stinkychops said:
Then what was your point?
I pulled something because it was argumentative and could have been construed as provocateurism. You decided to be argumentative anyway.
A thin skinned one? How is calling you out for making a non-point thin skinned? Or are you just throwing as much mud as possible and hoping some of it sticks?
...
what? I haven't "thrown"
any "mud."
Should I cry about you calling me 'think skinned' or is this another case of you being flawless and thus not being a complete hypocrite? Wait nope my mistake, you're a flat out hypocrite, sorry bro.
I just
love how the Internet has reduced "hypocrite" to a generic snarl word flung in an attempt to auto-discredit the opposition.
I'd say theres a significant difference, my assertions were at least suggested by her manner and post.
May I ask why you are quoting/criticizing me and yet not applying the same arguments to her? I'll go ahead and assume its bias because you agree with her.
Well, let's see:
JanatUrlich said:
The problem is that people like you are blind to the fact that the world is not equal.
That's the rudest thing she said. In fact, it's the only thing she said that was aimed at you in particular
and could be construed as rude. (Her assertion that the forum was sexist was fairly general.)
You, on the other hand, came in with a flippant dismissal of one of her earlier posts, got combative as soon as she replied to you, and have remained that way.
This is a poorly veiled attempt to argue around the point at hand by attacking my posts.
Sorry, but all of the "attacking" here has been on your end, with the possible exception of the "blind" comment. And that was pretty tame by comparison.
I see you didn;t take my prompt to discuss the topic at hand, which I'll take as a sign that you don't actually have anything worthwhile to say.
I
did discuss "the topic at hand." If you ignored it, that's on you.
Actually, I used the word trivial. You yourself just called it minor. Don't lie.
You
did dismiss it as irrelevant. You acknowledged that she'd brought it up, then completely brushed it off. Calling me a liar because you didn't use
that exact word doesn't prove anything.
I'd suggest you were deliberately misrepresenting my argument, but I won't give you that much credit.
Well,
that was the equivalent of making moose antlers of your hands and going "neener neener neener."
Go back to my original post and link to me, if you would be so kind, the pieces where I "brush off" and be "dismissive".
Well, let's see:
stinkychops said:
As for your trivial complaints about clothing conventions... Way to cherry pick scenarios. I'm not going to engage in a little "WE HAVE IT WORSE" duke route, and begin listing all the things men have worse then women.
Here's what I take it you were responding to:
JanatUrlich said:
A woman is called a slut for wearing a short skirt but it is perfectly acceptable for a man to walk around bare chested.
Sure, in the grand scheme of things, clothing conventions
are minor. But considering the example she used (only moderately extreme and not at all rare), you could have at least bothered to actually address it instead of contemptuously brushing it off.
Instead of supplying arguments which you find offensive. I'm not going to apologise for your sensitivity. I'm just going to briefly refer back to my mention of "need for victimisation" in my post to Janat Ulrich. Feel free to give that some thought.
Y'know...in light of the fact that I accused you of being thin-skinned, that looks suspiciously like a "NO U."
Heaven forbid I be making an argument, instead of attacking the poor oppressed females!
No, you're just championing the
poor oppressed males. And breaking out a wounded-gazelle gambit, while you're at it.
Of course, because when I point out someone being rude, and label them based on a post that's unacceptable.
When you do the EXACT same thing to me, you're a hero.
Your response was disproportionate, and I rest my case.
You're not exactly making it difficult.
(That was a terrible stretch of my metaphor)
And yet, you felt the need to snip at it anyway. Clearly, it stung.
Ozzythecat said:
The convention that because I have a penis I can only look at women as objects, and that when I say I respect women I get looked at like OJ on trial.
I'm sorry that you've run into some women of the sort that I tend to call "female-chauvinist sows." Some people, regardless of gender, are just jerks.
