectively 11 pages back then you managed to erode the impact by grandstanding. You should have quit while you were ahead because the message was strong enough on it's own. Your single minded and ineffective attempts to get mass confessions of misandry makes it all about you and your issues. So you crashed and burned. Bye bye

Take a bow ..... This masquarade is getting older. 

Women are not evil, many are angry because of past and current injustices. The rage men feel over this attack and the insensitive reactions is understandable. Women have had to deal with the same. We know how you feel. 

I have a hard time understanding why men are so supprised at the reaction to these crimes. Do we not live in a society where women had to battle for effective rape laws against formidable resistance from men, same with domestic abuse, we still have the problem of lenient treatment of sexual predators. So this righteous indignation about this one incident seems very self serving. 

Face it - The reaction of these women is no different from the reaction of men when women are targeted. Don't you think men are asking more from women as a group than they can manage to give? No man is an island... 

Men are the leaders of soiciety so act like leaders. Look at the real reasons for this reaction by women, face it like a real men. It's not because women are more evil than men it's that we are so much alike. If you don't like what you see than change you or shut the eeeeffff up. 
. 
Just saying
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Trenton

Entropy3000 said:


> House is awesome


Agreed!


----------



## Kobo

Catherine602 said:


> @AFEH it's called mob mentality common human failing. People behave in groups in ways they would never do on their own. The operative word is people as in men and women. Get you head out of your azz and look it up. You do it all the time and you are a man, see.
> 
> @Kobo you made your point effectively 11 pages back then you managed to erode the impact by grandstanding. You should have quit while you were ahead because the message was strong enough on it's own. Your single minded and ineffective attempts to get mass confessions of misandry makes it all about you and your issues. So you crashed and burned. Bye bye
> 
> Take a bow ..... This masquarade is getting older.
> 
> Women are not evil, many are angry because of past and current injustices. The rage men feel over this attack and the insensitive reactions is understandable. Women have had to deal with the same. We know how you feel.
> 
> I have a hard time understanding why men are so supprised at the reaction to these crimes. Do we not live in a society where women had to battle for effective rape laws against formidable resistance from men, same with domestic abuse, we still have the problem of lenient treatment of sexual predators. So this righteous indignation about this one incident seems very self serving.
> 
> Face it - The reaction of these women is no different from the reaction of men when women are targeted. Don't you think men are asking more from women as a group than they can manage to give? No man is an island...
> 
> Men are the leaders of soiciety so act like leaders. Look at the real reasons for this reaction by women, face it like a real men. It's not because women are more evil than men it's that we are so much alike. If you don't like what you see than change you or shut the eeeeffff up.
> .
> Just saying
> _Posted via Mobile Device_



That's fine. If someone's going to answer the question then answer the question don't talk around it or put your own meaning behind it. Nothing I've said is incorrect. If it's grandstanding to say that then you are correct in your opinion.


----------



## Deejo

Catherine said my rib was ... saucy :FIREdevil:

It's only sexual harassment if you don't enjoy it ...

I use the word dynamic a lot. It makes me sound smart.

But what I often find interesting is how a scenario plays out, and why it plays out the way it did. That is why I found this circumstance and ensuing discussion interesting.

I'm good with the acknowledgement, and apology. I wasn't all that offended in the first place. But Kobo's premise was interesting, would a heavier hand have been used had they been males? I believe it would. And I also believe a heavier hand would have been warranted.

As for the victims of such crimes, be they male or female? I don't believe they would see much humor in it at all.


----------



## AFEH

Catherine602 said:


> @AFEH it's called mob mentality common human failing. People behave in groups in ways they would never do on their own. The operative word is people as in men and women. Get you head out of your azz and look it up. You do it all the time and you are a man, see.


Ha! Sheep follow the mob mentality, monkey sees, monkey does. And didn’t all those women do it well. They excelled at it.

Me, I’m the black sheep of the family lol. Makes me different, original, creative and sometimes unique. In part it’s how I define myself and where my core value lays in my leadership skills.

I would have been the one leading the booing and calling for a mass exodus out of the studio. No leaders amongst the women in the audience, just a load of sheep.


----------



## morituri

Catherine602 said:


> @AFEH it's called mob mentality common human failing. People behave in groups in ways they would never do on their own. The operative word is people as in men and women. Get you head out of your azz and look it up. You do it all the time and you are a man, see.
> 
> @Kobo you made your point effectively 11 pages back then you managed to erode the impact by grandstanding. You should have quit while you were ahead because the message was strong enough on it's own. Your single minded and ineffective attempts to get mass confessions of misandry makes it all about you and your issues. So you crashed and burned. Bye bye
> 
> Take a bow ..... This masquarade is getting older.
> 
> Women are not evil, many are angry because of past and current injustices. The rage men feel over this attack and the insensitive reactions is understandable. Women have had to deal with the same. We know how you feel.
> 
> I have a hard time understanding why men are so supprised at the reaction to these crimes. Do we not live in a society where women had to battle for effective rape laws against formidable resistance from men, same with domestic abuse, we still have the problem of lenient treatment of sexual predators. So this righteous indignation about this one incident seems very self serving.
> 
> Face it - The reaction of these women is no different from the reaction of men when women are targeted. Don't you think men are asking more from women as a group than they can manage to give? No man is an island...
> 
> Men are the leaders of society so act like leaders. Look at the real reasons for this reaction by women, face it like a real men. It's not because women are more evil than men it's that we are so much alike. If you don't like what you see than change you or shut the eeeeffff up.
> .
> Just saying
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


And I thought you got it. 

Apparently I was wrong.


----------



## AFEH

morituri said:


> And I thought you got it.
> 
> Apparently I was wrong.


She's a woman, allowed to change her mind, often. You can see it all the way through the thread. It's all to do with their biology. Quite magical, often frustrating. But they'll deny it and again that's biological. Or they'll blame shift. And if all that doesn't work they'll minimise.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

AFEH said:


> She's a woman, allowed to change her mind, often. You can see it all the way through the thread. It's all to do with their biology. Quite magical, often frustrating. But they'll deny it and again that's biological. Or they'll blame shift. And if all that doesn't work they'll minimise.


There you go being a leader again Bob. Somebody says something desparaging about a woman and you jump all over it. I could set my watch to your posts. They never fail.


----------



## Kobo

AFEH said:


> She's a woman, allowed to change her mind, often. You can see it all the way through the thread. It's all to do with their biology. Quite magical, often frustrating. But they'll deny it and again that's biological. Or they'll blame shift. And if all that doesn't work they'll minimise.


Pretty much sums up the thread. It doesn't have to be frustrating. As long as you stay focused on the issue at hand and not move to far into sideline topics.


----------



## AFEH

Therealbrighteyes said:


> There you go being a leader again Bob. Somebody says something desparaging about a woman and you jump all over it. I could set my watch to your posts. They never fail.


I love women Brennan. But they have their dark side, their Shadow. Just as men do. It's Archetypal.

It’s a bit pointless at times trying to rationalise and use logic with them in an argument in the same way you’d do with a man. A man goes very wrong if he’s expecting a woman to fight fair. Most especially when she’s losing the argument and when the woman is in one of her moods.


If you really want to see the results of what leaders like me do, read through the Coping with Infidelity Forum and look for references to the 180 and look at the Men telling other Men about it. The 180 wasn’t even in the dialogue before I came along. I set out to change that based on seeing Men turned into Nice Guys. It took me about 6 months and now those Men don’t even need me and that’s a mark of a true leader.

Those women in the audience. A whole bunch of sheep. And if you don’t think that’s all about Feminism then I wonder which side of the Millennium you’ve been living in. Those women do the true Feminist movement a MASSIVE AMOUNT OF HARM. For goodness sake wake up to it all and come this side of the millennium.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

AFEH said:


> I love women Brennan. But they have their dark side, their Shadow. Just as men do. It's Archetypal.
> 
> It’s a bit pointless at times trying to rationalise and use logic with them in an argument in the same way you’d do with a man. A man goes very wrong if he’s expecting a woman to fight fair. Most especially when she’s losing the argument and when the woman is in one of her moods.


Yup, women are illogical and rational thought and reason cannot be used with them. 
Why do I hear Henry Higgins singing?


----------



## morituri

Catherine,

Aren't women also supposed to be leaders as well?

How many times have we been bombarded - by women - that women should have the right to be leaders?

Well if the 'Talk' is any indication, women ALSO have a ways to go to prove they are leadership materiel.

BTW the issue was never about the crime itself - horrific crimes happen everyday to ALL people everywhere - but the double standard issue of allowing a female tv show co-host to get away with behavior that would be unacceptable if it had been a male tv show co-host. You give great lip service that you do understand the issue but then turn around and make comments which clearly show that you don't or simply chose to divert it to something else.


----------



## AFEH

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Yup, women are illogical and rational thought and reason cannot be used with them.
> Why do I hear Henry Higgins singing?


You've proven that throughout the whole thread lol.


----------



## Trenton

Bob loves submissive women who know when to shut up. He is irritated easily by women who disagree with his idea of women or challenge his beliefs. Well...duh.

This whole thread is like a double standard within a double standard tucked neatly inside another double standard that resides somewhere within another double standard that goes on for infinity.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

AFEH said:


> You've proven that throughout the whole thread lol.


That's your opinion. Same with the 180.


----------



## Kobo

Trenton said:


> This whole thread is like a double standard within a double standard tucked neatly inside another double standard that resides somewhere within another double standard that goes on for infinity.




Please explain this statement.


----------



## morituri

Kobo said:


> Please explain this statement.


It's a blame shift attempt very commonly used by SOME women, when they've been caught red handed.


----------



## Sennik

morituri said:


> If anybody's interested, here is the"The Apology".
> 
> I couldn't help but noticed how nervous the other women hosts looked, especially when they all turned to look at Sharon Osbourne. Almost like they had gotten a good old fashion tongue lashing by their corporate masters who in turn might have gotten one from the sponsors who pay for the show. If that's the case then :smthumbup:


Now I see why you placed 'The Apology' in quotes.

Leah coming to Sharon's rescue while stifling a LAUGH plus Sharon's Facebook comments yesterday after the fact do not point to any sincerity in her 'apology'. Now Leah Remini on the other hand seemed sincere. I give her props.

Overall though IMO a really weak attempt at an apology.


----------



## morituri

Sennik said:


> Now I see why you placed 'The Apology' in quotes.
> 
> Leah coming to Sharon's rescue while stifling a LAUGH plus Sharon's Facebook comments yesterday after the fact do not point to any sincerity in her 'apology'. Now Leah Remini on the other hand seemed sincere. I give her props.
> 
> Overall though IMO a really weak attempt at an apology.


Nonetheless, the frightened look of the 4 other women co-hosts who turned their attention over to Sharon was priceless.

Which reminds me of this joke. Why does Sharon Osbourne have to always be on top of Ozzy while they're having sex? Because she can only f**k up.:rofl:


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

morituri said:


> It's a blame shift attempt very commonly used by SOME women, when they've been caught red handed.


Are you going to let her explain or are you going to talk for her? 
She's pretty capable of speaking her mind.


----------



## morituri

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Are you going to let her explain or are you going to talk for her?
> She's pretty capable of speaking her mind.


Hey I'm just acting like a 'leader'


----------



## AFEH

Trenton said:


> Bob loves submissive women who know when to shut up. He is irritated easily by women who disagree with his idea of women or challenge his beliefs. Well...duh.
> 
> This whole thread is like a double standard within a double standard tucked neatly inside another double standard that resides somewhere within another double standard that goes on for infinity.


I feel sorry for the Victim Feminists of the world, pity them even although I’m certain the last thing they want is the pity of a man. I might even put myself at risk to serious harm if I ever see a woman being beaten by a man or in any other way abusing her. And the same very much goes for defenceless children. And if I see a youth, young or old man being beaten again I may well put myself at serious risk to defend them. I have done types of things in the past and I may be yet again tested in the future.

What I cannot abide is the wholesale MEN ARE BAD promulgated by Victim Feminists. I cannot abide that. And why those things are tolerated here are way beyond me.

What you CANNOT SEE is just how seriously these Victim Feminists are damaging the feminist movement. And yes, there are a lot of women following the Victim Feminist Movement just like those women on the program.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

morituri said:


> Hey I'm just acting like a 'leader'


I guess you and I have a different definition of leadership then.


----------



## Trenton

Kobo said:


> Please explain this statement.


A woman agrees (or empathizes) with a man's POV on a double standard that is being pointed out and then the man says your view is invalid and illogical because you're a woman. This is an example of a double standard within a double standard.

It's all based upon preconceived notions and opinion that is divided by gender. If we listed the double standards based on gender what would they be? Which are more harmful to each specific gender as a whole? Why? Where do they come from?

Some opinions that came up (in no particular order): The women were treated differently. Women and men should be treated the same. Men are held to higher standards. Women can't make up their mind. Men are leaders. Women are illogical. Women suffer more abuse. Humor is not funny if it's at someone else's expense.

An interesting question might be...

If women and men are different does it make logical sense that different standards should apply?


----------



## Trenton

AFEH said:


> I feel sorry for the Victim Feminists of the world, pity them even although I’m certain the last thing they want is the pity of a man. I might even put myself at risk to serious harm if I ever see a woman being beaten by a man or in any other way abusing her. And the same very much goes for defenceless children. And if I see a youth, young or old man being beaten again I may well put myself at serious risk to defend them. I have done types of things in the past and I may be yet again tested in the future.
> 
> What I cannot abide is the wholesale MEN ARE BAD promulgated by Victim Feminists. I cannot abide that. And why those things are tolerated here are way beyond me.
> 
> What you CANNOT SEE is just how seriously these Victim Feminists are damaging the feminist movement. And yes, there are a lot of woman following the Victim Feminist Movement just like those women on the program.


Do you really feel sorry for them or do you simply dislike them?

I don't pay attention to anyone who claims to be a victim only to moan about it. We're all victims at one time or another. It's what you do about it that matters.


----------



## AFEH

Trenton said:


> Do you really feel sorry for them or do you simply dislike them?
> 
> I don't pay attention to anyone who claims to be a victim only to moan about it. We're all victims at one time or another. It's what you do about it that matters.


You use the term “them” and not “us”. You mean you don’t see yourself as a Victim Feminist?


----------



## Catherine602

This is a giant fitness test - and Deejo kicked ass! Look at his post on this thread - there is something about the way he responded that makes him very sexually attractive. I wonder what it is. Big ribs??

@ AFEH Yes I am a woman and I love being me. As for "getting it" getting what exactly? Is there a script I was supposed to follow and then say no more? Well so sorry to disappoint you but I did not invite you to give me a pat on the head for joining the men's team. I don't really care if you think I got anything. I am not a conscript in this war of the sexes. I have a war going on in my head and I have no intention of fighting to the death. I am trying to reach a healthy coexistence. I am working on becoming a better person, woman, wife, lover and mother not to impress you or anyone so disconnected from me. I am doing it for my family, friends and by extension society. 

This a classic sample of how men and women communicate I think. The accusations, code words, refusal to acknowledge mistakes, tit for tat, and hurling insults. It this how we fight in our relationships? We could use a coach to point teach us how to fight fair. 

I think that is really what this thread is about. The things that seem external to us are actually battles that we need to resolve within ourselves. I don't want to win a gender war, what would I do without male energy to both revel in and to be confused by. I don't want men to think like me, I want a fight but a fair fight. I want intelligent calm dialogue not acussation of being too female. I want leadership and something to admire about men. I don't want to be hurt by words or deeds. Yes I am a woman and I think in shades of gray. It's a gift to men so be careful what you complain about. 

Let me explain. I often look at complex issues from several angles because I can see it from several angles. I don't think any of views are wrong, inconsistent or false, they are just different. I'll kick around major issues in my mind in order to come to a resolution that I feel comfortable with. The more complex the issue the more angles. I am looking for the unifying theme. 

This forum is my journal so I write what I think. I admit that i both get it and I don't. These issues are so complex that I wonder that anyone is so sure they are absolutely right. I know I am not right but I am trying to step out of myself and be good and fair.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Kobo

Trenton said:


> A woman agrees (or empathizes) with a man's POV on a double standard that is being pointed out and then the man says your view is invalid and illogical because you're a woman. This is an example of a double standard within a double standard.
> 
> It's all based upon preconceived notions and opinion that is divided by gender. If we listed the double standards based on gender what would they be? Which are more harmful to each specific gender as a whole? Why? Where do they come from?
> 
> Some opinions that came up (in no particular order): The women were treated differently. Women and men should be treated the same. Men are held to higher standards. Women can't make up their mind. Men are leaders. Women are illogical. Women suffer more abuse. Humor is not funny if it's at someone else's expense.
> 
> An interesting question might be...
> 
> If women and men are different does it make logical sense that different standards should apply?



We've tried different standards based on race and gendor throughout our history and it's not pretty. 

I'll put it like this. As a minority I have more wiggle room in what I can get away with saying (in mixed company at least) at the workplace, out for drinks, etc. Is that fair to my caucasion brothers? Nope. Now I could try justify whether or not its a double standard by talking about 400 years of slavery, Jim Crow, raping of our women, etc. but it would all just be me talking around the issue at hand. Even the term reverse racism suggests a double standard. 

That's what I have a problem with. It


----------



## Entropy3000

Trenton said:


> Bob loves submissive women who know when to shut up. He is irritated easily by women who disagree with his idea of women or challenge his beliefs. Well...duh.
> 
> This whole thread is like a double standard within a double standard tucked neatly inside another double standard that resides somewhere within another double standard that goes on for infinity.


The shooters don't even know


----------



## Entropy3000

Catherine602 said:


> This is a giant fitness test - and Deejo kicked ass! Look at his post on this thread - there is something about the way he responded that makes him very sexually attractive. I wonder what it is. Big ribs??
> 
> @ AFEH Yes I am a woman and I love being me. As for "getting it" getting what exactly? Is there a script I was supposed to follow and then say no more? Well so sorry to disappoint you but I did not invite you to give me a pat on the head for joining the men's team. I don't really care if you think I got anything. I am not a conscript in this war of the sexes. I have a war going on in my head and I have no intention of fighting to the death. I am trying to reach a healthy coexistence. I am working on becoming a better person, woman, wife, lover and mother not to impress you or anyone so disconnected from me. I am doing it for my family, friends and by extension society.
> 
> This a classic sample of how men and women communicate I think. The accusations, code words, refusal to acknowledge mistakes, tit for tat, and hurling insults. It this how we fight in our relationships? We could use a coach to point teach us how to fight fair.
> 
> I think that is really what this thread is about. The things that seem external to us are actually battles that we need to resolve within ourselves. I don't want to win a gender war, what would I do without male energy to both revel in and to be confused by. I don't want men to think like me, I want a fight but a fair fight. I want intelligent calm dialogue not acussation of being too female. I want leadership and something to admire about men. I don't want to be hurt by words or deeds. Yes I am a woman and I think in shades of gray. It's a gift to men so be careful what you complain about.
> 
> *Let me explain. I often look at complex issues from several angles because I can see it from several angles. I don't think any of views are wrong, inconsistent or false, they are just different. I'll kick around major issues in my mind in order to come to a resolution that I feel comfortable with. The more complex the issue the more angles. I am looking for the unifying theme. *
> 
> This forum is my journal so I write what I think. I admit that i both get it and I don't. These issues are so complex that I wonder that anyone is so sure they are absolutely right. I know I am not right but I am trying to step out of myself and be good and fair.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Yes. Seemingly contradictory ideas and views can co-exist in the universe and still all be valid.


----------



## morituri

All right class, tomorrow there will be a quiz on the relationship between the production and decay of strange particles and the human response to simple questions with non-sequitur answers.


----------



## Trenton

AFEH said:


> You use the term “them” and not “us”. You mean you don’t see yourself as a Victim Feminist?


No I don't.


----------



## Trenton

morituri said:


> All right class, tomorrow there will be a quiz on the relationship between the production and decay of strange particles and the human response to simple questions with non-sequitur answers.


Crap, they have any Cliff Notes for that?


----------



## Trenton

Entropy3000 said:


> The shooters don't even know


Let's face it, it's confusing when you're not sure where to point and click.


----------



## morituri

somebody said shooters? as in tequila shooters?

H*ll bartender I'll have whatever the gentleman on the floor is having


----------



## Trenton

Kobo said:


> We've tried different standards based on race and gendor throughout our history and it's not pretty.
> 
> I'll put it like this. As a minority I have more wiggle room in what I can get away with saying (in mixed company at least) at the workplace, out for drinks, etc. Is that fair to my caucasion brothers? Nope. Now I could try justify whether or not its a double standard by talking about 400 years of slavery, Jim Crow, raping of our women, etc. but it would all just be me talking around the issue at hand. Even the term reverse racism suggests a double standard.
> 
> That's what I have a problem with. It


Do you have examples of things we've tried that are not pretty? I'm not sure what you mean.

Are you talking about societal enforcement for double standards such as more scholarships for women or minorities than white, male teens or legal enforcement?

My husband is from Bolivia but at work is always made fun of for being Mexican. If he comes in sweaty his guy friends at work will say something like, "What did you have to mow a lawn for extra cash or something?"

He laughs it off but tells me at home that it does bother him. He doesn't feel he has a right to make jokes about them or return the ribbing, instead he feels as if he has to work twice as hard to prove he's worth more than a guy who mows lawns to support his family.

Is that an example of a double standard? I don't think so. I think it's more of an example of preconceived notions about groups/generalizations manifesting itself as a way for the person to deal with it.

If we look at actual double standards that would be more along the lines of my husband not making the same pay as someone else in the same field with the same skill level and performance level based upon his nationality. I don't believe that is happening.

-or-

Women teachers getting away with having sex with teens in their class because they are women. This happens and you do have a double standard.

-so-

It goes to court and you put twelve jurors in a box and depending on their preconceived notions, you very well may have justice or the opposite.

It's not always about fair because things will never be fair, it's more about balance.


----------



## morituri

Trenton said:


> Crap, they have any Cliff Notes for that?


Male students are exempt from the quiz but female students are not - unless of course other 'arrangements' can be made.


----------



## Trenton

Catherine602 said:


> This is a giant fitness test - and Deejo kicked ass! Look at his post on this thread - there is something about the way he responded that makes him very sexually attractive. I wonder what it is. Big ribs??
> 
> @ AFEH Yes I am a woman and I love being me. As for "getting it" getting what exactly? Is there a script I was supposed to follow and then say no more? Well so sorry to disappoint you but I did not invite you to give me a pat on the head for joining the men's team. I don't really care if you think I got anything. I am not a conscript in this war of the sexes. I have a war going on in my head and I have no intention of fighting to the death. I am trying to reach a healthy coexistence. I am working on becoming a better person, woman, wife, lover and mother not to impress you or anyone so disconnected from me. I am doing it for my family, friends and by extension society.
> 
> This a classic sample of how men and women communicate I think. The accusations, code words, refusal to acknowledge mistakes, tit for tat, and hurling insults. It this how we fight in our relationships? We could use a coach to point teach us how to fight fair.
> 
> I think that is really what this thread is about. The things that seem external to us are actually battles that we need to resolve within ourselves. I don't want to win a gender war, what would I do without male energy to both revel in and to be confused by. I don't want men to think like me, I want a fight but a fair fight. I want intelligent calm dialogue not acussation of being too female. I want leadership and something to admire about men. I don't want to be hurt by words or deeds. Yes I am a woman and I think in shades of gray. It's a gift to men so be careful what you complain about.
> 
> Let me explain. I often look at complex issues from several angles because I can see it from several angles. I don't think any of views are wrong, inconsistent or false, they are just different. I'll kick around major issues in my mind in order to come to a resolution that I feel comfortable with. The more complex the issue the more angles. I am looking for the unifying theme.
> 
> This forum is my journal so I write what I think. I admit that i both get it and I don't. These issues are so complex that I wonder that anyone is so sure they are absolutely right. I know I am not right but I am trying to step out of myself and be good and fair.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I can appreciate this post as it's very similar to how I feel but it is very different from your previous posts where absolute judgments were made. Perhaps you explain in this post why that was in that you're just being honest and then have the courage to re-think about what you thought. I understand that. I think it's why I also come off as wishy washy from time to time. I actually do want to understand.


----------



## Trenton

morituri said:


> Male students are exempt from the quiz but female students are not - unless of course other 'arrangements' can be made.


No problem. I like a challenge and I like to know I actually learned something as well so I'm good. Excuse me while I go thank my vagina for giving me this opportunity.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

morituri said:


> Male students are exempt from the quiz but female students are not - unless of course other 'arrangements' can be made.


Are they exempt because they cannot read? For the viewing audience, the first 5 responses came from men and they didn't answer the question.


----------



## morituri

Trenton said:


> No problem. I like a challenge and I like to know I actually learned something as well so I'm good. Excuse me while I go thank my vagina for giving me this opportunity.


Give her my thanks as well. Its always a pleasure to meet her :rofl:


----------



## michzz

I havent seen such chain-yanking since I watched Harry Potter over the weekend in the dragon scene.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

michzz said:


> I havent seen such chain-yanking since I watched Harry Potter over the weekend in the dragon scene.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Wasn't that the whole purpose of this thread? I need to stop getting sucked in to this crap.


----------



## michzz

Exactly
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Kobo

Trenton said:


> Do you have examples of things we've tried that are not pretty? I'm not sure what you mean.
> 
> Are you talking about societal enforcement for double standards such as more scholarships for women or minorities than white, male teens or legal enforcement?
> 
> My husband is from Bolivia but at work is always made fun of for being Mexican. If he comes in sweaty his guy friends at work will say something like, "What did you have to mow a lawn for extra cash or something?"
> 
> He laughs it off but tells me at home that it does bother him. He doesn't feel he has a right to make jokes about them or return the ribbing, instead he feels as if he has to work twice as hard to prove he's worth more than a guy who mows lawns to support his family.
> 
> Is that an example of a double standard? I don't think so. I think it's more of an example of preconceived notions about groups/generalizations manifesting itself as a way for the person to deal with it.
> 
> If we look at actual double standards that would be more along the lines of my husband not making the same pay as someone else in the same field with the same skill level and performance level based upon his nationality. I don't believe that is happening.
> 
> -or-
> 
> Women teachers getting away with having sex with teens in their class because they are women. This happens and you do have a double standard.
> 
> -so-
> 
> It goes to court and you put twelve jurors in a box and depending on their preconceived notions, you very well may have justice or the opposite.
> 
> It's not always about fair because things will never be fair, it's more about balance.




Differing standards from the past:

Response to a man's infidelity vs a woman's

The military positions Blacks were allowed to have vs Whites



The list goes on. A different standard more in line with my previous post is the response to "Kramer" saying the nword vs the response to any Black Comedian that says the nword


----------



## Catherine602

Trenton said:


> I can appreciate this post as it's very similar to how I feel but it is very different from your previous posts where absolute judgments were made. Perhaps you explain in this post why that was in that you're just being honest and then have the courage to re-think about what you thought. I understand that. I think it's why I also come off as wishy washy from time to time. I actually do want to understand.


Exactly when I have the courage to read some of my earliest post there is a lot of judgement finger pointing and seeing the world through my narrow vision. My most scathing and meanest views were reserved for men. If you met me you would never think I harbored those thoughts because I never expressed them to anyone. I knew they were wrong but I could not defeat them until I exposed them to the light of day. 

I posted about them and got feedback and alternate ways to view things from you Trenton and many very patient men and women. I still have trigers when I am not as patient as I should be. 

I don't feel the way I did when I first started posting. It may not seem that way but I really do love men I feel it inside and out. I am a better wife and lover to my husband because of the changes. I don't think that these heated discussions should make us feel hopeless. I have thought about things that people have said when they are heartfelt. It takes time to process things and it does not come wrapped in a neat package. That's how people are right? I hope so cause that's how I am. 

I hear a basic simple request from men - recognize the special challenge it takes to be a good man and have some respect and give some consideration for that. Why is that so hard to do. Just that - no qualifiers about the plight of women. There is a peculiar penchant in this society to chip away at all things male. For instance, when i said leadership i knew someone would point out that women should lead too. True but leadeship is not at the center of gender identity for me as a woman. I think it is for most men. Can I get an amen?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## AFEH

Trenton said:


> No I don't.


You have the lexicon of one.


----------



## AFEH

Catherine602 said:


> Exactly when I have the courage to read some of my earliest post there is a lot of judgement finger pointing and seeing the world through my narrow vision. My most scathing and meanest views were reserved for men. If you met me you would never think I harbored those thoughts because I never expressed them to anyone. I knew they were wrong but I could not defeat them until I exposed them to the light of day.
> 
> I posted about them and got feedback and alternate ways to view things from you Trenton and many very patient men and women. I still have trigers when I am not as patient as I should be.
> 
> I don't feel the way I did when I first started posting. It may not seem that way but I really do love men I feel it inside and out. I am a better wife and lover to my husband because of the changes. I don't think that these heated discussions should make us feel hopeless. I have thought about things that people have said when they are heartfelt. It takes time to process things and it does not come wrapped in a neat package. That's how people are right? I hope so cause that's how I am.
> 
> I hear a basic simple request from men - recognize the special challenge it takes to be a good man and have some respect and give some consideration for that. Why is that so hard to do. Just that - no qualifiers about the plight of women. There is a peculiar penchant in this society to chip away at all things male. For instance, when i said leadership i knew someone would point out that women should lead too. True but leadeship is not at the center of gender identity for me as a woman. I think it is for most men. Can I get an amen?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


One day Catherine you will stand by yourself. You will not need others to tell you you are right, that you are on the right path. You will be your own woman. I say that not just from your last post but from your other posts, your posts about Victor F and about how you came to see Tobio. And you are just 30 but you’ve come a very long way. But until that day here is a very big.

Amen.


----------



## Catherine602

AFEH Thank for that. You are very perceptive I do have many insecurities and self doubts. Not yet ready to stand without props.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Halien

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Yup, women are illogical and rational thought and reason cannot be used with them.


You know, in a fit of pure insanity, I once said something along those lines to my wife. Gave a whole new meaning to 'when hell freezes over'. I learned that pronouncements such as these only make practical sense in a monastery, and affirmed my conviction that god must be a woman.


----------



## Entropy3000

catherine602 said:


> exactly when i have the courage to read some of my earliest post there is a lot of judgement finger pointing and seeing the world through my narrow vision. My most scathing and meanest views were reserved for men. If you met me you would never think i harbored those thoughts because i never expressed them to anyone. I knew they were wrong but i could not defeat them until i exposed them to the light of day.
> 
> I posted about them and got feedback and alternate ways to view things from you trenton and many very patient men and women. I still have trigers when i am not as patient as i should be.
> 
> I don't feel the way i did when i first started posting. It may not seem that way but i really do love men i feel it inside and out. I am a better wife and lover to my husband because of the changes. I don't think that these heated discussions should make us feel hopeless. *I have thought about things *that people have said when they are heartfelt. It takes time to process things and it does not come wrapped in a neat package. That's how people are right? I hope so cause that's how i am.
> 
> I hear a basic simple request from men - recognize the special challenge it takes to be a good man and have some respect and give some consideration for that. Why is that so hard to do. Just that - no qualifiers about the plight of women. There is a peculiar penchant in this society to chip away at all things male. For instance, when i said leadership i knew someone would point out that women should lead too. True but leadeship is not at the center of gender identity for me as a woman. I think it is for most men. Can i get an amen?
> _posted via mobile device_


I am really enjoying your insights ... thank you

*amen*


----------



## AFEH

Catherine602 said:


> AFEH Thank for that. You are very perceptive I do have many insecurities and self doubts. Not yet ready to stand without props.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Self doubts. Even the Dalai Lama has those things.

Catherine, you will know when you are ready to stand by yourself. Even then you will recognise the interdependency of humanity (man and woman) if you haven’t already and nature and why as human’s we have been given the stewardship of the planet.

I reckon you’ve chosen a good man in your H and your H a good woman in you. Enjoy the journey because for sure we haven’t a clue if it’s the only one we’ll ever have.


----------



## AFEH

Halien said:


> You know, in a fit of pure insanity, I once said something along those lines to my wife. Gave a whole new meaning to 'when hell freezes over'. I learned that pronouncements such as these only make practical sense in a monastery, and affirmed my conviction that god must be a woman.


Why do you creep so much?


----------



## Trenton

AFEH said:


> You have the lexicon of one.


You think that. I don't.


----------



## Trenton

AFEH said:


> Why do you creep so much?


It's better than being such a creep.


----------



## Trenton

Kobo said:


> Differing standards from the past:
> 
> Response to a man's infidelity vs a woman's
> 
> The military positions Blacks were allowed to have vs Whites
> 
> 
> 
> The list goes on. A different standard more in line with my previous post is the response to "Kramer" saying the nword vs the response to any Black Comedian that says the nword


The infidelity I'm a little lost on. Do you feel men are more harshly criticized or women are more harshly criticized in regards to response?

The military positions I understand but that's not an example of trying to adjust the double standards more towards fair and failing at it. A response to adjust it would be legislation that tried to even the playing field.


----------



## AFEH

Trenton said:


> You think that. I don't.


I know you don’t Trenton and even I can’t wake you up. You are a mother of 3 children and a wife. Where on earth you get your time from for posting here is way beyond me.


----------



## Trenton

AFEH said:


> I know you don’t Trenton and even I can’t wake you up. You are a mother of 3 children and a wife. Where on earth you get your time from for posting here is way beyond me.


Shame on you, Bob.


----------



## Halien

AFEH said:


> Why do you creep so much?


Be careful, based upon the personal attacks in your posts, this creeping poster is still looking down under his shoes to see you.


----------



## Catherine602

Alright Trenton, Bob, Halien and AFEH - I have no idea what you guys are talking about. Bad enough I i can't understand 90% of Trenton erudite posts, now there are a whole group of you joining her. Explain please! 

(Please excuse my spelling and grammatical errors - dyslexic- if I not careful gibberish sneaks out.)
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Trenton

It's really simple. Bob and I don't get along and Bob seems to think Halien is a creeper although I don't know what that means or why he'd think it.


----------



## Kobo

Trenton said:


> The infidelity I'm a little lost on. Do you feel men are more harshly criticized or women are more harshly criticized in regards to response?
> 
> The military positions I understand but that's not an example of trying to adjust the double standards more towards fair and failing at it. A response to adjust it would be legislation that tried to even the playing field.


No. I'm saying there was a time when the response to a man's infidelity was for the woman to suck it up. Also a time when a women was expected to tolerate being physically diciplined by her husband. The reverse would not be tolerated. So I'm saying we have already had times where we held different standards for different genders, races, etc. IMO they weren't the best of times.


----------



## Halien

Catherine602 said:


> Alright Trenton, Bob, Halien and AFEH - I have no idea what you guys are talking about. Bad enough I i can't understand 90% of Trenton erudite posts, now there are a whole group of you joining her. Explain please!
> 
> (Please excuse my spelling and grammatical errors - dyslexic- if I not careful gibberish sneaks out.)
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Yes, maam. Tried to interject a little undirected humor because this thread seemed to be getting pretty personal, and sadly pathetic. AFEH equated this to me being a bottom dwellor, which struck me as childish, so I took a seat in the sandbox. I am properly scolded for playing in the mud, but this thread was turning into a waste of electrons. Not sure how insulting a thread needs to be to awake the wrath of mods, but I think that his implicit accusation of poor mothering skills by being on this board should ring a bell somewhere.


----------



## Deejo

I think we have kicked the can down this road about as far as it needs to go.


----------

