Social Media

[StringerBell]

12 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

Yes - in many ways you're the original feminist..

Not an intersectional feminist?

[McRainy]

2 hours ago, StringerBell said:

The woman can then make a decision as to what she wants to do.

You are always arguing for the different treatment of men and women based on supposed biological differences. In the case of being promoted to an executive position, there are no conceivable differences which could be relevant. In the case of having a baby, however, it is the woman’s body. Again, you purport to advocate for freedom, yet you wish to remove a woman’s control over her own body in favour of someone who just happens to have shagged her a few months previously. There is no equivalence of rights here whatsoever. 

[StringerBell]

56 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

You are always arguing for the different treatment of men and women based on supposed biological differences. In the case of being promoted to an executive position, there are no conceivable differences which could be relevant. In the case of having a baby, however, it is the woman’s body. Again, you purport to advocate for freedom, yet you wish to remove a woman’s control over her own body in favour of someone who just happens to have shagged her a few months previously. There is no equivalence of rights here whatsoever. 

No I don’t. What the hell are you talking about?

[McRainy]

5 hours ago, Lambchop said:

you wish to remove a woman’s control over her own body 

 

4 hours ago, StringerBell said:

No I don’t. What the hell are you talking about?

 

7 hours ago, StringerBell said:

she should have a responsibility to inform the father (if he’s around). Then he should be able to sign his parental responsibility and rights away. The woman can then make a decision as to what she wants to do.

You said a pregnant woman must have a man’s permission before she can have an abortion. 

Sounds pretty feudal to me. 

[eddie]

8 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

 

 

You said a pregnant woman must have a man’s permission before she can have an abortion. 

Sounds pretty feudal to me. 

Hoist by his own sexist petard.

[StringerBell]

10 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

 

 

You said a pregnant woman must have a man’s permission before she can have an abortion. 

Sounds pretty feudal to me. 

No I said the woman can make a decision as to whether or not to raise a child alone if the man has decided to emancipate himself from the child.

 

[StringerBell]

3 minutes ago, eddie said:

Hoist by his own sexist petard.

And yet I’m the one arguing for sexual equality. What you’re experiencing now is gynocentrism.

[McRainy]

 

4 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

No I said the woman can make a decision as to whether or not to raise a child alone if the man has decided to emancipate himself from the child.

 

You’re wishing to give priority of choice to the man over what a woman does with her body. 

That is not equality by any stretch of the imagination. 

[StringerBell]

5 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

 

You’re wishing to give priority of choice to the man over what a woman does with her body. 

That is not equality by any stretch of the imagination. 

I say again, what the hell are you on about? At no point have I said anything like that.

[McRainy]

16 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

I say again, what the hell are you on about? At no point have I said anything like that.

I’ve already quoted you saying it twice.

You clearly stated that a pregnant woman could only have an abortion if the father agreed; by corollary, if he disagrees, she can’t have one, thus giving him the ultimate say over what she does with her body. 

It’s almost as if you don’t understand the implications of your own statements. 

[eddie]

41 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

And yet I’m the one arguing for sexual equality. What you’re experiencing now is gynocentrism.

What I'm experiencing is bafflement.

You seem to have two modi operandi when it comes to arguing on this messageboard.

1. Poster says that they have seen a black cat, so you counter by saying that you have seen a blacker one.
2. Poster says that they have seen a black cat, but you argue against the existence of cats in the first place and maintain that it was a dog that liked fish and climbed trees.

Which one is it tonight?

[StringerBell]

1 hour ago, eddie said:

What I'm experiencing is bafflement.

You seem to have two modi operandi when it comes to arguing on this messageboard.

1. Poster says that they have seen a black cat, so you counter by saying that you have seen a blacker one.
2. Poster says that they have seen a black cat, but you argue against the existence of cats in the first place and maintain that it was a dog that liked fish and climbed trees.

Which one is it tonight?

I think you addressed this to the wrong poster.

Tonight it’s the one where men’s rights are so anethema to  Lambchop that her mind can’t even contemplate when confronted with the lack of them. As a result this ends up being processed as an assault on women’s rights.

So I suppose that would be 

Me: I’ve seen a black cat

Lambchop: How dare you say that about women?

 

 

[McRainy]

1 hour ago, StringerBell said:

Tonight it’s the one where men’s rights are so anethema to  Lambchop that her mind can’t even contemplate when confronted with the lack of them.

Blah blah. 

*adds to ignore list. 

[StringerBell]

5 hours ago, Lambchop said:

Blah blah. 

*adds to ignore list. 

On ignore because you can’t understand basic English ?‍♂️

 

[Stive Pesley]

On 4/19/2018 at 20:18, StringerBell said:

No I said the woman can make a decision as to whether or not to raise a child alone if the man has decided to emancipate himself from the child.

 

Erm- isn't the man rather taking the decision out of the woman's hands there? Or have you just badly worded it?

[maxjam]

On 4/19/2018 at 20:54, Lambchop said:

I’ve already quoted you saying it twice.

You clearly stated that a pregnant woman could only have an abortion if the father agreed; by corollary, if he disagrees, she can’t have one, thus giving him the ultimate say over what she does with her body. 

It’s almost as if you don’t understand the implications of your own statements. 

I think this sums up the difference in men, women and equality nicely.

If two people want to have sex, they can have sex - but if the female then gets pregnant either on purpose or by accident, with or without the males consent, the female is in full control of the situation. 

My ex-wife (lovely woman ) tried without my knowledge to get pregnant which could have had a detrimental effect on me both financially and emotionally for years - yet I would have been obliged to support both her and the child despite having no say in the matter.

At a basic level equality isn't about giving women rights, its about making rights equal.

[McRainy]

1 hour ago, maxjam said:

I would have been obliged to support both her and the child despite having no say in the matter.

So much wrong with your comment.

Where is your share of the responsibility for contraception in this? Or did you just assume she was taking care of it?

Where is your responsibility in communicating adequately with the person you are having sex with? So you understand what she actually wants?

But no, the poor hard done by male gets entrapped by the scheming woman. Never heard that trope before. 

[maxjam]

48 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

So much wrong with your comment.

Where is your share of the responsibility for contraception in this? Or did you just assume she was taking care of it?

Where is your responsibility in communicating adequately with the person you are having sex with? So you understand what she actually wants?

But no, the poor hard done by male gets entrapped by the scheming woman. Never heard that trope before. 

Figured I'd get that response tbh.

Why automatically assume that the man never took any responsibility for contraception? Just because two people have sex doesn't mean either of them want a baby.  If we assume that neither person wanted a baby and both took precautions if the woman then becomes pregnant why does the man then have no say in what happens next?

Also, from very personal experience my ex-wife came off the pill without telling me - would I have been to blame for not asking her on a sex by sex basis whether we should have a baby?  And after I did find out and bought some condoms I later found these had been pin pricked - fortunately the relationship had degraded so much by then that they were never needed, but where were my rights not to have a baby having taken every reasonable precaution?

Nothing is ever black and white and equality goes both ways.

[StringerBell]

2 hours ago, StivePesley said:

Erm- isn't the man rather taking the decision out of the woman's hands there? Or have you just badly worded it?

As far as I can tell neither.

[McRainy]

1 hour ago, maxjam said:

Why automatically assume that the man never took any responsibility for contraception? 

3 hours ago, maxjam said:

My ex-wife (lovely woman ) tried without my knowledge to get pregnant 

She could hardly get pregnant without your knowledge if you were using contraception yourself. 

If your argument for a lack of male responsibility comes down to the possibility of sabotaged condoms, I don’t think that holds water tbh (no pin intended).