lets collectively lol @ these "I need feminism because..." pics

itsthesheppy

New member
Mar 28, 2012
722
0
0
the clockmaker said:
itsthesheppy said:
Oh hey guys is this another long rambling thread wherein a bunch of white dudes talk about the social struggle of people of a race/gender they don't share as if they have any idea what they're talking about? I just wanna be sure, there's like ten of these per week and I don't want to miss a single one, thanks.

Sorry for the interruption. I'm sure a lot of really good points were being made by people who clearly know what the fuck they're talking about.
Because understanding is governed by the colour of the skin and the nature of your genitalia.

Seriously, I am not in any way claiming that white people are oppressed or that discrimination against them goes beyond the superficial, but seriously now,
a-"We need to be understanding of everyone's view point"
b-"I have an opinion"
a-"Shut the fuck up, you are a white male and therefore have nothing of value to say"

You don't see the hypocrisy of that, or the closely linked hypocrisy of assuming that because someone comes from a social grouping that they immediately understand all issues related to that social grouping.

I'm not going to get involved into what actually is happening in this thread, but that belligerent and exclusionist attitude immediately denies you the right to claim that you are 'pro-equality'.

Furthermore, a hypocrisy that you personally are not guilty of but I have seen several times in this thread, complaining about the objectification of women and then linking a man's value to his number of sexual partners, ie
"you think that women who don't shave their armpits are unattractive,you are a permavirgin"

Why is it offensive to link a women's worth to her sexuality, but not a man to his?
Okay so that is what's happening in this thread? Awesome, thanks. I just wanted to be sure. As a white dude, I of course cannot stand to be left out of things when we're consulting and/or arguing with each other about social issues we tend to be the primary cause of.

If there's one thing that helps me listen and learn, it's talking at length about what I think, and pointing out that, okay, they have it bad, but what about my problems? Why aren't we talking about how this stuff effect me? Given that this thread is fourteen pages long, I think it's safe to say that this is exactly what people have been doing, so I think we can score this as another victory in our ongoing burden of holding the weight of the world on our rippling, muscly, sturdy, lily-white shoulders.
 

the clockmaker

New member
Jun 11, 2010
423
0
0
boots said:
Please don't 'fix' my posts, it implies that my opinion is 'defective' instead of different

No. If he had wanted to complain about the tone of the thread, he would have complained about the tone of the thread. He instead dismissed the idea of threads in this vein based solely on the premise that the authors are white and/or male and therefore incapable of understanding.

That is the premise that I am contesting, so please, if you wish to contradict me, actually go after what I said.
 

Moderated

New member
May 12, 2012
387
0
0
I need feminism because I'm tired of not being able to hit girls in the face.
I need feminism because I'm tired of only women being allowed in the women's room.
 

drisky

New member
Mar 16, 2009
1,605
0
0
I need feminism because this thread proves I need it. People taking sarcastic pictures as an attack on them. I also find it odd the amount of people who find the word feminism more offensive then rape, as if that isn't a sign of a problem.
 

General Twinkletoes

Suppository of Wisdom
Jan 24, 2011
1,426
0
0
SpectacularWebHead said:
General Twinkletoes said:
EDIT: I'm just getting rid of this (escapist needs a delete button...) because I honestly don't care, and don't want to be dragged into the inevitable flamewar.
See now that you've said that I have to respond to your post. Because I am essentially a douchebag.

So yeah, is this another one of those threads where everyone says "This will end badly" and just continue to say that until the thread kinda just dies? Because it looks that way.
People have stopped saying "it's going to end badly" and have just started arguing over absolutely everything. I'd say it's gone pretty badly.
 

Schadrach

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 25, 2020
1,698
242
68
Country
US
boots said:
Ernil Menegil said:
I would definitely say you suffered a severe injustice
How? He was found not guilty.
He *was* arrested and jailed, probably got a perp walk in there, and likely had it all over the (hopefully only local) papers. The accusation in and of itself is also likely to ruin relationships and estrange family, because "not guilty" still isn't "innocent".

The important question, if he Googles himself with the kind of information that an employment application would have on it does his being a "rapist" come up in the first page or so? Because that would seriously harm future employment prospects...
 

Catrixa

New member
May 21, 2011
209
0
0
boots said:
Catrixa said:
snippity snip
Yeah, that does kind of kill the trust between men and women. Luckily, I have an alternative proposed set of rules that are useful for everyone.
1. DON'T FUCKING RAPE PEOPLE
Yeah, that'd be nice. I'd like to take a walk alone at night in a park that isn't in a bad part of town, but could still be dangerous because I have a uterus (I have a male friend who says they're very relaxing and a parent who swears I'd be raped and killed on the spot for opening my door at night while alone). I'd also like to not be called super paranoid and laughed at for being worried about these things, too, but I guess I can't have everything.
 

Uncreation

New member
Aug 4, 2009
476
0
0
Wait... those are joke pics, right? Those people are just being ironic, right? I mean, i could see taking some of the seriously, but others... just, come on!! The guy with the university thing??? How does that make any sense? And the other guy with contributing to rape culture, bullshit term imo, without knowing it?? WTF?
Wow.
 

Terminal Blue

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 20, 2020
3,296
904
118
Country
United Kingdom
Father Time said:
The one we've been talking about, this one
Fine.

evilthecat said:
I'll give you one clue, see if you can work it out.

Feminism.
Feminization.

They have the same prefix. Why?
This is a rhetorical question. The purpose is to encourage the reader to consider a form of logic which they wouldn't otherwise in guide to them to understanding something on their own without me just sitting here and having to explain it.

In this case, the OP did not see what a guy being ashamed of enjoying a strap on had to do with feminism. So I used the rhetorical question to try and illustrate the link.

Feminism posits the existence of a sex/gender system in which men and women are not just physical classes of human being but also social classes, and are differentiated from each other not just physically but also socially. These social differences are, normative feminism would argue, hugely exaggerated and extrapolated into behavioral and psychological expectations. These are "masculinity" and "femininity". They are clearly not the same thing as male and female, as they can both be applied to people who are male or female.

Masculinity and femininity are different in terms of what they enable someone to do. This can be in very broad terms (such as strong, athletic people being regarded as more masculine) or in very intimate terms (being sexually receptive being regarded as a feminine position). According to feminism, many of the problems women in society come from the fact that many "feminine" behaviors are either less rewarding or are actively disempowering and humiliating when compared to their masculine counterparts.

For a man to enjoy being penetrating is feminizing in a very specific way. For most men, the very idea is humiliating. It has overtones of submission and powerlessness.

And now we get to the point. Those overtones of submission and powerlessness do not magically go away when it is a woman being penetrated, which means that to some extent our social conception of sex, but also the behavior around sex, dating rules, sexual morality, marital role distribution and so forth are structured as if penetrative sex is one partner (the receptive one) submitting to the person who penetrates them.

Feminism was never about the social advancement of women, it was about the social advancement of femininity. Therefore, feminism provides a tool for this guy, who enjoys adopting a feminine position in one area of his life, to challenge in his own mind and advocate socially against the unfortunate social implications and baggage which come along with that, just as it does for many women as well.

evilthecat said:
Would it have been easier if she had written it in pink?
I've already done this one to death, but I'll do it again. Basically, she's being sarcastic.

A great many people on this thread seem to have come away from that picture with the impression that she genuinely wants to be harassed in the street. She doesn't. In fact, that would be a contradiction in terms because if she did it would not be harassment. That is the joke.

Going back to the previous point when I was talking about masculinity and femininity as behavioral expectations which might have positive or negative consequences for individuals based on their ability to enact them in different situations. Well, one consequence is that women have generally been discouraged from displaying any recognizable social virtue apart from physical attractiveness, skill as a mother and a few vague ideas about intuition and emotional intelligence. Analytic intelligence, physical or emotional strength or competence has only recently become a real source of social reward for women, and for many it still comes at the expense of their perceived "femininity". Meanwhile, of the valuable "feminine" traits, physical attractiveness is the only one which brings widespread social acclaim to women, and the one most women obsess the most over in their social interactions and relationships with each other.

What the card is trying to suggest, in this case, is that this intense social demand to beautiful is highly damaging both to women who are not attractive, but also (importantly) to women who are, something that's occasionally been neglected or missing from the theory. The point she's making is that it's a double bind, that there is no acceptable way to be a woman which will not result in you being subject to negative consequences. If you are not attractive, there are few other socially acceptable ways to distinguish yourself. If you are, you're going to be treated like a sex object. Both can be prejudicial and damaging to you as a person.

Again, agree or disagree, but it's still wrong to read it as a literal statement.

evilthecat said:
Read the sign one more time. There's a very big clue in the way it is phrased.
To refresh. The sign said: I need feminism because I contribute to rape culture without knowing it.

The response was: Because I don't subscribe to feminism, I'm for rape? lol what

At this point, I'm kind of done talking about rape culture. It's not an idea I particularly support or feel is very useful, but it should be very obvious that the two statements above don't mean the same thing, in fact it strikes me that they they are directly contradictory. Being "for" something (in favour of it) suggests active endorsement.

evilthecat said:
No it's not.

Did you actually read the card?
evilthecat said:
Again, go back and read the card and tell me in what way anything you've said is relevant.
Covering these together because they're so similar.

Card 1
I need feminism because "don't worry, you can't tell" and "I don't think many guys will kick you out of bed" should not be the 'positive' reactions I get for growing out my armpit hair.

lol...again that's a personal confidence thing

Card 2
I need feminism because loving my fat body is apparently a radial concept. Smash patriarchal beauty standards.

A self confidence thing, nothing that an outside power will change for you. You need to do it yourself

I don't think I need to explain beauty standards again do I? You get where these are coming from?

I guess I haven't beaten this one to death on this post yet so I better do so and not point to the other various threads in which I've covered this. You know, because that would mean reading more than one post, which as we all know is impossible.

Feminism is not mind control.

I know the idea that we live in a savage, dystopian nightmare world where the women are either conspiring to or already have somehow seized control of society seems to be weirdly attractive. However, it's really not accurate, neither is it even possible to countenance if you understand the social history of feminism. Most countries do not have feminist political parties, and in those who do said parties are incredibly fringe. People do not advocate feminism on the belief that it will lead to a military coup to replace the government with a new, feminist order in which they will wield power. They advocate it as an idea which has personal significance to them. If a given idea turns out to have personal significance with enough people, then it will become political through the democratic process. This has already happened with many issues of gender equality.

To suggest that any form of advocation of feminism is seeking help from an outside power is a basic misunderstanding. Feminism is not an outside power, it is a highly personal position. It is, in fact, what allows these people to have to confidence to post pictures of their armpit hair online or to publically affirm their love of a body which is not considered conventionally attractive by many other people. Berating them for a lack of confidence is completely missing the point, however you feel about their argument.

evilthecat said:
You know what's funny? People who justify their own ignorance by claiming that the knowledge in question isn't important.

A cursory knowledge of gender studies would at least help you understand these cards before you embarrassed yourself on a public forum.
I'll accept there was no need for me to say that.. just like there was no need for this thread in the first place.

Like I said though, this is one of those areas where people sometimes feel they have a God-given right to have their opinion taken seriously over and above that of everyone else because they have a penis (or very occasionally a vagina) and thus understand some deep and fundamental truth about "gender" (frequently misusing the term) which is able to override and cut through any formalized knowledge of the subject. After all, it's not like it's real knowledge, it's biased knowledge produced by women.

Gender studies is by no means the only subject to suffer this, but there is a very peculiar brand of misinformation in some sectors regarding what gender studies is and does. I'm not going to write a full lecture on gender studies 101, there are many books in your local library which do that, however, and which would probably be good to read before assuming you can pass judgement on the field.

evilthecat said:
Really, this is too difficult for you? It's a pretty simple point.. if there's any criticism which can be made of it it's that it's actually too simple.
Probably the only thing I haven't explained at all yet. But then, it is a really simple point.

Most artists whose work makes it into galleries even today are men.
Almost all paintings of nudes produced even today depict women.

In the past, art was created primarily for male consumption. Women did not generally have the resources to commission or buy it, and even if they did the idea of women consuming any kind of art with erotic potential has been completely taboo for some time. Women, for much of recent history, have not been thought of as sexual agents at all.

Despite large numbers of young female artists, art is still very much a boy's club, and not just the artists themselves but also the consumers. This has real concrete manifestations, for example women seem to have great trouble getting their work into galleries and tend to be consistently poorly rated.

This may not be entirely unwarranted, there may be stylistic pressures which incline women towards different (less popular or marketable) styles of art, but regardless.. unless we're arguing that women are inherently too stupid to paint, there's a problem here somewhere and it's one which the art world needs to sit down and have a think about, if nothing else because it can't be good for creativity and the lasting appeal of the art of today to have it almost exclusively produced by and consumed by one type of person.

Was that everything you hoped for?
 

molester jester

New member
Sep 4, 2008
593
0
0
TomLikesGuitar said:
If she is conscious then who cares if she's black out drunk, she's making a decision to sleep with a guy. You are responsible for the decisions you make while inebriated.

I've been in the position where a girl came up to me at a party, pulled me downstairs to her room, begged me to fuck her, and then passed out. When she woke up, she told her boyfriend (who she neglected to mention the night prior) that I'd raped her.
So what you are saying is you are a rapist.

ok cool glad we cleared that up.
 

DevilWithaHalo

New member
Mar 22, 2011
625
0
0
bleys2487 said:
Feminism, the radical belief that women are people too.
People are often treated like they act. When people act like children, they are treated like children. When being act like adults, they are treated like adults.
bleys2487 said:
I find it funny the majority of people laughing about it are men.
That's because the majority of the time 'whoneedsfeminismfeminists' are blaming men. Why would we laugh at that?
bleys2487 said:
Those poor middle class, white males. Must be so hard. I mean, after all, you probably held a door for a woman. Poor boys, so oppressed.
I like the "middle class" caveat. I'm sure the "middle class", white females have thoroughly been oppressed by the system that bends over backwards to give them all of the rights men have and some extra men don't. (I'll ask you, since other people can't provide an answer; what right do men have that women do not?)

Not all people are middle class, and not all middle class are white. Please attempt to hide your bigotry a little better next time; it's painfully obvious you despise the middle class white male.
bleys2487 said:
Let's see you babies go through just a period. Probably break most of you.
Pain is a purely personal experience; everyone reacts to pain differently. Just because you are biologically designed (for the lack of a better term) to suffer a certain type of pain, does not mean that men do not feel pain in equal amounts. Ever been kicked in the balls? You'll never understand because you're not male. In the same way males will never understand female pain. An argument about who has it worse is merely a pity party; and no one likes those. (Besides the fact that the greatest pain a human can feel affects both sexes)

I've personally suffered various amounts of pain and witness others go through other various amounts of pain. I do not wish anyone to suffer through pain just to sympathize with your position; it speaks to your questionable character.
bleys2487 said:
I wish males could go through child-birth. Oh, the tears.
There are two reasons you don't...

The first is that males are not designed (again, the lack of a better term) for it; so their bodies would not fill them with all kinds of pain suppressants that the female body does during childbirth. I've actually witnessed the experiment where men were attached to an electrode that simulated childbirth pain; and again the researchers forgot that female biology temporary adjusts to compensate for the extreme shift. In essence, they were torturing the volunteers in the name of understanding and equality. Unless you're for torturing males, in which case shame on you.

The second is that it would create a serious dramatic shift in evolutionary sexual development of the human specie. Females; as already the physically inferior of the two sexes would be quickly obsoleted in the sexual market place. Beyond personal sexual preference, biologically speaking maters tend not to procreate with inferior partners. The female population of the specie would plummet in a matter of generations.

It's the equivilent to radfems calling for the extermination of males; it would doom the female side of the specie. You're just damning yourself.
bleys2487 said:
l.
o.
f*cking
l.
Indeed, but for entirely different reasons.
tyriless said:
Like with every goddamn movement you are going to have your outliers, folks that take the central ideas to an extreme.
Curious, do you actively condemn them like you do those within this thread?
tyriless said:
-equal pay for equal work
That's a matter of great debate. I'm curious what your thoughts on the following are... <youtube=ziWzgs40euc>
tyriless said:
-a woman's right to do with her body what she wants
To the extent that it does not adversely affect males in a disproportionate way; I agree. I believe women should have the right to an abortion to determine whether or not they have a child; I do not agree their decision be forced on the male.
tyriless said:
-a woman's worth is not inherently tied to her ability to reproduce and a man's desire to copulate with her
Outside of sexual reproduction, I agree. Similarly, a man's worth is not inherently tied with his social status and female's desire to access his resources.
tyriless said:
- a fair representation of women and men in management positions
I disagree. Equal representation is not necessary for equal parity gender wise. Our current government (USA) is dominated by men; yet every right and provision is granted to women by these men. Exactly what would change in politics if we had a few more women and a few less men in it? Their job function remains the same; serve the civilian community and insure equal rights and protections to everyone in it.

How will a business change if a CEO is a female as opposed to male? The structure of the business is still primarily determined by it's product/service value and process. Will KFC serve their chicken in pink buckets instead? We're arguing semantics at this point are we not?
tyriless said:
- a women or men having to endure sexual harassment to maintain or progress through their career.
I think you may have not worded this correctly; do you mean *avoid* sexual harassment?
tyriless said:
then you are feminist.
I am a feminist; yet I have disagreed with some of these. What do you think?
tyriless said:
If you believe in none of these, you are huge dick.
Does that mean if I only believe in some I'm half a dick? I just want to make sure I understand the insults lobbied at me.
 

Giftfromme

New member
Nov 3, 2011
555
0
0
DevilWithaHalo said:
I bless your soul for bringing me that video. That entire channel is incredibly politically incorrect, and yet has a lot of truth to it. This has made my week, at least
 

the clockmaker

New member
Jun 11, 2010
423
0
0
itsthesheppy said:
Okay so that is what's happening in this thread? Awesome, thanks. I just wanted to be sure. As a white dude, I of course cannot stand to be left out of things when we're consulting and/or arguing with each other about social issues we tend to be the primary cause of.
Issues here, identification of a personality trait by race and or gender,
Association of people with societal ills based solely on their race and or gender,
Implication by sarcasm that A-all members of this discussion are white males and B-That white males are, by their presence in a discussion on the topic, a invasive presence.

If there's one thing that helps me listen and learn, it's talking at length about what I think, and pointing out that, okay, they have it bad, but what about my problems? Why aren't we talking about how this stuff effect me?
Implication that all white male presence in this discussion is inherently self interested, or that a discussion of how societal change is affecting a given societal grouping is is not morally justified. Also disregarding any and all middle of the road, well reasoned or feminist positions that conflict with those shown in the pictures that spurred the OP
Given that this thread is fourteen pages long, I think it's safe to say that this is exactly what people have been doing,
conflating length of a thread with your arbitrarily chosen topic
so I think we can score this as another victory
Conflating any white male involved in this conversation as a 'point scoring' individual who is, of course on a 'team' with all other white males.
in our ongoing burden of holding the weight of the world on our rippling, muscly, sturdy,
Implying, by dint of the context of your original post, that any white male discussing issues of feminism, must subscribe to the 'white man's burden' myth, must conflate strength with worth as a male and must be sexist and/ or racist
lily-white shoulders.
Conflating white skin with a lily, implying a lesser degree of strength based on someone's skin colour.

Surely you can see the amount of stereotyping that you are pushing with these posts. White Males must be overbearing, must be obsessed with strength, must seek to dominate women and other ethnicities and must be incapable of understanding based on their gender and ethic characteristics.

I put it to you that whilst feminism is a necessary and on balance beneficial movement, the at times belligerent, prejudicial and 'pigeon holing' nature of a lot of the discussions has led to a degree of perfectly understandable backlash. Your initial contention that white men (aside from the fact that no one mentioned ethnicity until you did, implying that you link any opposition to feminism with an ethnic characteristic) cannot be understanding, supportive, or even contrary in a reasoned manner adds to an increasingly confrontational environment, which stifles discussion both good and bad.

Several of the pictures posted in the OP put forward unreasonable positions, leading to an implication that the individuals in question were seeking a culture of universal praise rather than one of universal acceptance. Several of the posters on the 'anti-feminism' side have also put forward unreasonable positions, implying that there are no negative or positive discriminations extant in this day and age. To oppose either group in that respect would have been acceptable, however you stated, or at least put forward the opinion that their opinions were invalid because A, they are male and B, they are white. That is unacceptable and so I also put forward that belligerent and discriminatory attitudes such as yours create the hostility that you often decry, bogging down the discussion and slowing down progress.
 

TomLikesGuitar

New member
Jul 6, 2010
1,003
0
0
molester jester said:
TomLikesGuitar said:
If she is conscious then who cares if she's black out drunk, she's making a decision to sleep with a guy. You are responsible for the decisions you make while inebriated.

I've been in the position where a girl came up to me at a party, pulled me downstairs to her room, begged me to fuck her, and then passed out. When she woke up, she told her boyfriend (who she neglected to mention the night prior) that I'd raped her.
So what you are saying is you are a rapist.

ok cool glad we cleared that up.
lol exactly

(I'm assuming/hoping-to-god that you're being sarcastic.)
 

itsthesheppy

New member
Mar 28, 2012
722
0
0
the clockmaker said:
itsthesheppy said:
Okay so that is what's happening in this thread? Awesome, thanks. I just wanted to be sure. As a white dude, I of course cannot stand to be left out of things when we're consulting and/or arguing with each other about social issues we tend to be the primary cause of.
Issues here, identification of a personality trait by race and or gender,
Association of people with societal ills based solely on their race and or gender,
Implication by sarcasm that A-all members of this discussion are white males and B-That white males are, by their presence in a discussion on the topic, a invasive presence.

If there's one thing that helps me listen and learn, it's talking at length about what I think, and pointing out that, okay, they have it bad, but what about my problems? Why aren't we talking about how this stuff effect me?
Implication that all white male presence in this discussion is inherently self interested, or that a discussion of how societal change is affecting a given societal grouping is is not morally justified. Also disregarding any and all middle of the road, well reasoned or feminist positions that conflict with those shown in the pictures that spurred the OP
Given that this thread is fourteen pages long, I think it's safe to say that this is exactly what people have been doing,
conflating length of a thread with your arbitrarily chosen topic
so I think we can score this as another victory
Conflating any white male involved in this conversation as a 'point scoring' individual who is, of course on a 'team' with all other white males.
in our ongoing burden of holding the weight of the world on our rippling, muscly, sturdy,
Implying, by dint of the context of your original post, that any white male discussing issues of feminism, must subscribe to the 'white man's burden' myth, must conflate strength with worth as a male and must be sexist and/ or racist
lily-white shoulders.
Conflating white skin with a lily, implying a lesser degree of strength based on someone's skin colour.

Surely you can see the amount of stereotyping that you are pushing with these posts. White Males must be overbearing, must be obsessed with strength, must seek to dominate women and other ethnicities and must be incapable of understanding based on their gender and ethic characteristics.

I put it to you that whilst feminism is a necessary and on balance beneficial movement, the at times belligerent, prejudicial and 'pigeon holing' nature of a lot of the discussions has led to a degree of perfectly understandable backlash. Your initial contention that white men (aside from the fact that no one mentioned ethnicity until you did, implying that you link any opposition to feminism with an ethnic characteristic) cannot be understanding, supportive, or even contrary in a reasoned manner adds to an increasingly confrontational environment, which stifles discussion both good and bad.

Several of the pictures posted in the OP put forward unreasonable positions, leading to an implication that the individuals in question were seeking a culture of universal praise rather than one of universal acceptance. Several of the posters on the 'anti-feminism' side have also put forward unreasonable positions, implying that there are no negative or positive discriminations extant in this day and age. To oppose either group in that respect would have been acceptable, however you stated, or at least put forward the opinion that their opinions were invalid because A, they are male and B, they are white. That is unacceptable and so I also put forward that belligerent and discriminatory attitudes such as yours create the hostility that you often decry, bogging down the discussion and slowing down progress.
Quoted above: somebody who I don't think quite got it, but spent a great deal of time and energy into not getting it. Comedy or tragedy? Depends on your perspective I suppose.
 

the clockmaker

New member
Jun 11, 2010
423
0
0
itsthesheppy said:
Quoted above: somebody who I don't think quite got it, but spent a great deal of time and energy into not getting it. Comedy or tragedy? Depends on your perspective I suppose.
You really cannot help but fall back on exclusionary thoughts can you? First off, people like me should not be involved because we are A-White and B-Have a penis (notably you brought up the topic of ethnicity out of nowhere). Then you attempt to shoo me off by claiming that 'I just don't get it'.

You cannot articulate what it is I don't get, nor how I have not gotten 'it' but apparently I do not fall into the ranks of the magically informed like you do. Come on sweetheart, its okay, you can tell me, I won't tell the nasty 'other', that your belligerent tactics require in order to not seem dickish.

If you can rebut or otherwise negate anything I said, do so, if not, well you will have shown that the understanding that you hold, your treasured attribute that allows you to 'get it' without being able show what it is, well you will have shown that it is nothing more than a flimsy arrogant façade.