AJC.com > Opinion > Woman to Woman > Archives > 2006 > September > 28 > Entry
Should men still be expected to protect women?
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Commentary
Despite the aggressive feminization of our culture, it appears that men still feel a responsibility to protect women. Society may not expect it anymore, but the men themselves do. While some women decry that “paternalistic” notion, I’m grateful it has endured.
An August study by Ohio University’s Scripps Survey Research Center asked, “Recall that male passengers on the Titanic agreed to give up their places on the lifeboats for women and children. If there were a similar life-or-death situation today, do you think men should be expected to die and allow women to live?” Nearly two-thirds of men said yes - while only 39% of women did. In fact, 43% percent of women thought the idea “old-fashioned.”
For years, women have been told that accepting help or protection from a man somehow makes them less than equal. And many men have been criticized instead of commended for chivalry - for following the protective, positive male instincts that are invaluable to society. Day to day, some guys have actually felt it safer to let a door slam in a woman’s face than to - oh how offensive - actually hold it for her.
But when it comes to life or death situations, the valiant instinct to protect will surge to the fore. Men are created to be warriors and defenders for those who are physically weaker than they.
Now, we women sure may hate the thought of losing our man to a sinking ship and not want to be the cause for his death (which I’m betting is the main reason only 39% of women agreed with that scenario), and we might choose to sacrifice our own lifeboat seat to stay together. But regardless, I think most women agree with Michelle Bernard, president of the Independent Women’s Forum, when she says that, “There is a place for chivalry. Part of that is being a protector. We at IWF celebrate the Titanic memorial, because so many men gave up their lives for women and children and we honor that sacrifice. And although many women said the idea is old-fashioned, the survey also showed that many think it isn’t. Most women believe in equality but still believe men should be a protector of women. And we are grateful for that.�?
Rebuttal
Do women want to be placed on a pedestal or do they want to be accorded the rights of equal treatment? It’s nice to have your cake and have someone feed it to you as well. But cultivating conflicting behaviors in men is unrealistic. To think men are biologically programmed to be both warriors and polite gents is fantasy.
And while we’re talking about fantasy, let’s talk about the realities of the Titanic tragedy: It took hours for the Titanic to sink. Many of the rafts were only half full. That’s because those onboard assumed the damage to the Titanic was trivial, not a life and death situation.
If men aboard the Titanic were genuinely invested in the welfare of women they would have escorted the lower class female passengers onto the raft boats at the same rate as their cherished progeny trophies. They didn’t.
This is reality and the reality is that in emergency situations women are more likely to be crushed to death than courteously escorted to safety. It’s called “human survival instinct�? and it supersedes our culturally-fostered social norms.
A 2005 stampede on a Tigris River Bridge in Baghdad left nearly 1,000 dead of which most were reported to be women and children. During the religious observation of Hajj in 2001, sixty-six percent of the victims in that stampede were women.
I could go on.
I don’t bring up these examples to mock courteous men but to question the romantic notion that men are biologically programmed to protect women. Civil behavior is learned behavior. Chivalry isn’t inborn; it has military origins. It was a code among professional soldiers passed down from medieval times adopted by Christians during the Crusades to defend the ideals of the Church. Since then, it has morphed into a Miss Manner’s checklist.
It’s comforting that early ideas about chivalry included notions about protecting “the weak�?. But let’s get real — opening doors and assisting women is hardly an instinctual male trait if it has to be written down with pen and paper as a reminder for rowdy men.
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By Brian Curtis
October 2, 2006 07:58 AM | Link to this
I strongly doubt Shauti’s assumption that the women who voted against men sacrificing themselves were all “worried about losing their own man,” as she blithely assumes.
Who’s to say that they didn’t value principles like, say, equal treatment, more highly? Or that they wouldn’t be comfortable with ANYONE sacrificing their own lives for her personal benefit? These are impulses at least equal in nobility to the concept of chivalrous self-sacrifice.
And the “Men are created to be warriors” line is a dead giveaway… the old Biology Is Destiny argument. Of course, that argument falls apart in all other areas, such as marriage vs. indiscriminate sex, compassion vs. selfishness, and reason vs. blind instinct—basically every other facet that makes up “civilization.”
I think a better question is this: Should you, regardless of gender, sacrifice your own well-being to help others in danger or in need? Yes, it would be a d-amn nice thing to do (though it must be balanced against your own need to survive too). Should others expect it of you, simply because of your gender, race, or anything else? Nope.
Welcome to the 21st century, Shaunti… where the presumption that others will lay down their lives for you simply because you’re a woman is revealed for the attitude of pure selfishness that it is.
By Renee
October 2, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this
Excellent, excellent comment Brian!! Using the Titanic analogy, that was a different time frame, and men and women had different ideologies. Giving up your life for anyone is quite a sacrifice, but nobody should feel obligated to do so just because they are a male, nor should it be expected of a man.
By lozen
October 2, 2006 09:41 AM | Link to this
What world is Shaunti living in? Men are created to be warriors and defenders for those who are physically weaker than they. Where does she get this stuff she comes up with? Brian, you made excellent comments as always.
By lozen
October 2, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this
Sojourner Truth (1797-1883): Ain’t I A Woman? Delivered 1851 Women’s Convention, Akron, Ohio …That man over there says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud-puddles, or gives me any best place! And ain’t I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And ain’t I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man - when I could get it - and bear the lash as well! And ain’t I a woman? I have borne thirteen children, and seen most all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother’s grief, none but Jesus heard me! And ain’t I a woman?
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this
I saw a thing on PBS last night about Hippos, and wonder if I should stake out my beach-side, and attack all intruding males, so that I would be the only one breeding with the females. Most of it is in the bluff anyway, so…(just as long as I ACT wild and crazy, I might be successful). Perhaps I should behave like a wild mustang, and have a harem of willing females.
I frequently have women hold doors for me, in the same way I will often hold the door for them. And I always remark, “What a gentle-lady”, and it causes abit of a laugh from the female, since they know EXACTLY what I am saying. LOL
Is it just me, or is Florida’s Foley attempting to define for the GOP, HIS version of family values? Or just giving new meaning to that phrase? hmmmmm.
By Astronomy Guy
October 2, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this
Unless it is someone who is elderly, someone with a infant or a bunch of kids (Female or Male, working retail I see it all the time) or the weather is just bad, I no longer hold the door open for anyone. I no longer use the term Ma’am or Sir unless I’m in the retail uniform.
I won’t get involved with a fight either, unless its someone who is not capable of defending themselves. Of course yelling to break it up with my deep voice and approaching with my girth, the fight tends to stop by itself. One time both parties fled. :-)
I now tend mind my own business out in public, less my head be pinched off for displaying some form of manners.
One odd trend that has thrown me off. I have noticed that the door has been held open a lot for me in the recent years. It tends to be both Male and Female on a equal basis. I’m in my mid thirty’s and while big, not morbidly so. I have no appearance of being febrile or unable to take care of myself. No kids, and the weather is perfectly fine. What gives?
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this
AstroGuy - perhaps people are “just” giving you random acts of kindness; it’s a good thing, pass it on.
By lozen
October 2, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this
Should any person still be “expected” to protect any person from harm? Should a weaker man expect a stronger man to protect him? Should a weaker woman expect a stronger woman to protect her? Oh, no. Oh, no! Only weak little women should expect big strong men to protect them. Give me a break! Women need to learn to protect themselves instead of expecting anyone else to do it.
“Civil behavior is learned behavior.” At least one of these women lives in the real world!
By lozen
October 2, 2006 10:21 AM | Link to this
Courtesy is wonderful and should be practiced by both genders don’t ya think? I hold the door sometimes for men. Why not? Sometimes men hold the door for me. Why not? I hold the door open sometimes for women. Why not?
By kimberly
October 2, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this
Both Shaunti and Diane are right this week. Yes, we DO appreciate chivalry, but yeah, it’s pretty much dead.
By Mara
October 2, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this
great lead-off comment Brian.
Chilao, lozen also good comments. The one from Sojourner Truth was especially apt, considering the premise is that women aren’t strong enough to protect themselves.
I’m with Chilao regarding Astronomy Guy. Holding the door so it doesn’t smack the next guy in the face is a matter of politeness/kindness and has little to do with gender.
Renee - I agree. Nobody should be expected to endanger themselves for someone else’s benefit.
By Just Being Me
October 2, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
I’m afraid to admit this, but if I was placed in the line of fire for any reason at all, I would hope a man would push me out the way and take the hit for me.
I doubt I’d do the same for a man I don’t know.
Of course, it’s quite hard to know what you’d do when you’re not in the situation, so maybe I would… but, I don’t think so.
I think there’s something psychological to be said about this, though… because I paused for a minute just now to think about it, and this is what I came up with. If someone who was (according to the rules of society) weaker than I (i.e. an elderly person, child, disabled, or even an animal) was in the line of fire, I would without question push them out of the way and take the hit.
I think there are some deeply embedded expectations in my mind about the order of society… who is weaker, stronger, the protector, the protected, etc…
By ProDealthPenalty
October 2, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
The problem is men DON’T protect women & children from what they really need protecting from, DANGEROUS MEN !
You can’t expect a group that proves everyday they are dangerous to get organized & actually police themselves.
By Just Being Me
October 2, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this
I smell a Whiley.
By Renee
October 2, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this
I smell Whiley lol.
JBM - I’m with you, I would WANT a man or ANYONE to take a bullet for me if my life is in danger, lol.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 2, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this
OK I admit it, I LOVE for men to be chivalrous and courteous towards me. I like for them to pick up the check on dates, hold the car door open for me, etc. I have no problem with any of those things. I reciprocate too in order to let the man know that I appreciate the things that he does for me.
I don’t expect anyone to save me, BUT if you see me drowning, or the big bad guy coming my way and I’m not moving, or I freeze up (like in the movies), PLEASE help a sistah out and pull me out of the way!!! Male or female, it doesn’t matter.
By lozen
October 2, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this
JBM, instead of waiting for a man to push you out of the line of fire, it would be far more helpful to be trying to figure out a way to save yourself! And speaking of warriors and protectors - how many conquered women have been raped, tortured, and murdered by the warriors who conquered them to protect their women?
By SusieHomeMaker
October 2, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this
Is it just me, or is Florida’s Foley attempting to define for the GOP, HIS version of family values? Or just giving new meaning to that phrase?
ooooohhhh you are bad!!! Although, I’ve made some really awful comments on that myself on F*X Network chat rooms!! I think a lot of the foxers have a “bible hit” out on me!!!
By Mara
October 2, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this
Just a thought - “Chivalry” to one person may look like “condescension” to someone else. Being courteous by holding the door, helping with packages, etc is mere decency, regardless of gender. Simple courtesy, in fact. Which is indeed a vanishing virtue, so I’m assuming that it is what kimberly meant when she said “we” appreciate “chivalry” (though I suppose the men appreciate courtesy also).
ON the other hand, some people use “chivalry” as an excuse to treat women as “less than…”. Assuming that a woman can’t possibly fix that flat tire, mow the lawn, or make financial decisions alone is condescending and NOT something I would miss…though I suppose that there are those women who like being treated as incompetent fools.
By Mara
October 2, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
Susie - in your 11:14 post you said it better than I did, though I tried :^)
hey JBM. PDP, a whiley?! heh, heh, heh. sound like, eh?
By lozen
October 2, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this
Chivalry has always been a double edged sword for women. If women are seen as too weak and fragile to open a door for themselves, that weakness can be used as an excuse to keep you from getting a higher education or working in a high paying job. It’s not possible to be seen as weak in one area and strong and capable in another. That held women back in the past and that’s why the left harps on this on and on as if it were something new. The left wants women back where we were 35 years ago before the second wave of feminism opened doors to law school, medical school, business management, etc. to women! Please understand what these people want!
By kimberly
October 2, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this
Mara, I’ve taken care of myself for most of my adult life, and now work, kids, pets, home, yard, car, the gutters, toilets, tiles, walls, garage, tools, bills, doing all the “women’s work” AND making the decisions. I’M TIRED. Men today are all to happy to cop a cheap thrill on a Friday night, but when it’s time to pressure-wash the driveway, they’re out on the golf course or exploring some other “meaningful relationship.” Yes, chivalry is dead and I mourn it.
That being said, my warmest gratitude and affection is bestowed up on the rare gem who still possesses and shares it. {;->
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this
Lozen - raise your two hands, and do the left-right thing. LOL “left, left, left right left, left, left, left right left”.
on that thought, in sail-boat racing, and vessels in general, there is port and starboard, and how I got it down years ago was PORT was the left-bank of Paris, with the red-wine, since the running lights on vessels and aircraft are red for port and green for starboard.
I thought that was Whiley as well.
By ProDealthPenalty
October 2, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
Why is Chivalry always defined as something as simple as opening a door? I’ve opened doors for men if the situation arised since I was a child & only thought of it as being polite. Why put a special title on a simple polite gesture? Why do men only get this Chilvary badge? And how many centuries are people going to use the sinking of the Titanic as the ultimate male Chivalry? Is that the only example?
By Just Being Me
October 2, 2006 12:00 PM | Link to this
Lozen, if a car is speeding toward you doing 99 mph and you’re in the middle of the road, you probably won’t have too much time to “figure out a way to save yourself! Ditto for a speeding bullet, or falling debris, etc.
I’m with you, Susie (and you, Kimberly). I love chivalry. I want a man (or a woman…lol) to open the car door for me, open the restaurant door for me, pull out my chair (which NOBODY does anymore), help me into my coat, carry my bags, etc. I like playing the role of the “weaker” gender (and no, I’m not saying that women are weak/er - I’m saying that I like “playing the role”).
In return, I always say “thank you.” And, I show my gratitude, too… ~giggle~
As Kimberly said, chivalry is dead, and I mourn it.
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this
“Democrats are using a very ugly occurrence to play politics,” said National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Carl Forti. (compliments of NYDailyNews, in a news article over the FoleyAffair)
So we best stop that, Susie. LOL We know they wouldn’t mention it, if it was the reverse. LMAO
By Toad
October 2, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this
At my work place we enter through two sets of double doors. Often a man holds the first door open for me. Then if I hold the second door open for him some men act embarrassed. I just feel like it is common curtesy. If they don’t want to go through the door I opened I’ll say “one good turn deserves another.” Their embarrassment indicates to me that having a door held open for them shows them to be weak or a lesser person.
By ProDeathPenalty
October 2, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this
Should men still be expected to protect women?
That’s not really the correct question to ask. The question should be, are men capable of protecting women & have they ever successfully done so other than spiratically here & there?
The Terry Nichols situation is a fine example of how well that protection Chivalry thing is going.
By chuck
October 2, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this
Brian, I don’t think her comments were asking for help for herself as much as she was defending the concept of chivalry and the SELFLESSNESS of the male respondents.
As for me, I always used to hold the door, change the tire, stop if a woman was having car trouble etc. Now, while that is still my first inclination, I have learned to ask, “Can I get that for you?” I have never had a woman tell me no to this point.
To me it is just courtesy to do that.
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this
From MovieMistakes.com: The lake that Jack told Rose he went ice fishing on when she was threatening to jump is Lake Wissota, a man-made lake in Wisconsin near Chippewa Falls (where Jack grew up). The lake was only filled with water in 1918 when a power company built a dam on the Chippewa River, six years after the Titanic sank.
By Toad
October 2, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this
Foley is my mother’s representative and she’s said for years that he’s gay, even though he hasn’t openly identified that way. His opponent called her and said “Foley didn’t vote for the marriage protection amendment.” My mother said gay marriage didn’t make one bit of difference to her. (She’s not open about having two queer children, but when ever some one “outs” someone to her, she just says “So what?”) So apparently Foley’s sexual preferences were an open secret.
By Renee
October 2, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this
I hate the word queer when used synonymous with gay/lesbian. Just my thing.
Chilao - very interesting.
It’s respectful to hold the door for someone one else no matter the gender. It’s amazing that people read so much into it (i.e. being the weaker person etc). It’s respect. I hold the door for men and women, and both hold the door for me. People in general should have good manners and be respectful.
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 12:33 PM | Link to this
I will often hold the doors for groups, and everyone will get comfortable once I come out with “They hired a doorman” even though USUALLY people will know I am joking.
Foley best not ‘come out’ at this point, otherwise it will be ‘see, all those homos are pedophiles’.
By Mara
October 2, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this
Toad, what has Foley’s sexual orientation got to do with his inappropriate, and possibly illegal, interaction with underage male pages? It wouldn’t be any more distasteful if they’d have been underage female pages…
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 12:48 PM | Link to this
It wouldn’t be any more distasteful if they’d have been underage female pages…
Just more understandable. (j/k) (but certainly more socially-acceptable for the family-values folks..I would not be having so much fun with this if they hadn’t been whining about the immediate demise of Western Civilization, over family-values, for the past 30 years).
By Mara
October 2, 2006 12:48 PM | Link to this
anyone recall a few months ago when the topic was whether or not a woman’s attire could contribute to her rape? I keep flashing back to Johns comment that “”…if women want to be truly equal,…they can’t expect to be treated with old-fashioned deference at the same time”
Deja Vous?
I’m lucky enough that my husband understands that “old-fashioned deference” should apply equally to both genders.
By lozen
October 2, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this
Of course I meant the right that keeps harping on gender stuff and not the left. It is Monday!
By The72John
October 2, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this
Since when does courtesy have to be linked to gender? Unless we’re talking about a situation where a man has to physically defend a women because he happens to be stronger or more capable of self-defense (not saying this is always the case - this is a hypothetical) it’s really silly to suggest that we should only be courteous to women. How about being courteous to everyone? The world would be a much nice place.
Foley is my mother’s representative and she’s said for years that he’s gay, even though he hasn’t openly identified that way. His opponent called her and said “Foley didn’t vote for the marriage protection amendment.� My mother said gay marriage didn’t make one bit of difference to her. (She’s not open about having two queer children, but when ever some one “outs� someone to her, she just says “So what?�) So apparently Foley’s sexual preferences were an open secret.
Foley isn’t gay - he’s a pedophile or probably more accurately an ephebophile. Heterosexuals and Homosexuals are defined by an attraction to emotional equals. Ephebophiles are adults who are exclusively attracted to post-pubescent adolescents. Calling him gay just reinforces innacurate stereotypes perpetuated by evil, hate-filled religious fanatics. Like chuck.
And this isn’t playing politics - it’s pointing out gross hypocrisy on the part of the self-righteous and self-appointed moral majority garbage in charge of the Republican party. Hastert and his fundy cronies have known about this travesty for over a year and did nothing. They should all be resigning right now, not just one of them.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 2, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this
What I find amusing (gasp!! that was horrid Susie!!) about the whole affair is that there are representatives in the Republican party who are WAY too interested in everyone’s sex else’s life!!! Yet, and here’s the kicker, they aren’t that worried about their own party’s members inapproriate sex life!! Go figure!! As long as it’s everyone else there’s “No Excuse!!” (Clinton/Lewinsky et al. — and they were adults), but if it’s one of their own, it’s a different story!!
The headlines on Fox News read “Foley caught sending inapproriate emails to a MALE Page”. If it was someone from the opposing party who got caught, it would’ve read “Foley Caught Enticing a CHILD!!”
By Toad
October 2, 2006 01:06 PM | Link to this
OK, I’m not saying gay means liking young boys, I’m just saying that I’ve known for a while that Foley is “gay” and apparently a lot of his constituents knew it too but they prefer he stay in the closet. I’m just mentioning that by way of saying I knew he was gay and I don’t think he’s married. It’s just unfortunate for the gay community that he prefers underage boys and this will reflect badly on us. (I like the word ‘queer’ because it covers the whole glbt, etc. gamut.)
By SusieHomeMaker
October 2, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this
The question should be, are men capable of protecting women & have they ever successfully done so other than spiratically here & there?
Yes. Men aren’t the cause of all evil in the world, (just the top 253 — kidding kidding). Men are capable of protecting but so are women. The most dangerous animal in the world is a mother protecting her young.
The Terry Nichols situation is a fine example of how well that protection Chivalry thing is going.
Do you mean the Terry Nichols of the OKC Bombing Timothy McVeigh infamy?
By Renee
October 2, 2006 01:18 PM | Link to this
I don’t think it will reflect badly on the gay community. I think some members of the gay community are jumping the gun a little. It has absolutely nothing to do with his being gay and everything to do with his little nasty azz like little boys. The text messages etc speak for themselves. I don’t think this is going to play negatively on the gay community at all.
By Toad
October 2, 2006 01:20 PM | Link to this
Ephebophile — wow, I never heard that word before.
By Renee
October 2, 2006 01:20 PM | Link to this
The most dangerous animal in the world is a mother protecting her young.
That is the truth!!! The most docile of female animals will change when their offspring is around.
By Renee
October 2, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this
liking not like…
By The72John
October 2, 2006 01:25 PM | Link to this
I don’t think it will reflect badly on the gay community. I think some members of the gay community are jumping the gun a little. It has absolutely nothing to do with his being gay and everything to do with his little nasty azz like little boys. The text messages etc speak for themselves. I don’t think this is going to play negatively on the gay community at all.
Exactly, Renee. He fits the profile of the ephebophile perfectly. Even his text messages read like something a teenager would write. He doesn’t reflect on “the gay community” any more than a man who sexually abuses little girls reflects on “the straight community”.
Unfortunately there are people out there who act as if one man taking advantage of a boy has some kind of implication for gay people as a whole.
And I don’t like queer, either. I’m not “queer”, as in strange, and I’m not “gay” as in light and fanciful and happy. I’m sexually and emotionally attracted to other men. My personality and behavior is not otherwise affected or dictated by that fact, and I really, really wish there was some other word that didn’t already have implications front-loaded into it.
By Toad
October 2, 2006 01:29 PM | Link to this
Renee — do you think it will negatively impact the GOP?
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 01:41 PM | Link to this
What will more negatively affect the GOP will not be the emails/IMs(I am sure alot of pages, male and female, get that kind of perhaps ambiguous stuff), but rather the fact the leadership did not do anything about it, or at least planned to keep it under wraps until after this Fall’s election.
By Renee
October 2, 2006 01:44 PM | Link to this
Toad - I think what should reflect negatively on the GOP is the fact that they knew beforehand. I think so many facts about it scream that they had prior knowledge. So while his actions should not reflect negatively on them, their reaction and possible cover-up should.
John - I have to admit that I did not ephebophile either, so I have expanded my vocabulary today, thanks to you.
And I don’t like queer, either. I’m not “queer�, as in strange, and I’m not “gay� as in light and fanciful and happy. I’m sexually and emotionally attracted to other men. My personality and behavior is not otherwise affected or dictated by that fact, and I really, really wish there was some other word that didn’t already have implications front-loaded into it.
Exactly!!! I find it such a nuisance that everything has to be labeled, and the gay community, in my community in some ways just makes it worse. Everything has to be named and fit the the stereotypical name. My partner REALLY hates it!!
By Toad
October 2, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this
Maybe its my rebelliousness, but I like being different. Although I want queer people to be accepted, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with wanting to stand out as different from the norm.
By Archie
October 2, 2006 01:50 PM | Link to this
Just a thought - “Chivalry� to one person may look like “condescension� to someone else. Being courteous by holding the door, helping with packages, etc is mere decency, regardless of gender. Simple courtesy, in fact. Which is indeed a vanishing virtue, so I’m assuming that it is what kimberly meant when she said “we� appreciate “chivalry� (though I suppose the men appreciate courtesy
I like those comments Mara and I must say there are some selfish women and it seems as if a lot of women think like Shanti. The selfishness that B. Curtis referred to earlier seems to exist in so many women and that’s why I get so frustrated at times with the some of the criticisms of men. I say yes at times men should be expected to protect women,specifically their women(wife,daughter,mom,and sister), but there is no overall responsibility to protect someone because of gender but even though many here speak with an open mind, a lot of women think like Shanti, in fact, most of women I have met think Shanti and yes, I think it’s selfish.
By Renee
October 2, 2006 01:51 PM | Link to this
I meant in my opinion…why can’t I type today??
By The72John
October 2, 2006 01:54 PM | Link to this
What will more negatively affect the GOP will not be the emails/IMs(I am sure alot of pages, male and female, get that kind of perhaps ambiguous stuff)
Dude - have you read the Text messages? They are on ABC’s web site and they are not even remotely ambiguous! I couldn’t make it past page three (of 10 or 11) and he was already asking the kid about how he liked to masturbate, where he liked to, how often, commenting about how he’d love to see it…
If he doesn’t see jail time, there IS no justice.
By ProDealthPenalty
October 2, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this
I meant to say Brian Nichols, not Terry. There are so many dangerous people out there it’s getting difficult to properly remember their names.
Men aren’t the cause of all evil in the world.
Not all but most. Why is this & what can be done? What happens to a sweet little boy once they grow to adulthood? What makes one child a danger to everybody & another one a responsible, secure & happy grown man? Bad childhood? Divorce? abuse? Normal family? Plenty of us don’t seek out the opposite sex to molest & murder just to feed a sick urge. Plenty of us from bad childhoods don’t abduct & murder women & children. A lot of people can’t get dates or are in bad marriages but don’t solicit sex from 13 year old children online.
Plenty of us from poor abused childhoods don’t shoot up schools or courthouses.
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this
NO, I only read the emails, and that was last FRI. I heard the IMs were more explicit.
By lozen
October 2, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this
72John, come on; you know there is no justice when one has enough power and money to prevent it!
By Renee
October 2, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this
Is it Whiley???
By The72John
October 2, 2006 02:13 PM | Link to this
Not all but most. Why is this & what can be done? What happens to a sweet little boy once they grow to adulthood? What makes one child a danger to everybody & another one a responsible, secure & happy grown man? Bad childhood? Divorce? abuse? Normal family? Plenty of us don’t seek out the opposite sex to molest & murder just to feed a sick urge. Plenty of us from bad childhoods don’t abduct & murder women & children. A lot of people can’t get dates or are in bad marriages but don’t solicit sex from 13 year old children online. Plenty of us from poor abused childhoods don’t shoot up schools or courthouses.
Goodbye, Whiley…we’ve heard it all before. Second verse, same as the first.
Or is that the 500th verse.
By Brian Curtis
October 2, 2006 02:14 PM | Link to this
JBM commented: “If I was placed in the line of fire for any reason at all, I would hope a man would push me out the way and take the hit for me.”
I agree wholeheartedly. If someone was shooting at me, I’d be delighted to have ANYONE push me out of the way and take the hit—-no matter what gender they were.
But it would be unreasonable of me to expect that solely because of my gender.
By lozen
October 2, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this
I just read Shaunti’s piece again for some strange reason. I guess Shaunti doesn’t have any male children and has never taught children or been in any situation where she sees interaction between grade school boys and girls. If she did, she could not possibly write this: “And many men have been criticized instead of commended for chivalry – for following the protective, positive male instincts that are invaluable to society.” Yes, hummmm, I must have been seeing things when I watched boys in 5th grade teasing girls to tears, making fun of girls and calling them sissies, pushing girls into mud holes. That instinct to protect does appear at a very early age! Again I am wondering about the world this woman is living in.
By mike
October 2, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this
Diane, do you actually dare to proprose that Muslim men in Baghdad treat women in the same manner, or hold them in the same regard, as American men? Asinine. Is that the best you can do?
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this
Lozen - you mean you never had some boy place his coat over that puddle of mud, just so you would not get your little black patent-leather pixie shoes muddy? (What a deprived childhood you had). Or were you just smart enough to walk around it? LOL
See what happens when you have private/religious education? Boy who does not put his coat over that puddle of mud for the damsel in distress gets a spanking. Oh, wait, that supports Diane’s learned behaviour concept. LOL
By Joe L.
October 2, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this
It’s simple biology people. The greater good of the species is to protect the female gender. One male and 100 females means 100 babies. One female and 100 males means 1 baby. Now there are always times where our brains get in the way, but deep down there is a biological imperative for men to protect women in some form.
By The72John
October 2, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this
Diane, do you actually dare to proprose that Muslim men in Baghdad treat women in the same manner, or hold them in the same regard, as American men? Asinine. Is that the best you can do?
I’m just curious - did you even read the article, or did you just fixate on this line because you’re a programmed right-wing drone who has knee-jerk “all Muslims are evil, Americans do everything right” responses?
Because if you HAD read the article, you would have realized that this was in direct rebutal to Shaunti’s notion that men a programmed to treat women equally.
But please - go back to your grunting.
By The72John
October 2, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this
Does anyone else find it amusing that Shaunti uses phrases like “aggressive feminization” and bemoans the loss of “traditional” roles, yet has a picture where she’s dressed like a man with bad fasion sense and a blind barber?
Meanwhile, Diane is dressed in very stylish, feminine garb?
By The72John
October 2, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this
sorry, should have been “protect women”. Don’t know where “treat women equally” came from.
Possibly the land of “if I made the world”.
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this
JoeL - Good point. Probably in the same way it is genetic for older men to find younger women desirable. That has nothing to do with the trappings of innocent,trainable etc, but everything to do with she can pump me out a whole bunch of babies. Conversely, women looking for stronger seed would genetically be inclined to seek out younger/more virile (with seed) men.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 2, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this
What happens to a sweet little boy once they grow to adulthood? What makes one child a danger to everybody & another one a responsible, secure & happy grown man? Bad childhood? Divorce? abuse? Normal family?
One child grows up to be Somebody that just loves to learn And another child grows up to be Somebody you’d just love to burn Mom loves the both of them You see it’s in the blood Both kids are good to Mom ‘Blood’s thicker than mud’ it’s a family affair
I’m trying to impress chilao!!! No one knows why these things happen. It’s probably a combination of all the things that you’ve mentioned earlier.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 2, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
What happens to a sweet little boy once they grow to adulthood? What makes one child a danger to everybody & another one a responsible, secure & happy grown man? Bad childhood? Divorce? abuse? Normal family?
One child grows up to be Somebody that just loves to learn And another child grows up to be Somebody you’d just love to burn Mom loves the both of them You see it’s in the blood Both kids are good to Mom ‘Blood’s thicker than mud’ it’s a family affair
I’m trying to impress chilao!!! No one knows why these things happen. It’s probably a combination of all the things that you’ve mentioned earlier.
By ProDealthPenalty
October 2, 2006 03:12 PM | Link to this
Why isn’t anyone willing to address my questions? It is important to be open about what happens to a lot of our children. I’m curious to what you have to say.
By kimberly
October 2, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this
stronger seed
Heh heh… heh heh…
By Monica
October 2, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this
Renee, I haven’t been able to type all day today!
Okay, I confess… I want to have my cake and eat it too! I don’t see a man opening a door for me or stopping to help me fix a flat as being condescending, or that he thinks I am weaker than he. In fact, I would be indignant if a man didn’t stop to help me out. However, if I were passed over for a job simply because I am a female, then I would be pretty upset.
I think the movie title “Steel Magnolias” really offers a profound philsophy: women are expected to be delicate yet resilient.
By Vincent
October 2, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this
The problem is men DON’T protect women & children from what they really need protecting from, DANGEROUS MEN ! Why won’t people discuss this — instead of saying it sounds like Whiley so we’ll just ignore it. This is a very good point. Women are more likely to be attacked by their husband or boy friend than a stranger. Where’s the protection from men in these situations?
By lozen
October 2, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, yeah, stronger seed is the all-important thing! What blinders some of us acquire by the time we’re adults. What stereotypes we choose to believe. 100 women, one man and 100 babies. That’s a male wet dream fer shur. 72John you are so funny with the go back to your grunting comment!
By The72John
October 2, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this
Why isn’t anyone willing to address my questions? It is important to be open about what happens to a lot of our children. I’m curious to what you have to say.
Your questions are weighted, Whiley. It’s like saying “Do people know you’re gay” in Jr. High. Either possible yes or no answer still leaves you with the pre-stated conclusion that you are gay and everyone giggles.
We’ll make you a promise - you come up with questions that aren’t so ridiculously front-loaded with tripe and garbage, and we’ll make some attempt to discuss them.
Until that point - and I’m not holding my breath - zip it, loon.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 2, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this
Unfortunately there are people out there who act as if one man taking advantage of a boy has some kind of implication for gay people as a whole.
True story: My daughter’s godmother is a lesbian who had came out the year before my daughter was born, (Sandra and I had been friends since 3rd grade). The year of my daughter’s birth, (she was born in Miami); these two lesbian lovers were on trial for the brutal murder of one of their children.
A LOT of people came up to me and questioned my sanity because I chose my best friend, the lesbian, to be my daughter’s godmother. Even my own mother told me that “Lesbian’s are unstable. Didn’t u c what those girls did to that child? Do you want that for YOUR child!!! Do you want someone teaching your child how to be a lesbian?!?” I thought that was really funny because no one had to “teach me” how to be straight!! I also had a visual of my child going to Lesbian School, or reading a book that said “How To Be A Lesbian In 13 Easy Steps or better yet, I saw her graduating from Cunnilingu$ U!!! Naturally I didn’t share any of those thoughts with my mother! I was real smart in those days — smart enough to keep my mouth shut and to keep smirks off of my face
But basically she and others were in fear for what two people who happened to be lesbians did and they let their fear blind them to reality.
End of Story.
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
stronger seed Heh heh… heh heh…
or as Suzie points out with Sly’s song, BadSeed
LOL @ impress(whatever for?). is a ‘you done good, grasshopper’ due? LOL
By Archie
October 2, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this
Monica at least you’re honest. It helps men,at least it does me when I know which version of equality some women want. Even though I agree more with Diane I have not run into that many women that think like her and put it into practice.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 2, 2006 03:34 PM | Link to this
Why isn’t anyone willing to address my questions? It is important to be open about what happens to a lot of our children. I’m curious to what you have to say.
Pro — No one knows why some children turn out the way they do. I’ve known families where one kid is super smart and a go getter, and the other is a lazy bum. Both of them had the same advantages/disadvantages, same parents, etc. — but they turn out totally different.
By lozen
October 2, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
The last time I had car trouble I called AAA. The first driver who came to rescue me was a man. He tried to take care of the problem for 45 minutes and couldn’t do it. So he called in for another driver. When the woman got there, she had the problem solved in 5 to 10 minutes and I was on the road! Just goes to show ya. For crying out loud why would anybody sit there with a flat waiting for some man to help you? AAA doesn’t cost that much. I know, I know. Cultural myths do take a long time to die out.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 2, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this
Why won’t people discuss this — instead of saying it sounds like Whiley so we’ll just ignore it. This is a very good point. Women are more likely to be attacked by their husband or boy friend than a stranger. Where’s the protection from men in these situations?
There are laws in place to protect women against their husbands, etc. I can’t vouch for their effectiveness but I also know that you must first protect yourself. If a person is in an abusive relationship GET OUT. By staying u are endangering yourself. You must protect yourself first, that’s the first rule of survival.
By Mara
October 2, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
As pleased as I am that Archie agreed with me on something, I have to say the the phrase about men protecting “…their women” still makes me cringe. It makes female family members sound like chattel. I know he didn’t mean it like that, but…
As for “selfishness”…I hadn’t noticed that it was so gender dependent. Are there selfish women? Heck yes. Probably just as many as there are selfish men. I hadn’t noticed that women were any more demanding of courtesy (or “respect”) than men are. And most of the women you’ve met are like that? Don’t know where you go to meet women, but I’m sorry to hear that. I know quite a few women who would be appalled to find out that they need to be “taken care of”.
Chilao - sorry darlin’. If we’re talking “biological imperative” we women would be looking for a long-term provider to support/protect us and the offspring of that virile young stud we bred with, not the youngster himself :^)
John - LOL @ calling Shaunti on wearing “masculine” garb while bemoaning the loss of the traditional gender roles.
End o’ day, finally. Catch y’all tomorrow.
By Just Being Me
October 2, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
Yep. That’s Whiley.
Brian Curtis, I understand what you’re saying, but my comments were based on how I feel… I can’t justify them or defend them, they are my feelings whether they make sense to other people or not.
Renee/John - y’all are holding it down for the fam! LOL! I completely agree: I hate the word “queer” (sidebar: did anybody see the guy from Queer as Folk on ER last Thursday??), and I don’t think this Foley situation reflects the gay community at all. If anything, it will reflect quite poorly on the Republican party - NOT because of what Foley did, but because the Party kept it on the down low (pun intended… hehehe).
By SusieHomeMaker
October 2, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this
or as Suzie points out with Sly’s song, BadSeed
Sorry wise old master, the name of the song is Family Affair. But I had to go WAY back to find it. I’m impressed that you knew it was from Sly!
By Just Being Me
October 2, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this
zip it, loon
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!! Hilarious!!!
By The72John
October 2, 2006 03:47 PM | Link to this
Pro — No one knows why some children turn out the way they do. I’ve known families where one kid is super smart and a go getter, and the other is a lazy bum. Both of them had the same advantages/disadvantages, same parents, etc. — but they turn out totally different.
You’re making a reasonable answer to an unreasonable question. Pro Whiley isn’t interested in rationally discussing why some people turn out bad when most people turn out good. She’s interested in affirming a long-held delusion of hers that almost all men are evil monsters who live to abuse women. She also deludes herself into believing that anytime she steps out of the house, swarms of men appear, waving their wangs in the air, uttering obsecene suggestions about what they want to do with and to her, and fondling her at every turn. She’s a nut job of the first rank.
By Vincent
October 2, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this
But often a woman who gets out gets killed. Men who are abusers need training to not abuse. So let’s get real — many men don’t protect — they hurt.
By Toad
October 2, 2006 03:52 PM | Link to this
Renee/John - y’all are holding it down for the fam! Guess I’m the black sheep in the fam. Or the queer sheep! HA HA!
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this
Suzie - the convo was about seed, hence Bad Seed, (I know it not the name of the song…LOL..after all, if I knew it was Sly….)
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 03:55 PM | Link to this
Mara - I stand corrected, so that would mean we would want to be like on DHW? and have our established older mate raise the youngster from the younger filly? LOL
By ProDealthPenalty
October 2, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this
Susie, so in a lot of cases the parents can’t be blamed. Which by the way we all have minds of our own it shouldn’t matter so much how you are raised. One doesn’t attempt to kidnap girls on college campus’s by accident or because your mother yelled at you. Can you imagine raising your children in a safe healthy environment & one of them ends up a criminal anyway? How awful that would be. No, men shouldn’t be expected to protect women, they can’t.
By lozen
October 2, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this
Susie, Why don’t women leave abusive husbands? A lot of women, if mot most, learn as they grow up a number of things that prevent this. 1. A woman is nothing without a man. 2. A woman must do everything to prevent the end of the marriage. 3. How could a woman be so selfish as to leave and keep her children from having a father? 4. You don’t need to worry about a career! You’ll get married and your husband will take care of you. 5. Men are always right. (He tells you it’s your fault he slaps you around. If you would just shut up, clean the house, do the laundry right, not try to tell him what to do, take care of the kids the way a woman should, have his dinner ready on time then he wouldn’t have to slap you!) Until you’ve been there please don’t judge women who stay in bad relationships. I’ve known several and they had all kinds of reasons for staying. The main one is, “I loooovvvvve him!” One friend went back to her abusive husband because she had nowhere to go but a women’s shelter where she and her kids were sharing a room with two other women and their kids. She listened to others’ stories and decided her husband was not nearly as bad as those men! “He wasn’t so bad as long as he wasn’t drinking!” Please don’t blame the victim.
By Just Being Me
October 2, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this
Anybody have a link to the Foley IMs or text messages? I read the e-mails, but I can’t find the other stuff…
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this
Suzie - see, I remember when that song was being played on the radio, for the FIRST times. LOL
By SusieHomeMaker
October 2, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this
Oh. Many pardons wise one. I shall now go and sit upon yon rock to ponder my momentary joy in thinking I had bested you.
In English that means — DANG!!!
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this
“Family Affair” (chart peak #1, 11/30/71)*
wow, later than I thought, thought it was 69-70 or so. I was still a youngster though. LMAO
By The72John
October 2, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this
JBM:
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/BrianRoss/story?id=2509586&page=1
By lozen
October 2, 2006 04:03 PM | Link to this
Often women who try to get out of abusive relationships get killed. Thank you Vincent; I forgot that reason. One woman i know tried many times to leave her abusive husband but he would track her down, stalk her, corner her and threaten to kill her, the kids and her parents if she didn’t come back. He is the one who ended up dead, shot in the struggle over a gun. It was the best thing that ever could have happened to her and her kids!
By Just Being Me
October 2, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this
Vincent, you said: many men don’t protect — they hurt.
Guess what else is true?
Many men don’t hurt - they protect. Many women don’t protect - they hurt. Many women don’t hurt - they protect…
So, what’s your point?
By The72John
October 2, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this
Can you imagine raising your children in a safe healthy environment & one of them ends up a criminal anyway? How awful that would be. No, men shouldn’t be expected to protect women, they can’t.
And here we have the root of the insanity that is ProWhiley. Because SOME men (and women, but the women who are criminals are so only because they are victims of men) become criminal, ALL men are criminals and terrible. Even though the vast majority of men (and women) living in this country are decent, normal people, in ProWhiley’s demented, terrified, frightened fantasy of a life, “Men shouldn’t be expected to protect women, they can’t”.
I see that our many suggestions that you seek professional help have fallen on deaf ears.
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this
JBM - I could only find a small selection at ABC when John mentioned it, but I did not look REAL hard for all of them.
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 04:09 PM | Link to this
Suzie - I realize that that sentence structure was not the best.(“sly’s song, Bad seed”) Get a kiester-pillow, for that rock.
now does anybody think it is funny that this blog gets editted for words like a-s-s but I am sure there are advertisements in the paper at least for the latest Johnny Knoxville movie? Spelled out even.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 2, 2006 04:16 PM | Link to this
Please don’t blame the victim
Lozen: Oh no!! I wasn’t trying to blame the victim. I’m sorry if you got that from my post. My post simply meant that you must save yourself first, then you can expect the law, etc. to take over and try to help you. My point was that you have to find strength from within first.
Remember that movie “Sleeping with the enemy?” At the end of the movie, when her husband had found her and was threatening to kill her; her boyfriend had tried to save her but had gotten beat down and was laying on the floor unconscious. In the end, she had to SAVE HERSELF. The first step she took was to arrange to leave her husband; the second step was to actually gathe up the courage to leave him; and the third step was to make sure he never hurt her again. She had to save herself before anyone else could save her.
I let my daughter watch that movie a LOT and we always talk about it. And I tell her that sometimes you can’t wait for anyone to save you. You have to learn to save yourself first.
By Vincent
October 2, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this
*Many women don’t protect - they hurt. Many women don’t hurt - they protect…
So, what’s your point?*
The W v. W subject is about MEN protecting — not about whether some women hurt. My point is: Why are people so dismissive of “ProWhiley” that they won’t even address the issue that all men aren’t these gentle protectors, but some women need protection from abusive men? Posing this question doesn’t mean PDP thinks all men are waiting to assault women. (Maybe s/he does, but that’s not what was said.) Why can’t we engage in a discussion of how men abuse power and their strength instead of acting as a protector?
By The72John
October 2, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this
Has anyone else read Freakonomics? One section discusses how skewed our sense of risk is. Things that are terrible and graphic capture our imagination and activate our own personal spidey senses much, much more than threats that are far more real yet far more prosaic.
The author uses as an example a gun/swimming pool story, in which someone he knew refused to let her child play at the house of a child whose father kept a handgun in the house, but allowed him to play at a home with a swimming pool. The point of the example was that we make bad decisions when it comes to assessing risk - the swimming pool was far more statistically likely to kill the woman’s child than the handgun - an order of magnitude more likely - yet her decision didn’t reflect reality.
That is the problem we have here - our assessment of risks do not reflect the reality of the situation. Take the Amish school shooting today - it was horrible, and taking into consideration the fact that it is one of three school shooting related deaths in the news in the past week, I’ll bet you there are a lot of anxious parents out there. I’ll also bet you that the yearly mortaility statistics of children simply walking or riding to school are far, far greater than those of children killed in school shoorting, yet I suspect that most parents aren’t nearly as anxious about the simple act of leaving for school.
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 04:29 PM | Link to this
wow, word of the day, at some point: keister:
http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19970417
By Just Being Me
October 2, 2006 04:30 PM | Link to this
WOW @ the IM conversation with Foley… thanks, John.
Where’s “To Catch a Predator” when you need ‘em?
By ProDeathPenalty
October 2, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this
I don’t see why anybody would be so hostile about my posts today.
By Kevin
October 2, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this
72John
ROTM @ 4:23. In Macon, two children were killed in a two week span waiting on the school bus. While those stories got front page coverage in the Macon paper, they were still overshadowed by the coverage given to the school shooting in Colorado.
By The72John
October 2, 2006 04:41 PM | Link to this
I don’t see why anybody would be so hostile about my posts today.
Hmm..possibly because you’re a raving lunatic?
By lozen
October 2, 2006 04:43 PM | Link to this
“… how skewed our sense of risk is. Things that are terrible and graphic capture our imagination and activate our own personal spidey senses much, much more than threats that are far more real yet far more prosaic.”
Like the woman I know who will not sit foot on an airplane because she’s afraid it’ll crash and she’ll die, but she smokes cigarettes!
By lozen
October 2, 2006 04:47 PM | Link to this
“I let my daughter watch that movie a LOT and we always talk about it. And I tell her that sometimes you can’t wait for anyone to save you. You have to learn to save yourself first.” Good for you Susie. And make sure she doesn’t take all that other stuff seriously too, like the belief that she’s nothing without a man!
By lozen
October 2, 2006 04:50 PM | Link to this
Should men still be expected to protect women? Well, the way the question is phrased assumes all men used to be expected to protect all women. That’s not a very rational assumption. When was the law passed in this country that outlawed the husband’s right to beat his wife? 1890? 1900?
By Just Being Me
October 2, 2006 04:51 PM | Link to this
My point is: Why are people so dismissive of “ProWhiley� that they won’t even address the issue that all men aren’t these gentle protectors, but some women need protection from abusive men? Posing this question doesn’t mean PDP thinks all men are waiting to assault women. (Maybe s/he does, but that’s not what was said.) Why can’t we engage in a discussion of how men abuse power and their strength instead of acting as a protector?
Because we’ve done that before; we’ve come to the conclusion that, as John put it, she’s a raving lunatic; we’ve decided that our time is better spent debating with intelligent folks than chasing our tails around with Whiley all day long; we don’t really like talking to walls that much…
Is that an acceptable answer to your question?
By lozen
October 2, 2006 04:52 PM | Link to this
And I still don’t see it: the aggressive feminization of our culture. Does anybody who isn’t a raving right-wing Rushbot see any signs of that?
By Chilao
October 2, 2006 04:53 PM | Link to this
I guess his Mom needs a man to do email attachment downloads. LOL
By ProDealthPenalty
October 2, 2006 05:03 PM | Link to this
I repeat I’ve said nothing that would cause that attitude.
Another school shooting on the news. No male protection at that location.
By turning stone casino bonus
October 2, 2006 08:46 PM | Link to this
turning stone casino [url=http://turning-stone-casino.monforum.fr/index.php ]turning stone casino [/url]
By TramadoL64594
October 2, 2006 10:38 PM | Link to this
I haven’t gotten anything done today. I feel like a fog, but what can I say? I’ve just been letting everything wash over me lately, not that it matters. Shrug.
By Brian Curtis
October 3, 2006 09:29 AM | Link to this
I think women should rely on Republican congressmen for protection. They’re proven pillars of virtue, right?
By lozen
October 3, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this
Right Brian! That certainly is who I’m depending on to protect me.
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this
so some public interest group in D.C. sent the FBI the IMs and emails in JULY and there was no investigation. hmmmm. Oh, but NOW the FBI is investigating. Gotta love being able to control even the cops, huh?
By Mara
October 3, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this
why is there even a seperate word for men-protecting-women (chivalry) but no designation for all the other acts where one human being protects another? Why do we differentiate between a man protecting a woman and a man protecting a male friend, or a co-worker, or a child? Is the act any less admirable when a guy jumps into a raging flood to rescue his buddy than it would be if he did the same for his girlfriend?
I would guess that any decent person would at least try to protect someone who needs help, regardless of their gender. It seems to me that once again W2W has picked a rediculous topic.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 09:50 AM | Link to this
Women should depend on DSW Warehouse, Sara Lee Cheesecake, good Vodka and themselves!! Some Republican Congressman may stick us back into the kitchen!
By WtoW fan
October 3, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this
Should the topic have been “what responsibility do men have to protect women & children considering they are the ones they need protection from?”
By lozen
October 3, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this
Hey Susie you convinced me. The vodka is particularly important! The best thing for cramps too. Yes, Mara, very good question. And Chilao, money and power must be wonderful things. No wonder those pols will sell their souls to get in office and stay there!
By TramadoL19675
October 3, 2006 10:25 AM | Link to this
I haven’t been up to anything recently, but so it goes. Such is life. What can I say? Pretty much not much exciting going on to speak of. I haven’t gotten much done lately, but I don’t care.
By Renee
October 3, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this
Mara great comment!!
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this
I think JoeL was right when he said this chivalry thing goes back to protecting the breeding stock. Wars over centuries have killed MILLIONS of men, and a lot less women. A woman is tied up for 9plus months to reproduce, but a man is not tied up at all, other than the (back to that word) Seed contribution.
on another note, how do some guys end up bad? Anybody see that Kevin MacCauley?(the HomeAlone guy) in the movie Bad Seed? that kid was flat-out evil. no child abuse, no deprived childhood, just born that way, flat-out evil. It happens.
By The72John
October 3, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this
Should the topic have been “what responsibility do men have to protect women & children considering they are the ones they need protection from?�
Whiley, changing your handle does not change the tone of your posts. Your madness shines through like a great beacon of irrational lunacy.
Really. We know it’s you. We know that in your fantasy land of paranoid delusions, men loom like ogres on the edges of your vision wherever you go, phalluses wagging and teeth poised to rend and tear. The truth does not matter to you; all that you care to hear is confirmation of your personal fears, and to relive over and over again whatever trauma it was that has caused you to sink into this miasma of mysandric myopia through which you wade.
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this
Macaulay Culkin(not Kevin Macauley) and the move was The Good Son, (not BadSeed, which he was); a major oxymoron name for a movie.
By Renee
October 3, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this
ROFLMAO @ Bad Seed!!!!
By Archie
October 3, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this
Mara this is a good topic because many women do want a man man protecting them. Notice the posts of JBM,Kimberly and Monica. These are the types of women I meet, intelligent, independent, yet they still want certain things from men. This does not bother me but what bothers me is when women talk about feminism yet act contrary to the idea by not accepting the blame for anything and as some of the WOMEN on this blog have said wanting to have the cake and eat it too. Lozen made a great statement when she asked why would you wait 45 minutes for someone to come and change a tire when you could do this yourself. That’s the kind of thing that should be done by any woman without them worrying about if it makes them less feminine. I don’t agree with Shanti’s definition of manhood but Diane says things that are really only feasible for someone in her position.
By roger freberg
October 3, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
I think a better question would be… who are the women men will protect?
Altruism is known to be a kinship phenomenon… as such, most men will protect the women they consider to be in their family… which helps explain the ‘Titanic’ example of Diane Glass in which some men did not come to the aid of female strangers…. although some did as Shaunti Feldhahn related.
Not to contradict Diane, however, many evolutionary psychologists probably will say that men behave in a ‘protective’ manner towards women… because that is what has been reinforced and selected over time…. this is biology in reacting to it’s environment…. or ‘nature via nurture.’
Scientists are discovering more and more about what is our nature and what place our environment has in determining who we are… and although it is not politically popular in certain circles to state this… a lot of who we are is in our genes (read any of Matt Ridley’s Books or Stephen Pinker of Harvard).
Science leans more with Shaunti on this issue.
Roger Freberg San Luis Obispo, California
By TramadoL75846
October 3, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this
I just don’t have much to say these days, but so it goes. Today was a total loss. I guess it doesn’t bother me.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
on another note, how do some guys end up bad? Anybody see that Kevin MacCauley?(the HomeAlone guy) in the movie Bad Seed? that kid was flat-out evil. no child abuse, no deprived childhood, just born that way, flat-out evil. It happens.
I know this sounds fanciful but I’m thinking genetics. And the reason why I say that is because I’m told I look, act and have the habits of my grandfather. My sister is the exact copy of my aunt and has some of her characteristics. I’m thinking that sometimes personalities can be passed on by genetics the same way mental illness or familial physical defects can be passed down. Just a thought.
Chilao: Here’s another one for you — umm a different type of damsel in distress (I couldn’t stop myself from doing this! Sorry)
Well, my damsel shes a woman with coal black hair
Dont you look her in her eye when she starts to stare
cause her beauty drive you crazy
And her potions steal your soul
No matter how you beg her she dont ever let you go
Well, you can cry, you can plead
It wont help you none
She’ll keep you in the shadows, never see the sun
Try to run, try to hide
Find a place to stay
No matter where you go you cant get away
By Just Being Me
October 3, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this
Archie, I don’t know how to change a tire, and I have no desire to learn.
Mara, I get your point, but I think that word you’re looking for (when a human being protects another, regardless of gender) is “samaritan.”
By Renee
October 3, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this
oh lord, say it ain’t so
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this
I think a better question would be… who are the women men will protect?
The women with the beer.
Sorry Roger, I just couldn’t stop myself………..
By WtoWfan
October 3, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this
John It seems you have anger issues toward women.
‘Human violence’ is absolutely inaccurate, it’s male violence that is the problem all around the globe, and yes, women always have been and still are the usual victims of male violence. We can’t deny it just because we don’t like it.
But you know John, i’m glad that you are uncomfortable with male violence—we all are. We should be— maybe if we’re uncomfortable enough, we’ll eliminate it. but not if we don’t have the guts to name it.
I’m just listening to yet another story about a man gunning down girls—-little girls this time.
I really can hardly bear hearing this—-again and again and again. it just keeps on.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this
This does not bother me but what bothers me is when women talk about feminism yet act contrary to the idea by not accepting the blame for anything
Examples please. Thanks!
By Toad
October 3, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this
Anybody remember the movie that was called “The Bad Seed”? It was about a wicked little girl. In the fifties or early 60’s I think.
By Archie
October 3, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this
JBM, I don’t think my spouse can change a tire either and it doesn’t fire me up but I do think she should be able to change a tire just in case the cellphone towers are out. It’s just a point of view that I share with Lozen on that one point. I had this to say on the profanity topic weeks ago — follow the rules or change the rules, because there are too many exceptions made in this society.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this
Human violence’ is absolutely inaccurate, it’s male violence that is the problem all around the globe, and yes, women always have been and still are the usual victims of male violence. We can’t deny it just because we don’t like it.
W2WFAN: It’s not that anyone is denying it, I think it’s just that we have realized that violence is just a part of the human condition. All through the history of the Homo Sapien, both male and female, violence has been an integral part of our existence. And this is where it gets sticky, you must learn to separate and segregate certain aspects of our society, (not obsess too much), in order to live in it. If not, if you just think about the bad, over and over again……you can go crazy.
By Toad
October 3, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this
The hardest thing about changing a tire is getting the lug nuts off. One morning I had a flat tire and decided to put the little fake tire on and take it to be repaired. I couldn’t get the lug nuts off so I looked around for a man. When I didn’t see any I said to myself, “Toad, you’ve been working out.” So I mustered up all my strength, pushed down on that thing-a-ma-jig and lo and behold — I loosened them. I prefer calling my road service, however.
By The72John
October 3, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this
John It seems you have anger issues toward women.
I have anger issues toward stupidity. I would be equally disdainful of a man who claimed that all women were faithless harlots. You make baseless claims about violence and then assume that anyone who disagrees with your clap-trap is
But you know John, i’m glad that you are uncomfortable with male violence—we all are. We should be— maybe if we’re uncomfortable enough, we’ll eliminate it. but not if we don’t have the guts to name it.
I am uncomfortable with violence. Period. It is your delusions that make you believe that men are not only the only perpetrators of violence, but that men are naturally inclined to violence.
I really can hardly bear hearing this—-again and again and again. it just keeps on
I wonder if you got so upset about the woman who murdered her best friend and dismembered her children last week? Or are your blinders so narrow?
Wait, what am I saying? You are someone so stupid as to believe that because someone commits violence and is male that all males commit violence.
By Toad
October 3, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this
Y’all can’t seriously deny that males are the prime instigators of violence, can you? I don’t understand the refusal of many on this blog to acknowlege it. John obviously thinks anyone who brings this up is just Whiley who thinks all men are ogres. Ok, if it’s not Whiley, why can’t we talk about this? Susie, why are you whitewashing this? Just saying “yes, men are generally the perpetrators of violence” doesn’t mean all men are ogres. Just most ogres are men.
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 12:00 PM | Link to this
I think I saw that 1956 BadSeed at a indie/revivial house cinema. Back in the day, different movie every night, entry was $1.50, maybe they would hold the BIG movie for two weekend nights.
Doobie Brothers, Evil Woman, that is a ‘walk around in a south Florida cattle pasture’ song to me. LOL
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
I carry a heavy-duty breaker bar, with various sockets, in my trunk. Why? for the sole purpose of helping damsels in distress needing a tire change. LMAO I actually saw two little girls(at a college, legal age) trying to STAND on the lug-nut wrench. Chilao to the rescue. (without the cape…LOL)
By Archie
October 3, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this
SusieH, hello, the examples have already been displayed on the blog but some and I stress some women will knowingly go out with a married guy but then say “well he came after me” instead saying I was wrong too. In my opinion a feminist would simply say I was wrong. There was the church lady that slept with her pastor for over 10 years and she has married for 14 years. The church lady said she was brainwashed but the pastor cannot say he was seduced,also the church lady would go to the pastor’s house after the man’s wife had left home. In other words, she snuck around the woman’s husband. As a man I know that pastor is dead wrong but I only heard a few blame that woman. I stress that some women did blame the woman equally with the man and the my point is I have no general dislike of women. My wife is much harder than I am and her words about the church lady were harsher than mine. This story was thoroughly covered in this newspaper but the names escape right now. I could give other examples but the topic is about protection. Some men,some men would criticize the response of 72John and Brian Curtis but I like them.
By RealityCheck
October 3, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this
John obviously thinks anyone who brings this up is just Whiley who thinks all men are ogres. Ok, if it’s not Whiley, why can’t we talk about this?
Um…it IS Whiley. I recognize her obsession. And what you seem to be utterly unable to fathom is that she ISN’T saying that most ogres are men, she is INDEED trying to say that most men are ogres.
By Mara
October 3, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this
Thanks for the kudos lozen, Renee. It baffles me that in the age of the .357 Magnum, society still seems to accept the antiquated idea that men protect women.
Archie - if a person is raised believing they’re entitled to be treated a certain way then they’ll expect to be treated that way. If they’re taught the acting a certain way, or doing certain things, is proper behaviour that’s applauded by their caregivers, they’ll act that way and do those things. A woman who’s raised to believe that men have certain obligations to her will certainly expect men to fulfill those obligations. Much like the man who’s raised to expect a woman to defer to him and cook, clean and breed for him will expect women to act a certain way. It’s unfortunate that there’re those “traditionalist” parents who hobble their children with gender stereo-types and expectations but there you are, and they seem to be the majority especially here in the south. That doesn’t mean it’s right or that we aren’t moving away from those expectations.
As to whether women specifically want a MAN to protect them, let’s ask, shall we? JBM, Kimberly, Monica (since Archie cited y’all)…does it really matter to you what gender the person who pulls you from the fire is? Would you be more likely to expect rescue from a male firefighter or a female firefighter? Exactly put, if you need protection does the gender of the protector really matter to you?
Remember, this isn’t about politeness or “gentlemanly” behaviour, it’s about whether you specifically prefer male rescuers or female rescuers.
I have to admit that I made a slight error in even addressing Archie, since he’s long since made plain his opinion that women are just hypocritical liars who pretend that they don’t want to be treated like a delicate little flowers…execept we really do. It seems obvious to me that Archie believes that women who say that they can do for themselves very nicely are fooling themselves and presenting a false face to the world. We’re all a bunch of selfish leeches just waiting for a chance to clamp onto some unsuspecting man.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this
Susie, why are you whitewashing this? Just saying “yes, men are generally the perpetrators of violence� doesn’t mean all men are ogres. Just most ogres are men.
Yes there are a lot of violent men who perpetrate violence, BUT let’s not get so involved in a subject that goes round and round like a wheel. People can have both violent and nurturing tendencies. I’m a pretty mellow person, but I can snap along with the best of them. I am female, but yes, I can be violent too if crossed.
Men have testosterone (sp), hubris, and a lot of codes, rules and mores that genetically make them men. So they can be much more aggressive than the female and yes, it’s true they can be much more violent. However, men are also nurturers, caregivers, and lovers.
Historically you and W2W and Pro are correct, on an average men are more violent than women; but that’s part of who they are and what makes them men — how are we supposed to change them? They’re MEN — they’re genetic make up makes them MEN, that means they have certain tendencies that women will never have.
I don’t think I’m whitewashing anything; I’m just acknowledging facts. It is what it is.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this
Doobie Brothers, Evil Woman, that is a ‘walk around in a south Florida cattle pasture’ song to me.
Again, wise master, you have put me to shame with your vast knowledge. Grasshopper will now go and meditate and think of more ways to (ahemm) test your knowledge (smile)
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this
In my opinion a feminist would simply say I was wrong.
Maybe, but not all women are feminists.
There was the church lady that slept with her pastor for over 10 years and she has married for 14 years. The church lady said she was brainwashed but the pastor cannot say he was seduced
I remember that story — my friend went to that church. You forget that there are a lot of gullible people out there who CAN be brainwashed or highly influenced by someone in a leadership or command position. It happens all the time, (If I was really mean, I’d make a comment on how the F0x Network does this same thing to their viewers, but I wouldn’t do that, oh no, not me); so let’s not discount her story right off the bat. And if she was a member of that church there is a GOOD chance that she was telling nothing but the truth, (Remember the story of Jim Jones —Jonestown Massacre, Ghana?).
also the church lady would go to the pastor’s house after the man’s wife had left home. In other words, she snuck around the woman’s husband
This probably means she was a tramp. Again, not all women are feminists and vice versa.
By Renee
October 3, 2006 12:42 PM | Link to this
I for one am convinced it is Whiley. Although she is held back on the incessant lunatic rantings.
By Monica
October 3, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this
As to whether women specifically want a MAN to protect them, let’s ask, shall we? JBM, Kimberly, Monica (since Archie cited y’all)…does it really matter to you what gender the person who pulls you from the fire is? Would you be more likely to expect rescue from a male firefighter or a female firefighter? Exactly put, if you need protection does the gender of the protector really matter to you?
Of course not. It’s not really the “protection” that I was talking about; it is the traditional honor or respect that a man shows a woman. I don’t mean to say that men don’t deserve honor from women as well. I was just admitting that I like it when a man opens a door, gives up a seat on the bus, etc. Now, on the home front, if I hear a “bump in the night,” I want my hubby to check it out, not me!!
BTW, I can change a flat tire. I just hope that someone would stop to help.
By The72John
October 3, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this
Yes there are a lot of violent men who perpetrate violence
The problem with this topic, whether it be posed by Whiley, or PDP, or whatever name she’s calling herself today, is that it takes one apparent fact (I say apparent because I don’t have the actual statistics in front of me) - that men are more likely to be violent than women - and erroneously extrapolates that to mean that Men are inherently violent.
This is always the flaw in Whiley/Clone’s argument.
Let’s use some hypothetical numbers, for the sake of argument. Let’s assume that 5 in 100 women will commit a violent act in their lifetime, and that 15 in 100 men will commit a violent act in their lifetime. That means that in a population of 1,000,000 men and 1,000,000 women: 50,000 women and 150,000 men will be violent. Yes, that’s a greater number of men, but it still leaves 1,800,000 people who will never be violent, 850,000 of which are men.
However, in the delusional fantasy world that our WhileyClone lives in, ALL men are just inches away from violence…women are NEVER violent, and the world is this horrible place where you must constantly live in fear.
It isn’t a RATIONAL argument, so it isn’t worth discussing.
Now, Suzie’s argument IS rational, as it acknowledges the fact that men do seem to be more prone to overt violence than women and attempts to find causes for an increased tendency.
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 12:46 PM | Link to this
Guyana is in South America, Ghana is in Africa.
By Mara
October 3, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this
some women will knowingly go out with a married guy but then say “well he came after me� instead saying I was wrong too. In my opinion a feminist would simply say I was wrong.
As a feminist I would say that anyone who betrays the trust of their mate and refuses to take responsibility for their actions is in the wrong. Male or female. It isn’t specifically females who do this. I’ve heard the excuse “boys will be boys” and “men have needs” at least as often as you have heard women refusing to accept their own responsibility.
By Jack
October 3, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this
Hi Everyone. Any man worth a s—t would gladly help a woman or anyone else in need. I open doors for ladies, change tires, stand between them and the vermin on the street and would jump in a flood to save a female. If there were a drowning male and female, sorry guy, better learn to swim.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this
Ooops! Sorry you’re right it was Guyana not Ghana.
By Mara
October 3, 2006 01:19 PM | Link to this
Susie - the woman with the beer - ROTFLMAO!!!
Hey JBM! :^)
Monica - I hope you don’t think I’m picking on you, because I don’t mean to be. I think every person has the right to live their lives as they choose, including following the “traditional” path if that’s what makes them happy. There are a lot of non-feminists who find having their roles and duties defined to be reassuring and comforting. And I think that’s fine…for them. My particular strengths and passions tend to fall outside that box of what, traditionally, women are supposed to be. I would find such a life stifling. And perhaps that is a weakness of feminism. We want these opportunities for ourselves so we tend to project those same desires onto our sisters who may be quite happy as “just” a wife and mother. (note the quotes around “just” indicating that I personally don’t believe that these roles have no value…)
that said, are you more pleased that a man would open the door, give up his seat, etc than you would be if a woman was equally as courteous to you? Is it the gesture or the gender that gives value to the act?
By Mara
October 3, 2006 01:26 PM | Link to this
Jack - if the man can’t swim at all but the woman is weakening as she treads water, you’d pass by the man to get to the woman?
By Jack
October 3, 2006 01:33 PM | Link to this
Why would Whiley change her moniker? You don’t think there are other females who share her opinion?
By Jack
October 3, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this
Mara. Yes.
By The72John
October 3, 2006 01:41 PM | Link to this
Why would Whiley change her moniker? You don’t think there are other females who share her opinion?
It’s not her opinion, Jack, it’s the manner of presenting it, the writing, etc.
There you go again - leaping inexplicably to the defense of a person who would undoubtedly curse at you and probably mace you if you so much as looked her way in RL.
By The72John
October 3, 2006 01:42 PM | Link to this
Mara. Yes.
How sad that your sense of altruism is based solely on gender…you would let a man die in order to save a woman who is perfectly capable of saving herself, just because she is a woman?
Well, I know who NOT to trust.
By Mara
October 3, 2006 01:46 PM | Link to this
sorry, Jack. I can’t express how much respect I’ve just lost for you.
By Eric Blair
October 3, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this
Interesting topic.
But I think this is a subjective issue that cannot be generalized. Men, will protect females or children or family that has a value to them. (And this isn’t always true.)
After that, it truly is a free for all. Opening a door is courtesy - I do it all the time for anyone. helping someone with car trouble (male or female) is being kind.
Risking your life for a stranger is selfless and couragoues be it male or female.
And I one person was drowning and you could save him/her - would you only jump in to save a female.
Also, I do agree with some comments regarding abuse of power as well. If men were always inclined to help the weak, their wouldn’t be nearly as much violence. Most violence occurs because one is considerably weaker than another - be it any gender.
By WtoW fan
October 3, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this
Since the discussion is wether or not men should expected to protect women, openly & honestly discussing male violence is appropriate. After all what is it women are needing protection from?
How can women & children protect themselves when boys & adult men enter schools & start shooting? Within 2 weeks angry men were singling out little girls. What animal decides to sexually assault children before he kills himself? What sort of animal can kiss his children goodbye while putting them on a bus to school, then go massacre little girls? How can anybody be protected from that?
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 02:00 PM | Link to this
In all this men are so abusive to females discussion, can it be mentioned that there are also many abused men, by their female spouses?(often under-reported).
By Renee
October 3, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this
exactly Chilao!!
By The72John
October 3, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this
How can women & children protect themselves when boys & adult men enter schools & start shooting? Within 2 weeks angry men were singling out little girls. What animal decides to sexually assault children before he kills himself? What sort of animal can kiss his children goodbye while putting them on a bus to school, then go massacre little girls? How can anybody be protected from that?
Are you deliberately obtuse, or just stupid?
By Monica
October 3, 2006 02:11 PM | Link to this
that said, are you more pleased that a man would open the door, give up his seat, etc than you would be if a woman was equally as courteous to you? Is it the gesture or the gender that gives value to the act?
Well, opening doors is maybe a bad example (maybe a car door instead of holding a door open). With regard to giving up a seat on the bus for me, for some reason, I would say yes to your question, Mara. For one reason, I have never had a woman give up a seat for me. If she did, I would graciously decline. I am in fine health and am perfectly capable of standing. I don’t see a man offering me his seat as him thinking that I am inferior or weaker. To me, it is a gesture of respect for me as a woman. I can’t explain my feelings, but it’s just how I feel.
Because I work outside the home, my husband and I share the household duties. Typically, I cook and clean the dishes, but that’s just because I get home before he does. We share in cleaning the bathrooms, doing laundry, and picking up the house. I do the finances because he doesn’t want to. He does the yard work because I don’t want to. My husband still opens the car door for me on occasion. That makes me feel special. I wish I could better explain how I feel, but that’s about as good as I can do. Sorry!
By Toad
October 3, 2006 02:31 PM | Link to this
Once on the airport ‘train’ some young women offered me the seat. I thought I must really look old! (I’m 52)
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this
How can women & children protect themselves when boys & adult men enter schools & start shooting?
W2WFan: So what’s the solution? Do all women live like the Amazons and abjure men? And if we did, how long will it be before our “Utopia” ceased to exist? Without the male we can not reproduce alone. You keep bringing this up as a topic, so what do you deem to be a fair solution to this problem? Obviously you have thought about this for some time,so what is your solution?
By Toad
October 3, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this
Maybe this is obtuse or stupid, but of course there are some abusive females just as there are violent females. And the crimes they commit can be against men, women or children. I don’t anyone has said only men are violent or abusive.
By Renee
October 3, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this
I have given up my seat to a woman (admittedly usually a pregnant woman) in meetings, on a bus (the few times I’ve ridden) or waiting for a table at a restaurant. I do it because I know it’s hard to stand uncomfortably. I used to get mad and wonder why a man wouldn’t give up their seat. I no longer do, I understand that nobody is obligated to do anything and some people (both men and women) are just more mannerable or understandable. Whose to say the man sitting down and not offering his seat has gout or something else making him need to sit. What makes the woman needing to sit more important than the mans need (other than pregnancy).
By Mara
October 3, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this
Monica, that’s fine. You explained it quite well. I wasn’t attempting to invalidate your opinion, merely to understand its nuance. And really, the way you describe your home life is a lot like the way mine is. (Though the yard work thing is only because he doesn’t want me messing with “his” tools. I still get to play in the flower beds)
Remember the question was regarding expectations and not whether we enjoy courtesy from people, men in particular. And while I probably do expect these things from my husband, it has nothing to do with his being a “man”. I expect it because he loves me. I do for him as much as he does for me, and for the same reasons. :^)
By Renee
October 3, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this
Definitely Whiley. Men cause all the evil in the world!!
John, you can’t argue with that!!
By Mara
October 3, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
Susie - Without the male we can not reproduce alone
just wait. It’s not long in coming (no pun intended LOL) They’ve already produced mouse sperm from mouse stem cells and the technology will probably be adaptable for humans…http://www.nih.gov/news/pr/nov2004/nichd-03.htm
By Toad
October 3, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
Sorry, left out the word “think.” Hmmm, wonder what that means??
By Mara
October 3, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
Renee - well said.
By The72John
October 3, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
I don’t anyone has said only men are violent or abusive.
No offense, but you need to re-read some of the person’s posts and look carefully at the sub-text. Her language is clearly weighted - protect women from dangerous men…men are what women need to be protected from…men are responsible for almost all the evil in the world…
Maybe you just don’t want to acknowledge the bias of her writing?
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
just wait. It’s not long in coming (no pun intended LOL)
I hope I NEVER live to see that day!! The only fun part of pregnancy is GETTING pregnant!! If they take that part away…….well, may God have mercy on our souls!
By Toad
October 3, 2006 03:03 PM | Link to this
It’s not bias to say men are responsible for most violence — it’s a fact. Maybe there is a subtext that “all men are evil” but I’m just going on what has been said in this post, not some topics from earlier topics. I think it is worthwhile to examine why this is so as some posters have done — testerone, larger and stronger, etc. It’s possible to give numerous example of violence commited by women but can you really say that there is not a much larger incidence of violence by men?
By lozen
October 3, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this
Hey Susie, you could still do the fun part even if pregnancy came about another way ya know!
By The72John
October 3, 2006 03:11 PM | Link to this
I give up, Toad. I guess it will take Whiley getting worked up into one of her fits where she starts foaming at the mouth about how horrible all men are for you to understand what I’m talking about.
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this
Hey Susie, you could still do the fun part even if pregnancy came about another way ya know!
what is even better is all that PRACTICE…LOL
Susie, I have a True Confession on the Doobie Brothers. While I certainly know who they are, and “south FL cattle fields” is accurate, I was only able to get that one from a google search. LOL. Hope you ARE aware nearly all lyrics, when plugged into google, yield results. First one for you, though, the Evil Woman one. SLY was right off the mind. immediately.
By Monica
October 3, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this
As you can see, John, some people prefer not to get off the merry-go-round :)
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this
Lozen: Whew!!! (Susie stopping herself from hoarding away all of her toys), Thank God!!! Some of us NEED that testosterone in our lives if only a little!!
Chilao: I couldn’ resist…….after this I SWEAR I’ll leave you alone, (for awhile anyway smile)oh any artist who sang the song will do.
Tired of bein’ lonely, tired of bein’ blue,
I wished I had some good man, to tell my troubles to
Seem like the whole world’s wrong, since my man’s been gone
I need a little sugar in my bowl,
I need a little hot dog, on my roll
I can stand a bit of lovin’, oh so bad,
I feel so funny, I feel so sad
I need a little steam-heat, on my floor,
Maybe I can fix things up, so they’ll go
This has been covered by a lot of different artists, so any artist will do.
By Jack
October 3, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this
OK. I’ll save the female first, then go back for the “man”. AND If you read John, she said “weakened”. She did not say,”perfectly capable of saving herself. And I don’t care how much respect you lost for me Mara. I feel the way I do. I suppose John would run and call for help. Trash Whiley if it makes you feel better.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
Susie, I have a True Confession on the Doobie Brothers. While I certainly know who they are, and “south FL cattle fields� is accurate, I was only able to get that one from a google search. LOL. Hope you ARE aware nearly all lyrics, when plugged into google, yield results. First one for you, though, the Evil Woman one. SLY was right off the mind. immediately.
Oh no, Master say it ain’t so!!! I had called my godmother and had her looking in her attic for some long haired stuff to stump you with!!! She had even emailed me some good Joplin lyrics to get you with!!! Dang that Google!!! Whatever happened to Name That Tune??!!!?
Oh well, I was tired of sitting on that rock anyway!!! (smile)
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
I was wondering where Whiley had been, thought she might have been partying too hard up in Asheville, but then when you look down at the previous weeks’ topics, there aren’t exactly many topics there condusive to her posts. Until this week. LOL
By The72John
October 3, 2006 03:34 PM | Link to this
By the way, Toad, if applies just a bit of logic to the posts of the loon, then clearly I am right.
Should the topic have been “what responsibility do men have to protect women & children considering they are the ones they need protection from?�
Logically examining this statement clearly suggests that the writer believes that all men are dangerous. If SOME men are dangerous, then clearly the non-dangerous men would be able to protect women from dangerous men. However, the statement says “what responsibility to men…considering that they are the ones they need protection from”.
Not “some of them”…”they” - an inclusive word. The only acceptable logical conclusion that can be drawn from this statement is that the writer believes that all men are dangerous.
Human violence’ is absolutely inaccurate, it’s male violence that is the problem all around the globe
This statement clearly absolves women of any blame for violence, and denies that women are violent.
The Terry Nichols situation is a fine example of how well that protection Chivalry thing is going
Another example of taking a single case and extending it to a concept as a whole. Because one man did something frightening, then Chivalry as a concept is false?
C’mon Toad - interpreting these statements isn’t Rocket Science.
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
Sorry, I am not that old. LMAO (Bessie Smith, 1931).
By The72John
October 3, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this
I suppose John would run and call for help
A completely needless and completely unfair dig, Jack. Just because I don’t base my decision on who to help first by who has t** doesn’t mean I don’t help.
By WtoW fan
October 3, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this
Her language is clearly weighted - protect women from dangerous men…men are what women need to be protected from…men are responsible for almost all the evil in the world…
John may I point out the obvious, it’s the topic this week.
Violence is evil, men commit most of the violence in this world. But that doesn’t mean all men are evil, unless the testosterone excuse is used then forget it it’s a losing battle.
Again I ask what is it men are needing to protect women & children from? Wild animals? Women stalking other women to abduct & murder becuase they had a bad childhood?
Women randamly sexually assaulting & murdering other women on Bike paths? Women & girls entering schools & randomly killing students becuase they were teased? Please tell us.
By WtoWfan
October 3, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this
“This statement clearly absolves women of any blame for violence, and denies that women are violent. “
So now women are responsible for male violence?
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this
Joplin’s Piece of my Heart, was originally done by Aretha Franklin’s sister, Erma.
By The72John
October 3, 2006 03:54 PM | Link to this
John may I point out the obvious, it’s the topic this week.
No, actually it isn’t…you’ve just decided to make it that. The topic is about men feeling inherently protective towards women…you’ve turned it into a “all men are evil and violent” fest.
So now women are responsible for male violence?
You are truly a moron, did you know that? At no point did I specify male violence. I said violence, PERIOD, which is committed by both genders. I can’t even BEGIN to understand how you came to this conclusion, except to write you off, yet again, as a raving fanatical lunatic.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this
Chilao: OK then who originally covered the Aretha classic “Respect”?
W2WFan: But that doesn’t mean all men are evil, unless the testosterone excuse is used then forget it it’s a losing battle.
Heavy sigh. No one is making excuses — what I’m saying is that there is no need to beat the horse into the ground. Testosterone was used to signify why men are so inherently different than women. If you don’t like the word testosterone, then let’s use ovaries.
Because of ovaries, women are biologically, mentally, and genetically differnt from men. All women have, (at one time or another) ovaries, but not all women can give birth with their ovaries. Some women’s ovaries were defunct at birth, some due to illness such as cancer, cysts, etc.; and some women have perfectly heathly ovaries but have never chosen to use them to give birth.
Because of ovaries and the cycle that comes with it; some women act differently during a certain time of month, (PMS), but not all women with ovaries do. Does the woman with the perfectly healthy ovaries pose more of a danger when she has PMS than the woman with the defunct ovaries towards the male of the species? If so, how?
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this
LMAO - I actually have that on a Best of Otis Redding.
But is the new EVANESCENCE out yet?, supposed to be OCT 3rd.
By Renee
October 3, 2006 04:08 PM | Link to this
Is it possible that more violence by women isn’t reported by the media? There are jails FULL of women, as there are men, and all of them aren’t there for killing their abusive husbands. For some reason when a women commits an evil crime, like um….drowning her children in a bathtub, or drowning her children in a lake and blamimg it on an abduction by a black man, or shooting her husband in the head while he sleeps…it’s looked on with pity. Like she must have had problems or what happened in her life, etc… It couldn’t be that she’s just evil, like some people are. And some men who commit crimes have been victims of abuse etc, to not excuse their crime, but give an explanation for their less than civilized behavior. I do have a friend whose wife was abusive to him, and I have had friends (acquaintances) who have been beat repeatedly by their partners who are also women. Women do dirt too, just as bad and worse than men, but it’s not widely publicized. As a society we are conditioned to believe that men do everything and women are safe. Sooo not true…..
By WtoW fan
October 3, 2006 04:17 PM | Link to this
Again John, what specifically is it that women need protection from if we are not talking about male violence?
And it IS THE TOPIC this week. What are men supposed to be protecting us from?
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 04:26 PM | Link to this
Renee — You are certainly correct that it might be that we only hear in the media about the most horrid things that women do; but not all the day to day violence that some women perpetrate. A LOT of women go to jail daily for child abuse! A LOT of women are on death row because of abuses to children. Some women, just like men, are just evil….period. Black widows, Killer nurses, etc. hmmmm good point, I wonder why we haven’t picked up on that one before?
By Bruce
October 3, 2006 04:27 PM | Link to this
I once protected my 11 year old girl from a cottonmouth moccasin, does that count?
By Renee
October 3, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this
Women need protection from men, other women, and sometimes animals. Women need protection from their own stupid decisions, women need protection from their children, rescue from a fire, possible drowning, any number of things.
Do women need more protection than men. Some may, others don’t.
And the topic is….Should men still be expected to protect women. Absolutely NOT!
By The72John
October 3, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this
Again John, what specifically is it that women need protection from if we are not talking about male violence?
Well gosh, Whiley…there are so many things that people need to be protected from at different times…only in your derranged mind is “male violence” the only problem in the world.
Freaking idiot.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 04:30 PM | Link to this
EVANESCENCE? Never heard of them, (shame on me!). I’m mostly a neo-soul, soul, blues, electric blues, early 70s, late 60s rock, funk, early 80s rap and jazz sorta girl.
However, I did take a page out of your book and looked it up on Google!! They come out 10.3.06!
By Brian Curtis
October 3, 2006 04:30 PM | Link to this
Fire. Men are supposed to protect women from fire, okay?
By SusieHomeMaker
October 3, 2006 04:34 PM | Link to this
Oh and Renee statistically men DO commit more violent crimes than women……you can check out the Dept. Of Justice’s website and get the vitals if you wish.
By WtoW fan
October 3, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this
Again John, what is it exactly we need men to protect us from? Wild boars?
I’m not an idiot for asking a question you refuse to answer. I think it’s a very important question. What is it women need protection from that they cannot fend off themselves?
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 04:41 PM | Link to this
Fire. Men are supposed to protect women from fire, okay?
And cruise ship disasters that could turn out like the Titanic.
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this
Susie - you really need to get Evanescence’s FALLEN.
By WtoW fan
October 3, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this
FIRE ! YES that is a big one. What a terrifying event, cannot imagine what that would be like to witness in person let alone be a fire fighter & keep your Sh__ together under such pressure.
By The72John
October 3, 2006 04:44 PM | Link to this
I’m not an idiot for asking a question you refuse to answer. I think it’s a very important question. What is it women need protection from that they cannot fend off themselves?
As always, loon, you ignore the answers you don’t want to see and continue to pound away at your raison d’etre of man-hating.
Though frankly, I wouldn’t be inclined to protect you from a wild boar, or anything else. One less fanatic in the world is always a bonus.
By In the Pound
October 3, 2006 04:44 PM | Link to this
Should “violence” be defined as only physical violence? My opinion is that a woman can inflict a lot of emotional damage on her man whenever she chooses to.
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 04:44 PM | Link to this
Someone has been watching the early weekend morning hunting shows, they were hunting Arkansas razorbacks last week, and not the sporting team. The GUYS waited 20 minutes or so for the other hogs to disperse, once they shot one, so imagine what they would do if the wife and kids were along.
By Pam
October 3, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this
Women of the world unite!!! And let us protect ourselves from bad hairdos!!! I saw this woman yesterday who had a hairstyle that was right out of “Stupd R Us” catalog!!! My gosh!! It’s like she went to the beautician and the beautician asked her,”How do you want your hair today?” and the woman replied, “Well, I don’t know. Just make me look like a damn fool today.”
We must stop this blatant disrespect and stop it NOW!!
By Pam
October 3, 2006 04:52 PM | Link to this
I inflict emotional damage on my man every chance I get. He has, however, developed a coping strategy. When I get PMS, (I’m one of those girls with ovaries), I act like a crazed, wounded animal who will tear into anything in its way. He has learned the art of hear no evil, see no evil, and speaketh nothing until the crazy witch is ok again. Hey, it works for us.
By A Doobie
October 3, 2006 04:52 PM | Link to this
Rising up blue, hills are rolling
Walking with you through a field of red stone
I’ve been confused from voices calling
Calling to me where the white sun has shown
And I slip away, down by the water
And I slipaway, down by the sea
Take love and give love, it’s got to be….
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this
See, Pam’s suggestion is something for the women, since us guys know NOT to go anywhere NEAR that one.
“yes, honey, your (crappy) hairdo looks fine” LOL
By Chilao
October 3, 2006 04:59 PM | Link to this
Standing by the ocean watch it tear away the shore Glide out upon the desert, the horizon is the door And though your voice is shouting above the wind it can’t be heard Drop all sense of reason, it’s there you’ll find your worth And though you are srrounded, feeling quite alone There’s a light to guide you home.
By Toad
October 3, 2006 05:04 PM | Link to this
Well, there aren’t a LOT of women on death row. Seems like I read an article about the lone woman on GA’s death row a year or so ago. Although I don’t remember if that woman who poisoned a husband and a boyfriend with anti-freeze got the death penalty. Guys — watch out for green jello!
I guess juries are hesitant to convict women of capital crimes. That woman in Texas — I forgot her name — who became a Christian — so many people said she shouldn’t be executed because she had repented. I seriously doubt a man would have gotten that kind of support, especially if he had been a man of color.
By TramadoL29113
October 3, 2006 09:47 PM | Link to this
I’ve just been staying at home waiting for something to happen. Whatever. Not much on my mind lately. I guess it doesn’t bother me.
By TramadoL56265
October 4, 2006 12:12 AM | Link to this
I feel like a complete blank, but I don’t care. Pfft. I’ve pretty much been doing nothing worth mentioning.
By Henry
October 4, 2006 07:22 AM | Link to this
http://xoomer.alice.it/ringtones-free/free-mp3-ringtones.html free mp3 ringtones free mp3 ringtones
By SusieHomeMaker
October 4, 2006 08:05 AM | Link to this
Well, there aren’t a LOT of women on death row. Seems like I read an article about the lone woman on GA’s death row a year or so ago.
Toad: Here’s the link to all the women currently on death row and a synopsis of their crimes.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=24&did=228
By Brian Curtis
October 4, 2006 08:07 AM | Link to this
Trying to shift the topic from “society’s expectation for men to protect women” to another diatribe about “how violent men are” is a dishonest and irrelevant tangent.
As already pointed out, “protection from X” can include violent assault, animal attacks, a drunk driver, a burning building, a sinking ship, drowning, and a host of other things.
Only a one-note mind like Whiley’s would immediately transform that into “Men can’t protect women from danger because men ARE the danger!”
By SusieHomeMaker
October 4, 2006 08:08 AM | Link to this
California has the most women on Death Row with 15(?) then Texas with 9. Florida was third, but they’ve since killed off all of their female death row inmates. I think Aileen Wuornos was the last one.
By Archie
October 4, 2006 08:13 AM | Link to this
*I’m afraid to admit this, but if I was placed in the line of fire for any reason at all, I would hope a man would push me out the way and take the hit for me.
I doubt I’d do the same for a man I don’t know.*
This was a comment made earlier on this blog. JBM knows or should know that I really like her. She doesn’t push b.s. she gives her opinion honestly and although we sometimes disagree at least she understands it’s not because she’s a woman.
By Renee
October 4, 2006 08:19 AM | Link to this
Susie - I know statistically men do get convicted of more crimes than women, and it may even be that they are actually committing more crimes in the long run. My point was, is that I think there is a deeper reason that women are not convicted more. I think women cut deals quicker than a man will, thus preventing the death penalty from being invoked, when such commission of a crime would apply. Additionally, on the lower end, you could have a women who committed let’s say assault, cuts a deal, first offender, and is only pleading guilty to disturbing the peace or another relative lesser offense. I would bet a dime to a dollar that juries are consistently more sympathetic to a woman, even in the most heinous of crimes. Look at Andrea Yates for example. The crime she did was horrific, and in my opinion, there should be no discussion as to the punishment for the crime. But in our justice system she is given the most lenient of sentences to put it mildly, and everybody is discussing post partum depression. Given a man in the same scenario, who would give a flying fig if he was a manic depressive. The media, the justice system, and lets face it, society as a whole does view women differently in these situations. Face it, viewing a woman on death row being executed is definitely more frowned upon that executing some evil man. Women are evil as well, they commit crimes, and they may even be a little smarter how they go about it and maybe never even get caught for their acts.
By The72John
October 4, 2006 08:26 AM | Link to this
Only a one-note mind like Whiley’s would immediately transform that into “Men can’t protect women from danger because men ARE the danger!�
One imagines that, were there no men, women would be completely safe and not in need of protection. Weather would suddenly become docile and cooperative. Water would no longer drown. Animals would no longer attack. Fire would no longer burn, ships no longer sink, mud puddles no longer splash, rain no longer drip from gutters above, cars no longer crash, hands no longer hit…
I could go on, but do I really have to?
By WtoW fan
October 4, 2006 08:26 AM | Link to this
Brian maybe YOU can tell us what women & children are needing protection from? Other than all those burning buildings, dangerous animals roaming the city, the daily news of women & children drowing all over this county, or those sinking ships that are affecting their daily lives.
By Archie
October 4, 2006 08:36 AM | Link to this
Renee your 8:19 am was an honest commentary.
By Brian Curtis
October 4, 2006 08:41 AM | Link to this
Don’t forget disease. I’ll bet men cause disease too, and so it’s only right that they be obligated to protect women from it. This one-note fanaticism is absurd… and, as I already said, irrelevant.
By Renee
October 4, 2006 08:45 AM | Link to this
WtoW fan - I guess what you have been hinting continuously at is that women and children need protection from men correct?
I would say they need protection from criminals, AND I would even venture to say that men need protection as well. So then society needs protection from criminals? Wouldn’t you find that to be a more fair statement.
Children need protection from molesting fathers, and mothers that allow it to occur. They need protection from mother’s who abandon them because a new man is in the picture and they don’t have a use for them anymore. They need protection from insane parents, both mothers and fathers. Before these women lie down with men, it’s the woman’s sole responsibility to find out what type of person they are sleeping with before they make children with them. It’s one thing to date the crazy man, but then make children, so then they have to deal with said crazy man.
By WtoW fan
October 4, 2006 08:52 AM | Link to this
Well if anything Renee actually said was true, then where are all the female sex offenders? Where are all the female serial killers? Where are all the female school shooters? Where is the special Dateline “to catch a female Predator” show? Where are all the female’s attacking women joggers on bike paths? Where are all those women gunning down their husbands at abuse shelters? They must be better at covering their offenses, there are just as many as men out there right? And to think all this time I was never concerned about all those dangerous women boy am I lucky !
Ok now what is it men should be protecting us from? What EXACTLY? Funny how so many of you are tip toeing around it. I wonder why that is?
By WtoWfan
October 4, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this
So then society needs protection from criminals? Wouldn’t you find that to be a more fair statement.
Not really because the biggest danger women & children face are sexual assault & abuse or murder from the opposite sex.
Not from other women. A lot of women need to make better choices who to make babies with, but that doesn’t guarantee much. Nobody can predict what a person is going to do later on or find out what they are hiding or capable of.
By The72John
October 4, 2006 09:01 AM | Link to this
Don’t forget disease. I’ll bet men cause disease too, and so it’s only right that they be obligated to protect women from it. This one-note fanaticism is absurd… and, as I already said, irrelevant
Very.
However, the death row comparison does raise some interesting questions about societal imperatives to “protect” women.
I wonder if you took all offenders in the justice system whose crimes were eligible for the death penalty and examined the percentages of men and women in that group who actually received the death penalty - what would we find? I suspect that a far greater percentage of men would be on death row.
If that doesn’t reflect some kind of societal urge for protection, then tell me what does?
By WtoW fan
October 4, 2006 09:06 AM | Link to this
All these new school shootings are going to cost all of us. Schools will be hiring more security, metal detectors, all which are very expensive. Don’t we all pay enough? I don’t recall anybody having a home alarm when I was growing up.
We should all want to address & do something about this problem, instead of ignoring it hoping it will go away.
By The72John
October 4, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this
Ok now what is it men should be protecting us from? What EXACTLY? Funny how so many of you are tip toeing around it. I wonder why that is?
We haven’t tip-toed around anything, you psychotic harridan. You just refuse to acknowledge anything that doesn’t conform to your obsession.
By Renee
October 4, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this
Not from other women. A lot of women need to make better choices who to make babies with, but that doesn’t guarantee much. Nobody can predict what a person is going to do later on or find out what they are hiding or capable of.
Maybe if you make a baby with them after you have been married and engaged for a period of time so you can get to know them, then there wouldn’t be so many problems. True in every situation you won’t be able to tell, but I can guarantee, that in many of them, even most of them, you can tellif you have a man that has a propensity for violence, molestation or exhibits traits that are less than paternal to say the least.
You seem to like to deal in absolutes, Whiley, actually crazy absolutes. What a sad, sad, life you must live, scared of all men, thinking that all men are out to get you. And to further expand this, you are completely out of your mind if you think women don’t sexually abuse other children, they don’t allow their husbands to sexually abuse their children, and that they don’t do anything questionable in society. So maybe there are less women serial killers. Are serial killers a big problem today?? With all of the problems in the world, my fear of serial killers is pretty low on the totem pole. And if one is out, I know how to protect myself, and I don;t need a man to protect me or my child.
You need to stop playing the victim role, because you make yourself a prime target for crime the more you do that. Oh, and while I don’t wish anything bad on anyone, I can only hope that you never come and say some crime committed against you was by a woman.
You lack the ability to have a real debate, argument or discussion without taking the ball and running with it. You don’t even run straight down the field, you run erratically from side to side, with these ridiculous statements and your Whiley “absolutes”. It gets really tiresome, especially when you rant and rave the same things, with no plausible reason. YOU hurt the cause for women rather than help it. Nobody will listen to anything any womans activist group has to say as long as you spout these ridiculous accusations about men.
You are just as bad as the PETA people who marched against people eating cockroaches. Your time towards your cause could be a lot more useful and helpful if it was…well….sane.
By The72John
October 4, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this
All these new school shootings are going to cost all of us. Schools will be hiring more security, metal detectors, all which are very expensive. Don’t we all pay enough? I don’t recall anybody having a home alarm when I was growing up.
Someone please explain to this idiot what I posted about the misassesment of risk in our lives. I don’t think she is able to comprehend statistics.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 4, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this
Ithink women cut deals quicker than a man will, thus preventing the death penalty from being invoked, when such commission of a crime would apply.
Perhaps traditionally that has been the case; but now it seems that Justice has become an equal opportunity employer. More women now are faced with the death penalty for capital crimes than ever before.
Additionally, on the lower end, you could have a women who committed let’s say assault, cuts a deal, first offender, and is only pleading guilty to disturbing the peace or another relative lesser offense.
First offenders, (male and female), will get off more easily because they are not considered a risk.
I think society judge women HARSHER than they do men. When I was looking on that website for women on deathrow; I was looking at some of their offenses, (one woman had killed her hours old baby — she had no prior arrests or convictions, had always been looked upon as a “good girl” but she got the death penalty. While looking at that same state’s website of deathrow inmates, there was a man who was convicted FOUR TIMES of rape, attempted rape, aggravated murder, and robbery who got light sentences each time and was paroled only to go back to jail again for an even more horrendous crime. After his fifth offense, which I think was murder/rape of a 10 year old cousin,he got the death penalty — but in the interim he had four chances to $crew the system before he got the death penalty. That woman however, only had one chance to hit the death penalty lottery). I feel women, like black men, are dispropritionately given harsher and more strenous sentencing BECAUSE they are female.
Look at Andrea Yates for example. The crime she did was horrific, and in my opinion, there should be no discussion as to the punishment for the crime. But in our justice system she is given the most lenient of sentences to put it mildly, and everybody is discussing post partum depression.
Andrea Yates was a classic schizo!! Her husband, who was the main bread winner in the family, refused to buy her her medication. Her parents, friends, everyone begged him to get the medication for her because she was slipping away, but he didn’t believe in “mental health meds”, so refused to give it to her. On her medication, I doubt that she would’ve done the crime. She LOVED her kids.
Face it, viewing a woman on death row being executed is definitely more frowned upon that executing some evil man.
Very true. I remember when Karla Tucker was on death row in Texas and the big hoopla over her going to the chair was on just about every radio station.
Women are evil as well, they commit crimes, and they may even be a little smarter how they go about it and maybe never even get caught for their acts.
True. But are they more VIOLENT than men? A lot of crimes women get caught on are non-violent. Like that lady who poisoned her husband and boyfriend, (allegedly poisoned),here in georgia. Her crime was considered non violent and it took years for anyone to catch her.
By WtoW fan
October 4, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this
We haven’t tip-toed around anything, you psychotic harridan.
What exactly have I said that is psychotic? You seem to have an anger issue with women. Please don’t shoot up a elementary school this afternoon.
By Chilao
October 4, 2006 09:18 AM | Link to this
I should point out that those little college-goth-chicks I mentioned yesterday over helping with a tire change seemed very interested in being able to do it themselves. So after merely LOOSENING the lug nights, I let them finish the job. They just need the right tool for the power-driven-ON lug nuts. They already had it jacked up, we had to bring it down to keep the tire from turning. But when I saw them trying to STAND on the lug-nut wrench..LOL.. Plus it was 95F and I had just gotten off work and if they WANTED to do it, fine by me…LOL
I personally think anyone who drives a vehicle should be able to change the tire and check the oil, but that is just me.
By Archie
October 4, 2006 09:20 AM | Link to this
Before these women lie down with men, it’s the woman’s sole responsibility to find out what type of person they are sleeping with before they make children with them. It’s one thing to date the crazy man, but then make children, so then they have to deal with said crazy man.
Renee it sounds like you’re actually advocating that women take some responsibility. My goodness Renee you are a woman-basher!!! Sarcasm aside I rarely hear those statements from women. I am really enjoying the commentary from some of the women here. Like India-Arie says “There’s Hope”.
By WtoW fan
October 4, 2006 09:21 AM | Link to this
Someone please explain to this idiot what I posted about the misassesment of risk in our lives.
Tell that to the families affected by the school shooters, tell that to the families who’s husbands are busted on dateline, tell that to the families of the courthouse shooter. Tell that to the families of missing or murdered children. Tell that to the family of the woman attacked & murdered on the Silver comet trail.
By The72John
October 4, 2006 09:24 AM | Link to this
What exactly have I said that is psychotic? You seem to have an anger issue with women. Please don’t shoot up a elementary school this afternoon.
Well, this, for example. You are oblivious to the fact that my “anger issues” are with you and your abject stupidity. This represents a serious inability to deal with reality.
The fact that anything said about you (never mind the fact that there are other women saying basically the same thing) translates into a hatred of women is a textbook example of your obsession and your detachment from what is real.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 4, 2006 09:29 AM | Link to this
I wonder if you took all offenders in the justice system whose crimes were eligible for the death penalty and examined the percentages of men and women in that group who actually received the death penalty - what would we find? I suspect that a far greater percentage of men would be on death row. If that doesn’t reflect some kind of societal urge for protection, then tell me what does?
But how can we achieve it? How can we make the punishment so fit the crime that causing a crime would be such a fearful advent that people would think twice before doing it?
By Renee
October 4, 2006 09:32 AM | Link to this
I have to respectfully disagree with your first two paragraphs Susie. The justice system is not an “equal opportunity employer” and I think it definitely is more favorable to women, not harsher. If we are going to have the death penalty in this country (which I am not a full supporter of) then the scales should be balanced. Lynn Fuller??? or whoever she is in Cobb County should have gotten the death penalty. Her crime is no less heinous than someone who came in with an axe. She came smiling with “love” and killing at the same time, while watching them suffer.
Andrea Yates DID NOT love her children. If she was so schizo that she could not function without medicine, I would say she was totally incapable of love. She should not have been allowed to procreate. I do agree that her husband should be held responsible but for different reasons than you named.
By lovelyliz
October 4, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
Since when have men ever “protected” women?
Shouldn’t we all look out for each other?
By The72John
October 4, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this
Tell that to the families affected by the school shooters, tell that to the families who’s husbands are busted on dateline, tell that to the families of the courthouse shooter. Tell that to the families of missing or murdered children. Tell that to the family of the woman attacked & murdered on the Silver comet trail.
Whiley.
You understand that there are 185 MILLION people living in this country, don’t you? Yes. These things that you mention are horrible. But they are not. all. pervasive. In the slightest. In your derranged mind, you BLOW these incidents all out of proportion, never realizing that your risk of being killed by a serial killer or derranged shooter is about equal to your risk of being struck by a piece of falling space garbage.
This is why you are crazy. This is why your grasp on reality is tenuous at best. You see terrible events and they baloon in your mind until your basic sense of proportion is completely distorted, and you see horrific events around every corner.
I pity you - you are a pathetic creature.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 4, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this
please forgive my awful spelling. please substitute these words for all the mis spelled ones in the previous posts
Disproportionate
Strenuous
By Renee
October 4, 2006 09:41 AM | Link to this
Archie, women absolutely have to take responsibility!!
By The72John
October 4, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this
But how can we achieve it? How can we make the punishment so fit the crime that causing a crime would be such a fearful advent that people would think twice before doing it?
You can’t…studies time and time again have shown that the penalties for violent crimes are simply not a deterrent. Most violent crimes are crimes of passion, and are not committed when one is in a reasonable state. You don’t stop and think - “Hey! If I chop this guy up, I might get the chair”.
What people don’t seem to understand is that we will never be able to eliminate violent crime from society. We can do what we can to mitigate the commission of crimes, but we just aren’t going to eliminate it.
That’s why Whiley’s plaintive and nonsensical “We should all want to address & do something about this problem, instead of ignoring it hoping it will go away.” is so assinine. For one thing, it assumes that we are ignoring violence, which we patently aren’t, but for another it assumes that stopping insane people from committing insane acts before they are committed is somehow within our control. In so many cases, it simply isn’t.
Human society is a deeply complex system, and like all deeply complex systems it is almost impossible to predict and certainly impossible to completely control.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 4, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this
I have to respectfully disagree with your first two paragraphs Susie. The justice system is not an “equal opportunity employer� and I think it definitely is more favorable to women, not harsher.
Cool a discussion!!! OK I said that the justice system was becoming an equal opportunity employer with regards to sentencing women to death. Women in history have ALWAYS been given the harsher penalties of law. Ever since the biblical mob tried to stone the adulteress and let the adulterer go this has been happening. Women are looked upon as sacrosanct by the law and men and when they do break the law are dealt harshly so as not to allow other women to step out of their pre-ordained role that they have been assigned to.
By Renee
October 4, 2006 09:58 AM | Link to this
OMG John…excellent, 9:45. That’s what I was trying to say…except you said it way more eloquently.
kudos
By Lucy
October 4, 2006 09:59 AM | Link to this
This article was interesting- i still like the idea of a man holding the door open for me and I wouldn’t expect anything less than to be shielded by a man. I love the idea of a big bear hug around me and it’s not so much a request- sort of expected. It doesnt make any women less equal-less powerful- it’s how it should be.
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this
WtoW fan—At the risk of damaging my “rep” here on W2W even more, I’m going to AGREE with you that, in a general way, men are much more physically violent than women. This is a fact which is undeniable, and to do otherwise is simply foolish.
In considering this fact in ISOLATION, one might conclude that “Life is Unjust”, which it appears you have done. Personally, I find that to be sad on your part, because it doesn’t reflect the Harmony of Reality, which is composed of an infinite number of counter-balancing forces and qualities which we can attribute to people, both men and women. In simpler terms, for every bad quality a man has, he has a good one. For every good quality a woman has, she has a bad one.
By The72John
October 4, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this
WtoW fan—At the risk of damaging my “rep� here on W2W even more, I’m going to AGREE with you that, in a general way, men are much more physically violent than women. This is a fact which is undeniable, and to do otherwise is simply foolish.
And since no one has denied that men are more physically violent than women, your mentioning it is pointless.
I see that the idiot troll has decided to poison the blog with his presence again.
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this
An important point which folks seem to be missing here is that we are both PHYSICAL beings as well as SPIRITUAL beings. That means, while we can declare someone to be a man based on his anatomical equipment, whether that person has a MALE SPIRIT is a very different question.
One very important application of this point can be made in interpreting the Bible, where it speaks of “man lying with man”. Most people (think chuck) interpret this commandment only in the PHYSICAL plane (i.e. homosexuality is wrong), which leads to obvious contradictions with Biology and people’s personal experiences. By reading this commandment in a SPRITUAL plane, all such contradictions disappear, however.
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this
Quick question, John—Why are you such a sour person?
By The72John
October 4, 2006 10:21 AM | Link to this
Quick question, John—Why are you such a sour person?
Quick question, Dog - Why are you such a sanctimonious self-righteous superior person?
By candide
October 4, 2006 10:25 AM | Link to this
It is men from whom women need protection. How can men protect them?
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
You didn’t answer me, John, but I will answer you: I am a sanctimonious self-righteous superior person due to FEAR. By staying in control, I can temporarily reduce those FEARS. Is that an honest answer?
By Toad
October 4, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this
It is men from whom women need protection. How can men protect them?
Men can protect women from other men by: (1) if a man has a daughter, he can educate her to stay away from men who have controlling or violent tendencies; (2) men can call other men on their sh-it when they hear them degrade or insult women; (3) if he knows of a man abusing a woman not burying his head in the sand and saying ‘it’s just between them.’
Can anyone else think of examples?
By Renee
October 4, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
John, I have to say that you were able to assertain quickly that was DOG. How did you know, I didn’t even pick up on it from the first comment.
(2) men can call other men on their sh-it when they hear them degrade or insult women;
I don’t think insulting women or even degrading them puts them in harms way. It may be immoral and less than mannerable, but not something a woman has to tolerate or should put her into fear.
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this
A part of the dynamic in “violent” interactions between men and women is the fact that women love a good fight as much as any man, if not more. The fact is, at the deepest biological level, women are the ATTRACTANT. Women fulfill this role with not only their sexy appearance, but by stirring up “trouble” at every turn (sound familiar, guys?).
Proof of this for me came as a young man when I foolishly listened to my mother and tried to be a “nice guy” while out on dates. Needless to say, the only sex I had was with Rosie Palm and her five little sisters. Fortunately, I overcame that handicap to good sex, and now just let it rip.
By ali
October 4, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this
http:/xoomer.alice.it/ringtones-free/free-mp3-ringtones.html free mp3 ringtones free mp3 ringtones
By Toad
October 4, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this
Renee, by insulting or degrading women I’m referring specifically to a man who insults his woman in front of friends. In this instance I think his male friends should let him know that’s not cool. A man who does this is abusing her emotionally, at least. I worded it very generally because I’d like to think men might object to statements like Pound Puppy just made.
By The72John
October 4, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this
Renee, the “In the Pound” handle fits his DOG/GOD delusionmotif. I was suspicious yesterday, but as soon as he made reference to his “rep” I was certain. Add in a dash of his pseudo-philosophical nonsense and - voila, la chien retourne.
Though how his “rep” could suffer when he is universally despised by ever regular poster, I can’t imagine.
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
Since I answered your question, John, about my M.O., are you going to answer my question about why you are such a sour person?
By Renee
October 4, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this
Toad - I guess my point was a woman doesn’t need protecting from this by other men. Having a man stand up to another man and tell him his behavior is less than moral is fine, but she can also do that. It’s not necessarily an act that a woman needs protection from. It’s annoying, a nuisance, but nothing causes fear. If a woman is with a man or another woman for that matter, and he/she degrades her in front of other people, SHE allows that to occur. Whether or not, she has other problems is secondary, primarily she allows this behavior to occur to her, and SHE puts up with it. So why should someone step in to a situation where the woman is obviously putting up to it.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 4, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
A part of the dynamic in “violent� interactions between men and women is the fact that women love a good fight as much as any man, if not more. The fact is, at the deepest biological level, women are the ATTRACTANT. Women fulfill this role with not only their sexy appearance, but by stirring up “trouble� at every turn (sound familiar, guys?).
OMG!! I KNOW you didn’t mean that did you?!?!!!??!! No one in this century, in this year, at this time of so much enlightenment could have said something that CRASS and IGNORANT and meant it!! That was a joke right??!! You didnt mean it…..Your mother made you do it…..You woke up on the wrong side of the bed……you had a brain freeze……the cow jumped over the moon…….you haven’t had “any” in so long you’ve become delusional……your best friend just married a farm animal…..SOMETHING!!!!! Something had to have happened for you to have said such confrontational, unrealistic, ego driven, macho bull$hit like that!
Wow. Maybe you just said that to get a rise out of people, but Mr. Man, what you just said are fighting words. Watch out!
By kimberly
October 4, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
This discussion is wholly disheartening. But it’s better to live with reality than die with one’s fantasies, right? (Or is it?) Violence against women goes back to the beginning of women, as in all likelihood, Adam gave Eve a good smack after blaming her for his misdeed, yet being punished anyway. I’d buy a firearm for protection, but statistically, it’s at least as likely that it will kill me or my offspring as defend us.
“In The Pound” is exactly the type of man who always finds and “woos” me. (We may already have a history.) My guilt for bringing a girl-child into this world is enormous, and today I endangered her life further by sending her to school. Perhaps a nice hot cup of herb tea… Does anyone have any HEMLOCK?
By Chilao
October 4, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this
Though how his “rep� could suffer when he is universally despised by ever regular poster, I can’t imagine.
Wonder who will be called a “Ho” this time around.
By The72John
October 4, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this
Since I answered your question, John, about my M.O., are you going to answer my question about why you are such a sour person?
Why, no, cur, I’m not. Because to do so would validate your assertion that I’m a sour person, when actually I’m not.
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
Ha, ha, got you again, Renee! ; > ]
By The72John
October 4, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this
OMG!! I KNOW you didn’t mean that did you?!?!!!??!! No one in this century, in this year, at this time of so much enlightenment could have said something that CRASS and IGNORANT and meant it!!
Yes, Cur did in fact imply that violence against women is, in fact, the woman’s fault. What a nice rapist he must be!
My guilt for bringing a girl-child into this world is enormous, and today I endangered her life further by sending her to school.
Kimberly, don’t beat yourself up about this - really, you didn’t statistically endanger your child by sending her to school - you statistically endanger her more when you get in a car.
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this
Well, John, I can’t disagree with your own SELF-ASSESSMENT of whether others perceive you as a sour person, but I think your posts on W2W the past several months are VERY REVEALING. If you will double-check, you almost always use the same set of insults for any poster with whom you disagree, whether it is DOG or WtoW fan. Care to comment on this fact?
By Toad
October 4, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this
Renee, you say a woman permits such abuse (insults) but often it is systematic degradation of an abused woman. I’m a strong supporter of Man Stopping Violence. Their agenda is holding men responsible for violence against women. My comments support the idea that men should step in and not be enablers of men who are abusive. Yes, I’m including emotional abuse. Women who are in abusive relationships often have a history of abuse which may include an abusive family of origin, so they may put up with degradation that you or I wouldn’t.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 4, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this
My guilt for bringing a girl-child into this world is enormous, and today I endangered her life further by sending her to school. Perhaps a nice hot cup of herb tea… Does anyone have any HEMLOCK?
Boy or girl it doesn’t matter. About 3-4 years ago a Middle School boy got raped in my neighborhood as he was getting off the bus and walking home. He was raped in broad daylight and to the best of my knowledge his rapist has yet to be found.
I have a boy and a girl and talk to them about safety the exact same way. My boy, who is a big 15 y.o. thinks his height and girth will save him, but I show him the bio of John Wayne Gacy to let him know that that is not necessarily true.
Take heart. Try to focus on the good things in life, if you think constantly and are apprehensive about only the bad, you’ll turn into another Howard Hughes. Crazy as a bed bug.
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this
Susiehomemaker, please be aware that I don’t perceive natural biological responses as falling in the realm of “fault” or “blame”. Things are the way they are, separately from our interpretations of them. In fact, one of the biggest causes of insanity, in my opinion, is NOT ACCEPTING REALITY AS IT IS, BUT INSTEAD DEMANDING THAT REALITY CONFORM TO OUR WISHES.
By The72John
October 4, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
Well, John, I can’t disagree with your own SELF-ASSESSMENT of whether others perceive you as a sour person, but I think your posts on W2W the past several months are VERY REVEALING. If you will double-check, you almost always use the same set of insults for any poster with whom you disagree, whether it is DOG or WtoW fan. Care to comment on this fact?
I think that you should not be taking any sort of high ground about insulting people. Don’t you agree? I know I do, and I’m sure that every single person on this blog that you called names over and over again certainly would.
By kimberly
October 4, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
John, true, but you don’t think I’d stick her on a school bus in the morning, do you? So I drove her to school, endangering her doubly. That she is exhibiting the tendencies of a flaming heterosexual only deepens my guilt, (knowing what’s in store for her) offset only slightly by the possibility of enjoying grandchildren one day.
By FatMoose
October 4, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this
This topic can only shed light if had in a general format (ie. people commit crimes, people protect other people). Once you begin to try to assign labels to groups you will find too many instances that cut back against those labels.
The people with adjendas know this and are experts at weaving through the cuts with the purpose of creating a loaded conversation.
Although these people passionately claim that they only want to stop/solve a problem, they are blind to the fact that they are one of the root causes that there cannot be a discussion to solve the issue/problem.
People are funny.
By The72John
October 4, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this
Well, John, I can’t disagree with your own SELF-ASSESSMENT of whether others perceive you as a sour person, but I think your posts on W2W the past several months are VERY REVEALING
And let me share with you what is very revealing. There has never been a slew of posts directed at me demanding that I leave, and suggesting that my presence has destroyed an otherwise enjoyable blog. However, each time you have dropped in and bathed the blog in shadow, such posts, directed at you, have poured forth.
Think about that while you are smugly feeling so superior about yourself.
By Archie
October 4, 2006 11:52 AM | Link to this
I say right,riight to your 11:21 am post Renee. Chilao I intend to teach my little one how to change a tire and check the oil as soon as she’s old enough. I talked to a police officer who said that we(people in general) rely on technology too much. Everyone needs a plan B and maybe a plan C.
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this
Call me crazy, John, but I viewed the slew of posts demanding for me to leave as COMPLIMENTS. So, keep them coming! Maybe lozen can whine to the AJC again and get me banned from the board for a second time.
Of course, if your political and personal views were as solid as you believe they are, I would imagine you could defend them in a reasonable fashion, instead of merely trying to censor me.
By SusieHomeMaker
October 4, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this
please be aware that I don’t perceive natural biological responses as falling in the realm of “fault� or “blame�. Things are the way they are, separately from our interpretations of them. In fact, one of the biggest causes of insanity, in my opinion, is NOT ACCEPTING REALITY AS IT IS, BUT INSTEAD DEMANDING THAT REALITY CONFORM TO OUR WISHES.
Im sorry. I don’t understand what you’re trying to say. Please “dumb it down” for me. thanks!
By SusieHomeMaker
October 4, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this
please be aware that I don’t perceive natural biological responses as falling in the realm of “fault� or “blame�. Things are the way they are, separately from our interpretations of them. In fact, one of the biggest causes of insanity, in my opinion, is NOT ACCEPTING REALITY AS IT IS, BUT INSTEAD DEMANDING THAT REALITY CONFORM TO OUR WISHES.
Im sorry. I don’t understand what you’re trying to say. Please “dumb it down” for me. thanks!
By The72John
October 4, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
Of course, if your political and personal views were as solid as you believe they are, I would imagine you could defend them in a reasonable fashion, instead of merely trying to censor me.
If you think that this is the reason we found your presence offensive, then perhaps a little more self-analysis is in order.
By Jack
October 4, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this
Hi Sweet Thing. :)
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this
Susie, thanks again for your respectful questions of my views. My goal in coming here is simply to learn more about my self and others, not to “win” any arguments. I have enjoyed chatting with you in this regard.
Obviously, not every one here on W2W is in the same place you are. I believe a quick look at previous W2W discussions will reveal that John is incapable of maintaining a reasonable conversation for very long. I probably shouldn’t care about him or his views, but I do believe he might be a decent person under all that bluster, and would enjoy seeing evidence of growth.
But then again, I’ve been wrong about people many times in the past……
By lozen
October 4, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this
Please please please people do not respond to the TROLL!!!! I may need to complain again and it takes too much time! One thing I’ve noticed this morning is that ppl are full of opinions about things (like female criminals are treated better than male criminals vs. female criminals are treated worse than male criminals) with very little real information to base that on. Toad, I support “Men Stopping Violence” also and wonder why we never hear much about those groups. I’ve known so many women who were abused by husbands and I see how it starts and then continues and builds until a woman is in hell almost without realizing what’s happening. I know that once, when I was threatened by a boyfriend, I went into emotional shock. I went into complete denial. It is such a shock when the person who is supposed to care most about you becomes abusive/violent. If I hadn’t been seeing a counselor at the time who said to me, “you must get out of there; you cannot allow that kind of behavior,” I might have started that whole dynamic of abuse. He hurts you, then he tells you how sorry he is and how much he loves you, and you make up and everything is great until the next time. And for the women who cannot imagine how that could happen to them - John said earlier: Human society is a deeply complex system, and like all deeply complex systems it is almost impossible to predict and certainly impossible to completely control. “Human relationships are deeply complex systems and ….” The reason we blame the victim is because we do not want to face the fact that we could be in the victim’s place!
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 01:05 PM | Link to this
I guess the best way to answer your question regarding the difference between reality and our thoughts about reality, Susie, would be to ask you to remember a time when you misplaced something. After a few minutes of searching, the inevitable human suspicion usually creeps in that maybe someone stole it. The longer we keep searching, the more complete of a story we create in our minds that someone DEFINITELY STOLE THE ITEM. Then when we finally find it, hopefully the ridiculousness of our mental construct will slap us in the face regarding the difference between reality and our THOUGHTS ABOUT REALITY.
By Renee
October 4, 2006 01:11 PM | Link to this
The reason we blame the victim is because we do not want to face the fact that we could be in the victim’s place!
There is a difference between accepting responsibility on how you could have prevented the situation and “blaming the victim”. The perpetrator is to blame, however, women can change their tolerance, their behavior, etc, that will deter these situations from happening in their lives. And I have been in the victims place.
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 01:27 PM | Link to this
lozen, just so you are aware, there is a branch of theoretical physics which attempts to model the overwheloming complexity of life and to accurately reflect the fact that often seemingly small events can trigger huge reactions, creating apparent chaos. It’s called chaos theory.
While I don’t expect it to stand up to the rigors of further questioning (as no scientific theory can), it has great value in at least ADMITTING THE TRUTH THAT REALITY IS STRANGER THAN ANY FICTION THAT SCIENTISTS CAN CREATE.
By Jack
October 4, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this
If you are abused by your husband, wait for him to go to sleep. Creep down into the kitchen and get the iron fry pan and bring it to the bedroom and crown the MF.
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 01:44 PM | Link to this
So again, anyone want to disagree with me that women like a good fight as much, if not more, than any man??
Of course, womens’ weapons are DIFFERENT from mens’, but usually just as effective. I’ve spent plenty of time in the DOG HOUSE before, and frankly life isn’t worth living without some “sexual healing”, which is totally under the woman’s control. (P.S. to Marvin Gaye: I was a litlle embarassed by the honesty of your masterpiece at first, but have come to fully embrace your last gift of song to us).
By In the Pound
October 4, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this
Well, Renee says I gotta go, because “Less is More”. So, I’ll just say that the word for the day is legs. Spread the word.
By Archie
October 4, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this
Speaking on protection, a couple of my female co-workers are talking going to the firing range today because it’s ladies’ day. Fellas, we may need protecting because one of my coworkers had a small .22 caliber bullet. Women can do anything and I mean anything that a guy can do and my only issue is just like Renee says,take responsibility when you do dumb stuff and make no excuses.
By Chilao
October 4, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this
Fellas, we may need protecting because one of my coworkers had a small .22 caliber bullet.
You got that right, talk her into a .357 or greater. LOL
By Chilao
October 4, 2006 02:39 PM | Link to this
a .22 is only good when you are sitting in the back seat, and therefore real hard to call it defensive. LOL (for those legal nuances)
something I saw in a movie once.
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this
Having worked for many years as a counselor to abused women, I found the only way to motivate these beaten down souls is to get them to simply face the reality of their situations and take responsibility for their own fates. Once the layers upon layers of crazy thoughts are pealed away, these ladies finally realize that “Love” doesn’t have to mean getting the crap beat out of you, and usually high tail it out before the escalation continues.
Unfortunately, a big error many folks make coming out of an abusive relationship is to think that all “fighting” is bad. They forget that every weapon began as a tool. The “fighting” between men and women is natural, and can be healthy if channeled in the right ways. Of course, “fighting” shouldn’t dominate any relationship, no more than cooperation should. That is ultimately makes a healthy relationship: balance.
By Toad
October 4, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this
Cooperation shouldn’t dominate a relationship????
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
The “healthiest” couples retain their individual identities within the framework of cooperation, Toad. When a man “smothers” a woman, or a woman “smothers” a man, that’s the beginning of trouble.
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 03:17 PM | Link to this
While it remains popular to believe that women who end up in abusive relationships are “innocent victims”, from my perspective there usually seems to be a “method to the madness”. This is especially apparent in the cases of the women who stay with an abuser despite every plea to leave from their friends and family members.
Ultimately, the “victim mentality” is what I perceive to be the true barrier to mental health for most people, especially for those who truly were victimized at one point in their life WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION (young children). Letting go of the feelings of helplessness is the biggest step. Usually this involves a lot of anger.
By chuck
October 4, 2006 03:23 PM | Link to this
WtoWfan, Why not try and read the articles on which these posts are based. If you will notice, the example given was the SINKING OF THE TITANIC. It had nothing to do with violence per se, but rather a man giving up his spot in the lifeboat for women and children.
I have to agree with you 72john. However, the population figure is closer to 290,000,000 and expected to go over 300,000,000 SOON. AND YOU ACCUSE ME OF LIVING IN THE PAST.
By Renee
October 4, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this
Excellent, excellent points Love Monster
By Chilao
October 4, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this
It will hit 300 million THIS month. big news item all around. mid month or any day or so, I think.
By Chilao
October 4, 2006 03:34 PM | Link to this
he must have meant 285 million, cause even doing the Constitutional(males or white males) it does not Compute. LOL
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this
The final step in healing is realizing that GOD never left us in those troubled times in our lives.
Although it’s hard to believe, there really can be a good reason for evil. And the journey to find the good within evil, to rediscover that “good” really means, and not what we heard in fairy tales, can take to you to some really beautiful places.
Remember, Renee, GOD punishes those who s/he loves the most. It’s up to us to disover that love, however, if we choose to. Sometimes that’s the hardest thing in the world to do. That part usually involves a lot of tears.
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this
Thanks, Renee, even a DOG needs a little bone once in a while. : > }
By Renee
October 4, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this
okay, never mind love monster….
I should have known it was a trap
By Toad
October 4, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this
Love Monster, you were making sense, why’d ya have to go and drag God into this?
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this
If my words contain a trap, I did not intend them to, Renee. Can’t a sistah have a little fun??
By Toad
October 4, 2006 03:51 PM | Link to this
According to Hume, since an omniscient god must be aware of evil, an omnipotent god could prevent evil, and a benevolent god would not tolerate evil, it should follow that there is no evil. Yet there is evil, from which atheists conclude that there is no omniscient, omnipotent, and benevolent god.
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 03:52 PM | Link to this
You know my feelings for you, Renee. That’s why I went with the Love Monster handle. Of course, all I get in return from you is abuse ; > { . ; > }} !!
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 03:54 PM | Link to this
Toad, GOD is nothing more than REALITY ITSELF. Don’t confuse my use of the word to mean some jolly green giant out in space. I don’t believe in fairy tales. My GOD is the GOD of Physics.
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this
What happens to abused people, Toad, is that they lose their basic sense of security in the world due to a betrayal by another human. This can especially be acute in the case of abused children, unbelievably acute for young girls molested by their fathers.
The solution to restoring that confidence in the world (i.e. a realistic confidence, not a fantasy of confidence), is to realize that GOD is all around us, not out in space. GOD’s LOVE is right here to see also, any time we like, whether through a microscope or a song, or even through a cup of coffee with a friend.
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 04:01 PM | Link to this
Toad, since GOD is the TOTALITY, GOD contains both Good and Evil. It is a false teachings of church that GOD must equal only the Good half of the equation.
By The72John
October 4, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this
You know my feelings for you, Renee. That’s why I went with the Love Monster handle. Of course, all I get in return from you is abuse ; > { . ; > }} !!
Possibly it’s because you are a condescending prick whose only purpose in coming to this blog is to exert what you believe is your intellectual and philosophical superiority over everyone else?
By Jack
October 4, 2006 04:06 PM | Link to this
I sincerely hope there is a special place in hell for that SOB that killed those precious little girls in that Amish school. Too bad he chickened out and killed himself.
By The72John
October 4, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this
I have to agree with you 72john. However, the population figure is closer to 290,000,000 and expected to go over 300,000,000 SOON. AND YOU ACCUSE ME OF LIVING IN THE PAST.
Breathe, Chuck…don’t have apoplexy.
Wait…on second thought…
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this
Once you try to say God is only Good, you’re on very shaky ground, because it is insanity to deny Evil, especially through a logical construction like you just did, Toad.
Similarly, GOD is not exclusively Good or Evil, feminine or masculine, light or dark, or whatever polar pairs of opposites you wish to construct. GOD is all of these ALL AT THE SAME TIME. GOD IS THE DIVIDED UNITY.
That is why the Bible (which is a book written by men) quotes GOD to say “I am”, without providing any additional modifiers. To provide a modifier would be a violation of the “omnipotent” and “omnipresent” parts by presenting only half the picture.
By Chilao
October 4, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this
Joan Osborne on the blog?
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this
Ah, yes, the true “Object of My Affection”, John!! John, I’m working overtime to give you (1) A Biblical interpretation which says that homosexuality is NOT a sin in the spiritual sense (2) A roadmap to heal from abuse, which you stated you suffered from as a young person.
All that work, and just like Renee, nothing but abuse in return. ; > }. ; > {{.
By kimberly
October 4, 2006 04:14 PM | Link to this
Love Monster is scaring me! It seems wise… I’m drawn to listen… but cannot trust. HELP! HELP!
By Jack
October 4, 2006 04:20 PM | Link to this
Hi Kim. Assume nothing, trust no one. :)
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this
Don’t trust me or any other human, kimberly, because we all have our motivations to distort the Truth. Trust your own judgement of Truth, or better yet, tune in to GOD’s judgement of Truth.
Also, don’t forget, Truthful words are ugly, Lying words are beautiful.
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this
P.S The reason churches teach the false doctrine that GOD is only the Good half of the equation is so that they can SELL SALVATION. I’m sure the more learned here know all about the history of Indulgences sold by the Catholic Church.
The Bible actually states that GOD is the Creator of ALL THINGS, INCLUDING SATAN. In the original Hebrew, there are many different names for GOD. Interestingly, the Hebrew word for Creator translates to “a many breasted woman”. By translating all these descriptive terms into just one word, that original flavor was lost, that GOD has many aspects, both male and female, singular and plural alike.
By kimberly
October 4, 2006 04:32 PM | Link to this
Lie to me, Baby! {;->
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this
The key to it all, kimberly, is to remember the greatest point of the Bible: GOD’s LOVE definitely exists, but it is forever out of the control of our selfish human brains. There is no prayer, chant, exhortation, demand, etc. we can make to the Universe to cause things to go the way our imaginative minds would like them to go. Things happen only because of Physics, not “fake miracles” that our minds would like to believe in.
This concept is known as Grace: GOD’s LOVE is an unmerited GIFT. We cannot earn it, and certainly can’t buy or sell it.
By Toad
October 4, 2006 04:39 PM | Link to this
I”m allergic to GodTalk so I gotta go take a shower. Oh, wait, did someone say “many breasted woman”? Guess it will be a COLD SHOWER.
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this
Jack, how do you like that definiton of GOD: A many breasted woman?? I’m liking it!!
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 04:41 PM | Link to this
So kim, are you “married with kids” like mara? I offered to be her sugar daddy and die young!
By Chilao
October 4, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this
speaking of God, how about the Book of Joshua, another exposure at a young age thing, like the Catholic Bible. I always imagined some old drunk sage, hungover, coming out from his tent after an all-nighter with 2 slave girls, and going “God came to me in a vision last night and told me to KILL KILL KILL our neighors and EVERY LIVING THING”. (since the neighbors had some cuties he coveted)
http://www.slate.com/id/2150402/entry/2150542/?nav=tap3
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 04:45 PM | Link to this
Remember, Jack, she only bought a STAIRWAY to heaven, she never got there. ( If she gets there she’ll know, the stores are all closed, with a Word she can get what she came for…)
By Chilao
October 4, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this
many breasted woman
so is that like many women with breasts or like in TotalRecall…LOL
anybody seen the anti-GE(genetically engineered) milk billboard that was up in WI? Brian Curtis, was that near you?
woman on all fours, dairy-cattle milking system, on FOUR breasts.
By The72John
October 4, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this
John, I’m working overtime to give you (1) A Biblical interpretation which says that homosexuality is NOT a sin in the spiritual sense (2) A roadmap to heal from abuse, which you stated you suffered from as a young person.
Let me assure you that I need no biblical interpretations of any kind, especially from you. And I never stated that I suffered “abuse” as a young person, so I certainly don’t need your assitance there, either.
Please don’t pretend that you are anything other than a self-agrandizing fool who believes himself to be some sort of Great Teacher, with insight into “The Truth” that all the rest of us lack. From the moment you put your foul fingers to keyboard and began polluting the blog with your particular brand of pedantic patronizing, your purpose has been to perpetuate this personal delusion of yours. The rest of us come here as participants - often at odds, yes, but participants in the debate, not its arbiter. You seem to believe that your imagined special knowledge qualifies you to disdainfully drip aprobation or disaprobation on various posters from day to day, wherever your whimsy takes you.
Please be aware, oh-he-of-many-monikers, that none of us cares. We don’t care about your favored device - that of deriding Science for failing the test or truth, yet continuing to use it as a bludgeon to assault others, or your second-favorite device - that of claiming that you are not religious, yet clinging to Biblical references as if they were - forgive the pun - the Gospel truth, or even your THIRD favorite device - that of creating some bizzare synthesis of the two whenever neither the first nor second succeeds.
We just don’t care. What we DO care about, Canine Colostomy, is your constantly cluttering up our blog with long-winded, bombastic Manifestos that make it virtually impossible for us to concentrate on the topic we are trying to discuss.
So do the entire world a favor. Go away. Find yourself a clutch of credulous would-be-disciples, set up your little cult, tell them about the ships coming, put on your purple Nikes and drink your bloody Kool-aid!
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 04:49 PM | Link to this
Chilao, sorry to hear you were abused as a child as well with that Church indoctrination.
By Chilao
October 4, 2006 04:52 PM | Link to this
Hardly Church Indoctrination, straight out of the Book of Joshua.
see, just more “man said…..” (DUH)
By Chilao
October 4, 2006 04:54 PM | Link to this
The Islamics sure had good instructors, “God said KILL KILL”
By Toad
October 4, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this
Tell it, John!!
By kimberly
October 4, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this
If we can’t buy it, sell it, or call upon it for “miracles,” then what, in your opinion, are we supposed to DO with it?
By Love Monster
October 4, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this
Sorry again I don’t fit your stereotypes, John. I know you would like to put me in a little box like you do to 2D everytime he comes on board.
Maybe with all your degrees you could debate the SUBSTANCE of what I’m saying, instead of launching all the personal attacks. If you don’t understand something, ask a question. I remembered your question about chaos theory, but failed to answer before, which I hopefuly did today for you.
My disdain for Science is that like Religion, it is only a cheap, verbal approximation to the real deal, GOD, the TOTALITY OF REAL THINGS.
By FormerNiceGuy
October 4, 2006 05:22 PM | Link to this
Sheesh, another we want more from men thread? To answer the question, NO, Never not for an American Woman. Women as I see it these days in America allready have way to much power. I personally hate all women in this country, a man can pour his whole heart and soul into a relationship and most of time the woman is still not satisfied if ever. I wasted 10 years of my life with a woman that I thought was my soul mate and I believed it, we became engaged to marry but at the last minute before the deal was signed she decided that she was passing up to many opportunities to sleep with men that were throwing themselves at her.
I glad I did not marry her, because I stand to lose alot if I did. Reguardless even if it were her fault in this country she can still take me to the cleaners(I really Hate you women for that). IMO women are Highly overrated here and they can do NO wrong (even cheating). For my brothers who are really looking for love and someone who will love you for you being you, look for outside this country for it, the women here have lost thier value. /end rant /oops did I derail the subject my bad, you guys will live.
By TramadoL99047
October 5, 2006 05:46 AM | Link to this
Not much on my mind lately. My life’s been completely boring these days. I’ve just been hanging out not getting anything done. So it goes.
By Brian Curtis
October 5, 2006 08:10 AM | Link to this
FNGuy: I see your point, but announcing that “women have it too good already”… on the Woman-to-Woman blog… Well, let’s just say it’s not likely to get far as a convincing argument.
It would be like saying “The REAL reason for outsourcing is because American workers just have it too darn good. They need to work for 20 cents an hour and no healthcare if they want to compete with Chinese laborers!”
Oh, wait—some folks DO make that argument. Never mind.
By formerniceguy ex
October 5, 2006 08:17 AM | Link to this
Formerniceguy has a small Peniz.
That was your problem dude. Non-american women won’t like it either.
By Monica
October 5, 2006 08:38 AM | Link to this
FormerNiceGuy, I think we have a blogger here who is perfect for you. Her name is Whiley.
By Mara
October 5, 2006 09:02 AM | Link to this
and you all don’t recognize troll poop when you read it? (sigh)
If it was just a tad more lucid I’d think that Justin was back. But it’s most likely just another FM/Tobago/Dog pseudonym…
By Chilao
October 5, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this
My comment yesterday, using the term “Islamics” should really have been “Jihadists” or my preferred term “IslamicFascists“(as unPC that that term supposedly is), similiar to our own American Taliban.
By Chilao
October 5, 2006 09:18 AM | Link to this
FormerNiceGuy, I think we have a blogger here who is perfect for you. Her name is Whiley.
sometimes it is just TooBad we have evolved beyond Dueling. LOL. can you see those two doing 40 paces?
By FatMoose
October 5, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this
But it’s most likely just another FM/Tobago/Dog pseudonym…
Not me, FatMoose is the only name I have used on here; and why you’d think I would sheds some light on your listening/reading skills i guess.
By Brian Curtis
October 5, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this
Mara: Justin, that’s the name! I was trying to recall where I’d heard this level of poor-me whining and misogyny before, and I couldn’t recall Justin’s name! Thanks.
By DOG in Heat
October 5, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this
Same for me, Mara. DOG is NOT tobago.
By Renee
October 5, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
yeah, it does sound like Justin, except, I don’t think his writing skills were at all …let’s say similar to FormerNiceGuy….
By Renee
October 5, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this
No, Dog isn’t Taboga….
By DOG in Heat
October 5, 2006 10:15 AM | Link to this
Unlike FNG, I LOVE women—especially my newest sweetie, kimberly. I’m totally excited that’s she’s looking for an “old-fashioned” guy who will open her door and pay for dinner. Plus, my suspicion is that she never had a REAL MAN in the sack with her before, either. Remember, kimberly, I’m not happy until my woman is TWICE as “happy” as me!
I wonder how hard it will be to get Jack to agree to let me take her out? I heard he makes DeNiro look soft.
By DOG in Heat
October 5, 2006 10:19 AM | Link to this
Also, Mara, I was curious now that you’re married if you still think girls wear mini-skirts strictly because “it’s really hot outside”?? Hmmmmm, no attempt to catch a few mongrel eyes, eh??
By DOG in Heat
October 5, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this
So Jack, if you will trust me, I will take fantastic care of kimberly for you. Hopefully the fact that I grew up with a great mom and four rockin’ sisters might reassure you regarding my affection for women as PEOPLE first, SEX OBJECTS second. Also the fact that I kept the same two lady secretaries happy for over twenty years might support my case that women like me as a person as well.
Of course, she will benefit from all my years in the healing profession. It is my guess that a bunch of guys have treated her bad, and she needs the love of a REAL MAN to make her whole again.
By Jack
October 5, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this
Dog. Kim is my blog sweetheart but if she wishes to be with you, that is up to her. She knows I would love to take her out and wine and dine her and treat her like a queen but alas I am taken…
By Monica
October 5, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this
Mara, Were you in girl scouts when you were young? I was, and I am going to revise the girl scout motto for our blog:
~doing girl scout salute~ On my honor, I will try, to serve God, my country and mankind, and NOT TO FEED THE TROLLS.
By Chilao
October 5, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this
Gotta love the fruit-cake psychotic wack jobs, now the church in KS that sends protestors to dead-GI’s funerals blame the Amish for what happened:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,217975,00.html
By DOG in Heat
October 5, 2006 10:59 AM | Link to this
Jack, I do think she needs the love of a real man who will treat her like the absolute queen that she is. What do you think? Hopefully I’ll be good enough for her.
By kimberly
October 5, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this
Jack, will you please punch this presumptuous twerp’s lights out for me? YOU’RE my hero!
By Toad
October 5, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this
Excuse my ignorance, but what is a TROLL?
By the Call of the Wild
October 5, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this
Even though rabbits are very clean animals, and use a litterbox, my female likes to PEE IN FRONT OF THE MALE’S CAGE EVERY CHANCE SHE GETS. I guess it’s her way of saying “Here it is, come and get it!”
I haven’t had any girlfriends try that one yet, but I won’t be shocked if one does one day while I’m trying to watch a football game or after I announce that I’m going golfing. Seems like that golfing thing really drives the ladies crazy.
By the Call of the Wild
October 5, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this
Aw, kim. I know Jack is your guy, and I would never challenge that. But since he’s not available, maybe the Love Monster would be a good second choice.
By Jack
October 5, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this
Hi Sweet Thing. :) He’s not in your league.
Dog. You are not married?
By the Call of the Wild
October 5, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this
Plus, when I take care of a lady, that means yardwork and car repairs also. That is all without being asked, and expecting no reward. That’s my definition a real man.
By the Call of the Wild
October 5, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
No, I’ve been single for 15 years now, Jack. No kids, of course. I would have stayed married if we had had children. That is one of my absolutes.
By the Call of the Wild
October 5, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this
Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies. Tell me lies. (Fleetwood Mac)
By Mara
October 5, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
Monica - I was in the GS when I was young…but eventually I got tired of sewing aprons and doing macrame plant hangers, which was about all my small-town troop leader thought was appropriate for little girls.
Renee, et al - well I did say that the literary style of Justin didn’t quite match that of FNG so I’ll accept that it’s just someone like him. Frankly I don’t know if the troll is t-booger or not, I do know that whoever it is isn’t anyone I want to engage in conversation with, or anything else for that matter.
Toad - according to the Urban Dictionary a “troll” is -
A depraved individual who sits in front of a computer all day and posts flames of an idiotic or pseudo-intellectual nature on public forums and private websites. Many of these people actually become emotional about what is said on the afore-said mediums and feel it is their duty to punish those who disagree with them. They too may pursue this object in an obsessive-compulsive manner
or more succinctly from Mara’s Dictionary - someone who likes to agitate, annoy, and/or disrupt blog forums for no better reason than their own entertainment. They tend toward name-calling, insults, and a “I believe it so it’s a fact” mentality. Frankly, a waste of cyberspace.
By the Call of the Wild
October 5, 2006 11:33 AM | Link to this
kimberly did get my imagination going when she implied we might have had an actual “history” before. I remember two kimberlys I dated back in the 90s, but I doubt if she was one of them. I was in the “tall, blonde” phase back then. One of the kims was actually 6 feet tall. The other was about 5’ 10”. Ya see, I like ‘em tall, Jack. I want one who can put me in my place. No wimps or whiners for me.
By the Call of the Wild
October 5, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this
Was my picture by that definition of a troll, Mara? Or am I even below a troll? Okay, you’re right. Troll is just too good of a word for a lowly mongrel like me. : > {
By the Call of the Wild
October 5, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
So what are you jamming to today, Jack? I’ve been in a Bob Dylan mood lately—“Don’t Think Twice, It’s Alright”
By the Call of the Wild
October 5, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this
Although in my defense, Mara, I’m new to blogging and computers in general having just retired last year.
Also, I don’t punish anyone who disagrees with me, only those who flame me and then dodge direct questions as to their motives (think BC).
By DictionaryEditor
October 5, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this
The picture of the W2W “Dog” was next to the dogfeces definition.
By Reason, Season, or Lifetime?
October 5, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this
But don’t despair, Mara. From my heart I’m only here for a reason, not a season or a lifetime, and you’re definitely not the reason I’m here.
Unfortunately, you’re not going to like my stay, however, because I find you to be quite the hypocrite, unlike kimberly, SusieHomemaker, and Renee, who are all righteous women.
By DictionaryEditor
October 5, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this
Troll:
Any person who is so miserable and lacking self worth that said person makes his/her lifes goal of p** others off and generally being a lamer.
Lamer: A person who participates in forums, etc, online seemingly with the sole purpose of getting on people’s nerves. Seems to have no clue at all, and will eventually be banned, kicked or otherwise ejected from the area.
By The Reason
October 5, 2006 12:22 PM | Link to this
I ain’t tellin’ no lie.
Mine’s a tale that can’t be told,
My freedom I hold dear;
How years ago in days of old
When magic filled the air,
T’was in the darkest depths of Mordor
I met a girl so fair,
But Gollum, and the evil one crept up
And slipped away with her.
Her, her….yea.
Ain’t nothing I can do, no.
By The Reason
October 5, 2006 12:31 PM | Link to this
Or is it more about “The Lemon Song”? Hard to tell.
By If Anyone Wants to Meet DOG
October 5, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this
The funny thing is that most of my friends in real life are all flaming liberals. They know my bark is just that—all bark. When they need some “muscle”, however, they know they can count on DOG.
By Renee
October 5, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this
lol @ Dictionary Editor!!
By kimberly
October 5, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this
Will some strong, chivalrous man PLEASE get this mongrel off my leg?
By DOG
October 5, 2006 01:07 PM | Link to this
I’ll go you all one further. If any of you have the balls to come to this event and ask for DOG, I WILL PAY YOUR WAY INTO THE TOURNEY. And so all of you know, my word is my bond. You listening, kimberly? So put your money where your mouth is Libs, and come out to this event. I’ll even let John have a “free shot” at me IN PUBLIC if you will all agree to come out.
To prove my word is good, this will be my last post for today.
By Justin
October 5, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this
No, FormerNiceGuy is not me. He is just another man who got involved with a woman who wants it all and doesn’t care who she hurts.
I’ve been busy and must say I have missed the debating.
FormerNiceGuy, go to www.nomarriage.com. They have some good advice for you. :-)
I think it is instinct for a man to protect his woman. We must understand in this society, women need to be aware of their surroundings. Perfect example, the woman who was victimized on the Silver Comet trail. It is sad but reality. Women need to be more cautious in our society. And, criminals are less likely to break into a home if they know a male resides there. All of us, especially females who live alone, should always have protection.
By Jack
October 5, 2006 01:42 PM | Link to this
Oh how I would love 10 minutes with the scum that killed the woman on the Silver Comet trail. Absolutely no blame should be placed on her AT ALL! How many times had she run there without incident? I hope she turned his testes to mush before he killed her.
By Jack
October 5, 2006 01:51 PM | Link to this
“I think it is instinct for a man to protect his woman.”
Should be any woman.
By FAN#2
October 5, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this
What’s the point of having beautiful bike paths & parks if they’re too risky to enjoy? I agree with WtoWFan, men F@#up everything.
By Mara
October 5, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this
kimberly - Will some strong, chivalrous man PLEASE get this mongrel off my leg?
ROTFLMFAO!!!
By The72John
October 5, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this
What’s the point of having beautiful bike paths & parks if they’re too risky to enjoy? I agree with WtoWFan, men F@#up everything.
You consider one murder commited on a bike path frequented by 10’s of thousands of people a year to be an unacceptable level of risk? Wow, how do you even manage to leave your house in the morning?
By WtoWfan
October 5, 2006 02:13 PM | Link to this
Fan 2 I hear what you are saying & it is very sad to not enjoy fully these beautiful places. The Mall of GA even seems different after another attack on a woman in broad daylight. There’s something wrong with a world where over 50% of the population needs a “bodyguard” to exercise in a public park.
By Chilao
October 5, 2006 02:15 PM | Link to this
So after weeks of basic Slimy-ness the Dog expects us to believe he has personal integrity?
If you believe that, I have great beach front property on Kodiak Island for sale. You will have to sun-bath on rocks, and keep your clothes on, (it will be too cold), the water will be too cold to SWIM in, as well as being too rough, AND some bears might view you as a tasty morsel, from time to time.
Step right up, make me an offer.
(my version of Florida Swampland)
By Chilao
October 5, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this
You consider one murder commited on a bike path frequented by 10’s of thousands of people a year to be an unacceptable level of risk?
No, it IS UNACCEPTABLE.
By Oprah
October 5, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this
WtoWfan—Don’t listen to John and all his statistics. When a person is assaulted, the “statistic” becomes 100% to THAT PERSON. Get it John??
John, if you were the “compassionate” person you claim to be you would acknowledge this poor woman’s situation instead of trying to deny her reality with “statistics”. What is your motive here, John?
Hang in there WtoWfan! A better day is coming for you. I guarantee it.
By The72John
October 5, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this
Fan 2 I hear what you are saying & it is very sad to not enjoy fully these beautiful places. The Mall of GA even seems different after another attack on a woman in broad daylight. There’s something wrong with a world where over 50% of the population needs a “bodyguard� to exercise in a public park.
And yet again, you demonstrate your utter lack of proportion. The Mall of Georgia is patronized by how many people each day? The population of a medium-sized town? And ONE attack or even TWO attacks or even THREE attacks makes you feel uncomfortable?
And how many women do you think “exercise in a public park” each day in perfect safety and security? How many women do you think spend their lives exercising in a public park without being attacked?
Any of this getting through to you? Any of it?
By Oprah
October 5, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this
How much you want for that land, Chilao? Money is no object for me.
By FAN#2
October 5, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this
There’s been several attacks on women in the last couple of months on that very bike trail.
Friggin moron. Women are attacked everyday in this city, it’s just so frequent idiots like you don’t even pay attention to it or give a dam enough to do anything about it. Instead of the revolving door of pigs lock them up & throw away the key. OH NO the solution is that we have more freedoms taken away & it’s our responsibility to arm ourselves, restrict what we do & where we go, or have some guy around to protect us.
By Oprah
October 5, 2006 02:31 PM | Link to this
Healing can be a beautiful experience, WtoWfan, if you let it be. Let GOD’s LOVE wash over you. All you have to do is open up the door to your heart again. Try to understand where the attacker may have been coming from. Try to find compassion for that person.
By Oprah
October 5, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this
What is getting through to me John is that maybe you’re not the loving person you think you are in your mind. If you can’t find compassion for WtoWfan, who do you reserve it for?
By The72John
October 5, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this
And with the appearance of “Oprah”, the personal integrity of the troll is proven to be what we always knew it to be - worthless.
By Oprah
October 5, 2006 02:36 PM | Link to this
Keep working on those “errors of proportion”, John. I see that you’re now able to see the toothpick in WtoWfan’s eye in this regard. How about the telephone pole in your own?
Tools are weapons. Weapons are tools. It’s all in the use, John.
By Eric Clapton
October 5, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this
We made a vow we’d always be friends/ How could we know that PROMISES end?
By Eric Clapton
October 5, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
And my next dedication is to WtoWfan: “You Are Wonderful Tonight.” Who loves you, baby?? GOD does!! Don’t ever let a rapist tell you otherwise, okay, honey?
By Renee
October 5, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this
So what the woman got attacked and killed on the Silver Comet Trail. To put it bluntly, sh!t happens every day. It’s sad for the family, and for the victim, but reality is it can happen on a bike trail, in your home, Mall of Georgia, Lenox Mall, Buckhead, Bankhead, wherever…. Criminals exist…..how surprising!!
By Eric Clapton
October 5, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this
And I’ll tell you who else loves you, WtoWfan—Jack, with his advice to “Assume nothing, trust no one”. At first this is a hard truth to swallow, but it eventually can be quite relaxing once you accept it and can act upon it in a way that doesn’t involve overwhelming fear.
I’d give you a cyberhug also, but mine are pretty wimpy compared to Jack’s.
By FAN#2
October 5, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this
Try to understand where the attacker may have been coming from. Try to find compassion for that person.
Compassion for the attacker?? Why should anybody? What a joke hang him up by his ballz & be done with it. Healing with God’s love? Don’t preach to anybody your BS. ZERO TOLERENCE for people like that.
By The72John
October 5, 2006 02:52 PM | Link to this
There’s been several attacks on women in the last couple of months on that very bike trail. Friggin moron
O Rly? Got documentation of that? Because I can’t find references to any attacks other than the murder.
Women are attacked everyday in this city, it’s just so frequent idiots like you don’t even pay attention to it or give a dam enough to do anything about it
Well, you’re certainly jumping to conclusions here, but even if you’re correct in saying women are attacked everyday, in a population with 3 million people, that doesn’t mean much in the larger picture.
Yes, it’s just terrible for the people who it happens to, but if you think that you can’t go out in public or into parks because you’re going to be attacked, then that’s a problem that YOU own. If you are more likely to be killed in a car wreck than you are to be raped in a public park, yet it’s the public park you refuse to go to, then you don’t have a reasonable sense of risk.
Call me idiot all you want - that’s simply a fact.
By Eric Clapton
October 5, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
Let me and Jack hang the guy up by his balls, ok WtoWfan? Don’t get your hands dirty with all of that. Right, Jack? “Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap!”
By WtoWfan
October 5, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
I’m not sure I am understanding your Healing post. Healing is not going to make that bike path or any other place safer for me. There is no excuse ever for any attack on anybody (unless in self defense). Try to understand where the attacker is coming from? You cannot be serious.
By Eric Clapton
October 5, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
Sorry if it sounds like preaching, WtoWfan. Go off on me if it helps. I can take a lot, honey, especially if it’s helping you in some small way.
By Mara
October 5, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this
And yet again, you demonstrate your utter lack of proportion. The Mall of Georgia is patronized by how many people each day? The population of a medium-sized town? And ONE attack or even TWO attacks or even THREE attacks makes you feel uncomfortable?
So what the woman got attacked and killed on the Silver Comet Trail. To put it bluntly, sh!t happens every day. It’s sad for the family, and for the victim, but reality is it can happen on a bike trail, in your home, Mall of Georgia, Lenox Mall, Buckhead, Bankhead, wherever…. Criminals exist…..how surprising!!
and don’t forget THE TERRORISTS!! They want to KILL you. Yes, YOU! Be AFRAID…very very AFRAID! Forget that you have better odd of winning the lotto AND being struck by lightening…the terrorists are after YOOOOOOOUUUUUU!!
(but georgie, rummy, and good old unca’ dick will protect us…) MwaaaaaaaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
By Eric Clapton
October 5, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this
You’re on the right track, WtoWfan! Our thoughts about reality often have little to do with reality itself!
By accepting this, you then have the chance to change your “world view” back to one of acceptance instead of fear and withdrawal. There are a lot of beautiful people in the world. It seems a shame for you not to enjoy those experiences.
By GOD
October 5, 2006 03:03 PM | Link to this
Yes, WtoWfan, “Let vengeance be mine!”
That guy already got what was coming to him many times in the past, and will many more times in the future. Don’t worry about that part.
By Chilao
October 5, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this
Call me idiot all you want - that’s simply a fact.
John, sentence structure? LOL (J/K)
By Jack
October 5, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this
They should hold a lottery drawing and the winner gets 10 minutes in a cell with the scum. You think chivalry is dead? I’ll bet lots of tickets would be sold and the victims next of kin would get the money. the winner of the drawing would get the pleasure of reigning justice down on the scum.
By Monica
October 5, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this
Okay, who let the DOG out again? Is it me, or are the posts by the same blogger who uses several different monikers OBVIOUS to everyone else as well? I mean, they all have a certain STYLE about them that makes them similar. :)
By The72John
October 5, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this
John, sentence structure? LOL (J/K)
Umm…good point.
By FAN#2
October 5, 2006 03:12 PM | Link to this
Well then, 267 RAPES were reported in Atlanta last year. The reported ones. That’s at least 267 women. Real women. Real people. One attack is too many. This is not including the attempted rapes or other sexual crimes. Nor does it include domestic violence or those murdered by boyfriends or husbands. Those numbers would be higher if women walked around like there wasn’t a danger.
That doesn’t mean much in the larger picture? I suppose if you aren’t a woman it doesn’t mean much.
PIG
By Jack
October 5, 2006 03:17 PM | Link to this
Is that a fact John? hahaha
By Brian Curtis
October 5, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this
Monica: Yes, Bruno the Cowardly Bore is back, with his usual tired retinue of lies and insults.
Wonder how long it’ll be before he throws another tantrum and gets banned again?
By Jack
October 5, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this
and don’t forget THE TERRORISTS!! They want to KILL you. Yes, YOU! Be AFRAID…very very AFRAID! Forget that you have better odd of winning the lotto AND being struck by lightening…the terrorists are after YOOOOOOOUUUUUU!!
(but georgie, rummy, and good old unca’ dick will protect us…) MwaaaaaaaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
Not very nice Mara. Let’s see you laugh when they succeed in killing a few thousand more of us.
By Renee
October 5, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this
Well then, 267 RAPES were reported in Atlanta last year. The reported ones. That’s at least 267 women. Real women. Real people. One attack is too many. This is not including the attempted rapes or other sexual crimes. Nor does it include domestic violence or those murdered by boyfriends or husbands. Those numbers would be higher if women walked around like there wasn’t a danger.
So what is the point. It’s still not likely when you leave your house you will be raped. Possible, but not likely.
By Oprah
October 5, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this
Fan#2—Do these statistics give meaning to your world view, or does your world view give meaning to the statistics?
Although John will likely argue with me, I believe the second way is how we think as humans.
Again, this may be a little unusual to consider things this way, but it is your only hope to regain your confidence in Life.
By The72John
October 5, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this
That doesn’t mean much in the larger picture? I suppose if you aren’t a woman it doesn’t mean much.
PIG
Sigh. Yet again, you misunderstand, either deliberately or simply because you’re so carried away with your cause that you’re unable to think logically.
Yes, any crime is terrible. It horrible for the victim and the victim’s families and I feel for them.
My point is not to suggest that crime is not tragic and that we simply shouldn’t worry about it, though as I said before, human nature being what it is you are never going to eliminate crime entirely. It’s to point out that statements like “too bad we can’t use our bike trails because they are so dangerous” does not make rational sense.
Ok…there were 267 rapes, according to your figure, in Atlanta last year. How many people were killed in car accidents, do you suppose? Or died from some kind of accident? Your chances of actually being raped are minimal, especially when weighed against all the other things that can happen to you.
That’s what I mean by “larger picture”. Feel free to scream PIG all you want.
By Oprah
October 5, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this
So, BC, what experience do you have with healing, other than staring through a microscope at coagulation?
By WtoWfan
October 5, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this
By accepting this, you then have the chance to change your “world view� back to one of acceptance instead of fear and withdrawal.
Eric it’s not about fear & withdrawal, it’s about knowing what & who the danger is & adjusting life accordingly. There is not an acceptable level of violence in my humble opinion. By the way loved your show in 81. “Wonderful Tonight” will always be included in my top 50 songs of all time.
By Oprah
October 5, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this
Pretty amazing how the “compassionate” liberals, John and BC, keep mocking WtoWfan when she obviously is in a lot of pain.
OOps, that’s right, I forgot BC makes his living by administering pain to defenseless animals he keeps in cages. Silly me to forget that.
By Eric Clapton
October 5, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this
Thanks, W2Wfan—I sang that one especially for you that night!
By Eric Clapton
October 5, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this
Do me a big favor, WtoWfan— listen to Luther Vandross’s song “Dance With My Father” sometime soon. I heard his momma can’t make it all the way through that song without crying. Me neither.
By Luther (from Heaven)
October 5, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this
Back when I was a child/ before Life removed all innocence/ my FATHER would lift me high/ and dance with my mother and me.
And then spin me around/ until I fell asleep/ Then up the stairs/ he would carry me.
And I knew for sure that I was LOVED.
By Luther (from Heaven)
October 5, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this
If I could get another chance/ another walk, another dance with HIM/ I’d play a song that would never end.
How I’d love, love, love to dance with my FATHER again.
By Luther (from Heaven)
October 5, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this
GOD loves you, WtoWfan. But keep remembering, GOD isn’t a man out in space. GOD is simply everything around you, both in the material AND spiritual sense.
By Renee
October 5, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this
I seriously doubt you are listening to Luther, much less crying over his verses.
Very good post, John, at 3:26, but it’s really unfortunate that your words will be construed to have a totally different meaning.
By DOG
October 5, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this
I cry a lot, Renee.
By DOG
October 5, 2006 04:12 PM | Link to this
Stevie Wonder’s “Heaven is 10 Zillion Light Years Away” is also hard to make it through with dry eyes.
By DOG
October 5, 2006 04:15 PM | Link to this
As a matter of fact, Renee, not only do I have every recording Luther ever put out, but I also have the BET special about him on DVD. Luther’s got a lot to say. Why wouldn’t I want to listen?
You probably thought I was kidding about ODB as well. Next time you’re in Atlanta, look me up. I’m out in Lilburn.
By DOG
October 5, 2006 04:20 PM | Link to this
Well, I guess my cover is off. I’m probably not as tough as Jack, but I will use him as my model.
By DOG
October 5, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this
For a good crying movie, how about “Ghost”? My throat tightens up just typing in the title.
By DOG
October 5, 2006 04:27 PM | Link to this
Now there’s a good W2W topic: Good movies to cry by!
Of course, every man in the world, including probably Jack, cried a little when “Brian’s Song” first came out. James Caan and Billy D. were fantastic!
Another one that gets me a little is “The Thing Called Love” with River Phoenix. I think that one is sad not just within the context of the storyline, but the “meta-level” meaning also associated with the film, the fact that River threw his Life away by using dangerous drugs.
By Jack
October 5, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this
Flattery will get you no where.
I did get “misty” when I watched Brian’s Song. That was oh so long ago. Ghost was pretty good for a “chick flick”
By DOG
October 5, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this
Yeah, I guess that I’m a little more “feminine” in some ways than you are, Jack. Of course, I think our mutual object of desire, kimberly, might have a few “masculine” qualities mixed in with her spirit to counterbalance.
I don’t mean this in any bad way, kimmy. All my sisters were tough, and I love them more for that quality. Who wants a pushover? (Well maybe in the bedroom…..)
By Jack
October 5, 2006 05:02 PM | Link to this
I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were you.
By FormerNiceGuy
October 5, 2006 08:44 PM | Link to this
Yeah, Yeah, Yeah and another thing I wanted to point out is society these days also portray Men as we have no feelings or whatever happens to us is deserved. But let the same thing happen to a woman, OMG OMG that man needs to die or how wrong, or personal my favorite ” she cheated on you because you wern’t doing things right for her”. It’s ironic how women can say or do as they please to men (lie, cheat, hanging out with male friends) and nothing is said. But let a Man do something to a woman, (cheat, lie, dropkick her butt to the curb, hanging out with a friend that might be a girl) oh man that scum needs to die.
I never once deseverd to be cheated on or left at alter. I gave her everything she wanted and then some, I even dropped hanging out with freinds just so I take care of her when she was sick or may have had surgery. Heck one time carried that girl in my arms down to the hospital not to far from my house when she had pneumonia. If she wanted something, I gave her my credit card if I wasn’t able to go and get it myself. I even did the same when we needed groceries.
I waited on her hand and foot, I even did some things for her that most men would never dream of doing for thier woman. Yep I so deserved being cheated on, left at alter, and treated like a fool. I guess thats what you get for being an overly nice boyfriend, soft hearted, and wanting to do everything right for what I thought would be my wife. So, go ahead and curse me for being a crazey man with a shattered heart. I have every right to be filled with such rage and hatred for females. Btw this woman to woman thread is so one sided, they need it to be Woman to Man or Man to Woman w/e. FLAME ON YOU PUKES
By TramadoL99240
October 6, 2006 05:11 AM | Link to this
Not much on my mind. I don’t care. I’ve just been letting everything happen without me , but shrug. Whatever. I feel like a void.
By Mara
October 6, 2006 08:08 AM | Link to this
FNG - I have every right to be filled with such rage and hatred for females
no, you have every right to be filled with rage at THAT female.
But you can hate the little Amish girls in Pennsylvania if you want. You can hate the barista at the coffee shop who smiles as she pours your latte . You can hate the college girl sitting in her Poli-Sci class right now. You can hate the lady volunteer who runs the Meals-on-Wheels van in Minot, North Dakota. You can hate Rose Kennedy, the Queen, Sister Mary Agnes, Shirin Ebadi, Winnie Mendela, Madeline Albright and Dakota Fanning. It is your right to hate anyone you want to hate. But that doesn’t make it any less bat-s** wacko, now does it?
Jack - Not very nice Mara. Let’s see you laugh when they succeed in killing a few thousand more of us
The point, JACK, is that you are more likely to win the lottery and get hit by lightening on your way to the bank than you have of being killed by terrorists. I was laughing at the irrationality of Joe Schmoe in Podunk, Alabama being terrified of “the terrorists”. The average American is more likely to be killed in a car accident than by a terrorist, but where’s the “War on Cars”? You’re more likely to die from heart desease or cancer than from a terrorist attack. Why aren’t you hysterical about that? Do you walk around town gripped by the fear that those movers are going to slip up and a Baby Grand piano is going to come crashing down on your head? There’s probably as good a chance of that happening as being killed by terrorists. Shouldn’t you be more worried about the things that are likely to kill you than the things that might kill you?
By Jack
October 6, 2006 09:04 AM | Link to this
I got your point Mara I just thought it was presented in bad taste. I would not have had a problem with your post had you left out the laughter at the end. We do not need to be paranoid but we will be hit again. No doubt. Glad to be in Georgia, they don’t care about us down in the South, they want new York or LA.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this
Howdy, Jack. Started having a few memories of the old days around Philly and Camden. Did you hang out much over on South Street? Go to any cool concerts at the Spectrum, JFK stadium, or the Tower Theatre? How about my old hangout, the Oasis over on Admiral Wilson Blvd.? Nicest strip club in all of Camden!
Of course, I’m sure you bought beer at that big licquor emporium across the Tacony-Palmyra Bridge, All the Philly boys would get their beer there until they turned 21.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 09:31 AM | Link to this
Good morning, Mara. Sorry to criticize your weak ideas again, but your “statistical analysis” of the true threat of terrorism is not “actuarially” correct.
By The72John
October 6, 2006 09:33 AM | Link to this
I got your point Mara I just thought it was presented in bad taste. I would not have had a problem with your post had you left out the laughter at the end. We do not need to be paranoid but we will be hit again. No doubt. Glad to be in Georgia, they don’t care about us down in the South, they want new York or LA.
I believe the laughter at the end was directed at the Bush administration and its deliberate use of people’s fear and paranoia for its own political ends.
By lozen
October 6, 2006 09:34 AM | Link to this
If every man or woman in the world hated all women/men because of one person who cheated or dropped them or took advantage of them, we’d soon be extinct! For Pete’s sake it’s happened to just about everybody at some time or another. It’s so easy to see yourself as an innocent victim who did no wrong and was treated so badly for no reason. Even if you did nothing to contribute to the outcome, you still were partially responsible because you chose someone who would not treat you well. Look in the mirror, get some counseling to uncover your hidden agenda, or you’ll choose another woman who will treat you wrong.
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this
Glad to be in Georgia, they don’t care about us down in the South, they want new York or LA.
I wouldn’t want to bank on that, actually. There are many nice targets here in the South, especially considered, like the MidWest, The Heartland.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this
To save you the trouble of sitting through the Actuarial Exams as I have, Mara, I will attempt to explain a few common fallacies about statistics to you.
By Mara
October 6, 2006 09:43 AM | Link to this
So you don’t find it laughable when georgie, rummy, and unca dick attempt to scare the bejeesus out of people with their “the terrorists are coming for YOU” rhetoric? And that people believe them?
Glad to be in Georgia, they don’t care about us down in the South, they want new York or LA
Oh, in case you forgot, the Old McDonald’s Petting Zoo in Alabama and the Kangaroo Conservation Center over in Dawsonville are prime terrorist targets according to Homeland Security. How can you not laugh at that?
By Doc
October 6, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this
The most common fallacy occurs in trying to apply GROUP STATISTICS to an INDIVIDUAL.
For example, yesterday John and Renee thought that telling WtoWfan not to worry about being raped again because “only x rapes per 100,000 people occur” would reassure her devastated emotional state. Not only did they show complete callousness, in my opinion, but both were DEAD WRONG in their use of these stats. To an INDIVIDUAL, whether something “occurs” is either 100% or 0 %. Are any of you following? As such, telling WtoWfan that because “only” 267 rapes were reported, that she must be “nuts” for feeling unsafe is, mathematically speaking, NOT TRUE.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 09:52 AM | Link to this
Moving up to the GROUP LEVEL in which GROUP STATISTICS potentially have meaning, another common fallacy occurs by A$$/U/MING that last years “stats” will be accurate again THIS YEAR. Anyone who follows the fortunes of the insurance companies knows that all throughout the 1980s and 1990s, all of the property and casualty actuaries consistently underpredicted the rate of growth of health care costs, which almost bankrupted several large companies.
And as much as people like to demonize insurance companies, in the end it’s OUR MONEY they’re “holding” for us to pay off claims. As such, we should WANT these companies to show a profit each year so that they will be able to pay large claims off, like those gnerated by Katrina last year.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this
I didn’t find it funny John.
Went to a concert or 2 at the Spectrum. Good ball games at Connie Mack. Wish we could get good bread down here. (and chipped beef)
By Doc
October 6, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this
To be completely accurate, I probably need also to mention the concept of REINSURANCE. The truth is, even insurance companies “need” to buy insurance, to help minimize the risk of a rash of catastrophic claims rolling in all at once. So, State Farm, Allstate, etc., ultimately “bundle” their individual policies sold and “sell” them to even larger whales, the reinsurance companies. I forgot who the biggest reinsurer in the world is right now, but Swiss Re is one of the biggest. If you follow the money trail, most of the big money is concentrated in Europe and Hong Kong.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this
So, in answer to your specific charge about your PERSONAL ASSESSMENT of the risk of terrorism, I disagree with your “statistical analysis”, Mara. If you think about it, we don’t really know how many attacks have been thwarted the past 5 years, because such data is “classified info” by the government, as it should be. I bet all of us will be shocked one day when the actual number of attacks thwarted by Bush is revealed.
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this
anybody see the FRONTLINE this week about the resurgence of the Taliban in the tribal no-man’s-lands of Pakistan?
By Jack
October 6, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this
Yes. the govt is screwed up but that doesn’t make threats to our security a lughing matter.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this
I know what you mean about the “philly cheesesteaks” here in the South being a joke, Jack. I actually read a chemical analysis of the reason one time—It all has to do with the water used in making the bread. There are a certain combination of minerals in the Philly/South Jersey water which gives the bread its taste.
All “youse guys” from Philly, all together say “wooter”, instead of “water”.
By TramadoL68531
October 6, 2006 10:09 AM | Link to this
My life’s been basically bland today. More or less nothing seems worth thinking about. My mind is like an empty room. I’ve more or less been doing nothing to speak of. Not much on my mind recently.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
But then again, Mara, I know you don’t actually like to THINK, so you have my permission to skip any posts which might challenge your pre-determined world view. Especially that one you have that INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE DEMONIC.
By Still Loving the Visual, Mara
October 6, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this
By Mara
April 18, 2005 10:59 AM | Link to this
Well Shaunti has evidently never worn thong underwear! (oops, sorry about the visual there) and though James admitted that he’d never worn thongs, or halter tops, he has heard that they aren’t comfortable. Maybe they aren’t comfortable for men but to any woman that’s accustomed to them to wearing thongs, regular panties are constricting, confining, and aggravating. Thongs are the next best thing to going commando. In my opinion, the only really good reason to wear underwear at all is to keep from getting your pubes stuck in the zipper.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 10:15 AM | Link to this
I’ve heard before that it was the water in the Schuykill.
By Mara
October 6, 2006 10:15 AM | Link to this
let me see if I understand this correctly…
If you get run over by a tricycle-riding chimpanzee then, statistically speaking, you have a 100% chance of being run over by a tricycle-riding chimpanzee. If you’ve ever been run over by a tricycle-riding chimpanzee you should be absolutely terrified of being run over again by a tricycle-riding chimpanzee because there’s a 100% chance that a tricycle-riding chimpanzee has run over you. And we shouldn’t mock you for being afraid that you’ll get run over by a tricycle-riding chimpanzee? (snort)
By kimberly
October 6, 2006 10:21 AM | Link to this
FRIDAY JOKE:
Why don’t Republicans use book marks? snicker ‘Cause they just bend the pages over! Hahahaha!
By Doc
October 6, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this
The final point you need to understand about statistics, mara, is that ultimately they can only show MATHEMATICAL CORRELATION WITHIN A SPECIFIED DEGREE OF TOLERANCE. This is NOT THE SAME THING AS CAUSATION!!!!
This point may be lost on you, because you are a GOD-less person, Mara, but it is critically important if one is SEEKING THE TRUTH AND NOT MERELY TRYING TO CONFIRM YOUR OWN PREJUDICES.
So while you are at school today, why don’t you think about the difference between CAUSATION and CORRELATION.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 10:25 AM | Link to this
Mara, you would make a terrible counselor to abused women with the outlook you have. Are you sure that you are as COMPASSIONATE as your own SELF-ASSESSMENT tells you you are?
Also, watch the mockery, Mara. You don’t want the Bruno Troll to come back, do you?
By Renee
October 6, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this
Mara…..OMG….I haven’t laughed all day…thanks!!
By Doc
October 6, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this
Let me explain your fallacies once again, in “tricycle terms”, Mara: A person’s emotional feeling, emotionsl security is just that, an emotion. And while we would like to believe that our emotions are determined by, or at least influenced by facts, that is SCIENTIFICALLY NOT TRUE.
And again, trying to apply GROUP TRICYCLE STATISTICS to an individual is MATHEMATICALLY INCORRECT.
And again, last year’s TRICYCLE STATISTICS may not be applicable to THIS YEAR.
By Mara
October 6, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this
ooops.
As Renee so elequently said the other day “I should have known it was a trap”
Me too, Renee. Me, too.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
You see, Mara, like John and BC, you can only parrot ideas, but have difficulty applying concepts correctly to real life situations. To do this requires a skill known as critical thinking, something not taught in school anymore.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
By Still Loving the Visual, Mara
October 6, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this
By Mara
April 18, 2005 10:59 AM | Link to this
Wow. You went back all the way to April 18th. You don’t have enough to do.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this
Hi Sweet Thing. :)
By Doc
October 6, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this
I do sincerely hope a qualified phycisist comes on board one day to W2W to evaluate the totally asinine comments made by BC about Thermodynamics and Living Systems. I know that none of you here actually understand these concepts, but you all seem eager to accept the atheistic assumptions which go into using Evolution as an explanation of cosmolgy.
The “gaps” in the Big Bang Theory and Evolution are insurmountable, and can only be filled in with a lot of hand waving, which BC is an expert at. I tried hard to find his published paper on purpura to tear apart for you all, but couldn’t find it through googling.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this
It still seems incredible to me that many of you here claim to be “truth-seekers” when it’s really all about confirming your own prejudices. None of you here has to like me. In case you all haven’t figured it out yet, I don’t give a rat’s arse about being insulted. But I do care about the truth, which usually boils down to MOTIVATION when it comes to human beings.
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this
speaking of Alabama, hot off the email inbox:
-The lady was a Southern Baptist who attended services and taught Sunday School every week. On one Sunday, a recently introduced gentleman was in the pew right behind her. He noted what a fine looking woman she was.
While they were taking up the collection, the man leaned forward and said, “Any chance of you and I having dinner on Tuesday?” “Why yes, that would be nice,” the lady responded. The gentleman couldn’t believe his luck. On Tuesday he picked the lady up and took her to the finest restaurant in that part of Alabama.
When they sat down, the gentleman looked over at her and suggested,”Would you like a cocktail before dinner?” “Oh, no,” said this fine example of Southern womanhood, “Whatever would I tell my Sunday School class?” Our gentleman was set back a bit, so he didn’t say much until after dinner. When he pulled out a pack of cigarettes and asked, “Would you like a smoke?” “Oh my, goodness no,” said the woman. “I couldn’t face my Sunday School class if I did.” Our boy felt pretty low after that, so they left, got in his car and as he was driving the lady home, they passed the local Holiday Inn. He’d been morally rebuffed twice already, so he figured he had nothing to lose so he ventured forth with, “Ahhh, mmmm, how would you like to stop at this motel?” “Sure, that would be nice,” she said with anticipation! The gentleman couldn’t believe his ears, and did a fast U- turn right then and there and drove back to the motel and checked in. The next morning, after a wild and passionate night, the gentleman awoke first. He looked at the lovely Dixie darling lying there in the bed and with remorse thought, “What the heck have I done?” He shook her awake and pleaded, “I’ve got to ask you one thing, whatever are you going to tell your Sunday School class?”
The lady said, “The same thing I always tell them:
“You don’t have to smoke and drink to have a good time.”
By Jack
October 6, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this
Joke: Marriage is a relationship in which one person is always right, and the other is the husband.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this
One day a man came home and was greated by his wife dressed in a very sexy nightie. “Tie me up,” she purred, “and do anything you want.” So he tied her up and went golfing.
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this
You went back all the way to April 18th. You don’t have enough to do.
April 18th, 200FIVE, 1.5 YEARS ago even. LMAO
By Doc
October 6, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this
Well, like my favorite “droogie” said in A Clockwork Orange, “No time for the old in-out, me love, I’m just here to read the meter”.
Any of you Libs ever watch A Cockwork Orange????. The highlight is when an old lady gets raped by a gang of thugs while Malcom McDowell, the ring leader, sings “I’m singing in the Rain” and does a little soft-shoe. It should be required viewing for all brain-dead Libs, don’t you think, Jack?
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this
PPJ this month:
Mature man(defined). Someone who can legally date someone 1/2 his age.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this
Another movie classic which should be required viewing for all Libs is the Omega Man. Very intense!! As a side note, it included the first interracial on-screen kiss in a big-budget film.
Another one Libs need to see might also be Planet of The Apes (the original, forget the sequels) with Roddy McDowell. A lot can also be learned by watching the original “Death Race 2000” with David Carradine or even the original “Roller Ball” with James Caan.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this
Jack, no sweat to dig back to April to have a look at a nice thong. Hey, I remember as a kid working on a horse farm one time this particular stallion which jumped numerous fences to find a mare literally more than a mile away.
Hey, just got another visual—-mare and mara. Neeeeeeeeeigh.
By Mara
October 6, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this
Renee - I do what I can to make everyone smile on Joke Friday. ;^D
kimberly - LOL!! but do they “dog-ear” them, too?!
Chilao - good ‘un - LOL
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this
Well, no more time to annoy Mara, so I’ve prepared my W2W match.com profile for kimberly:
Name: DOG
Age: 46
Height: 5’ 10”
Weight: 160
Appearance: Think Paul Newman at 35
Size of Package: Think Tommy Lee
Our Date: My place for a quickie
Rest of the Week: ALl golf, all the time
So what do you say to a date?? I think I can be a bigger prick than the guys you keep picking. But then again, that’s only my own SELF-ASSESSMENT.
By Mara
October 6, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this
Chilao - good call! I didn’t even notice that it was from 2005!
Don’t you think that it’s kinda creepy that he’s saved my posts like that? Creepy and gross. From what I’ve gleaned from cursory scans of his posts (which is about all I read of them) he’s some old retired guy…sitting there…collecting my blog posts…day after day, week after week, year after year…eeeeeeeeewwwwwww!
(shudder)
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this
So, are you good at “handling horses”, kimberly? That is meant to be interpreted on many levels of reality. ; > }
By Jack
October 6, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this
Most ladies don’t find “A Clockwork Orange” very entertaining.
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this
Clockwork Orange was the first movie I ever saw at the bigscreen cinema, 1972 or so. Wasn’t that the movie that treated criminals like Pavlov’s dog, meaning by pumping them with the right kind of drug that made them sick, they associated getting sick with (verboten activity), touching a woman’s breast, for example, which made it impossible for them to find a woman’s breast attractive. There was this scene where he was on stage, in front of a large audience, to demonstrate he was ‘rehabilitated’ and he got violently ill when he attempted to touch a woman’s breast. Similiar to a lobotomy, I presume.
an earlier Stanley Kubrick.
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this
we had a stallion that had to be put down for breaking his leg on a metal fence he tried to jump to ‘get some’. Fed him to the sharks.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this
Well, you all will likely get a break from me the week after nest when I have to go for jury duty.
Of course, the other times I was called in I always made sure to show up with a crew cut and a business suit on, and made it a point to stare down the defendants. “Miraculously”, I’ve never been selected by a defense attorney yet to sit in judgement of their clients.
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this
stallion’s name was Hanz. he threw me twice. LOL
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this
Jack, Chilao, ever watch The Omega Man?? It’s a must see!!
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
Also, ladies, I would be curious to know what your favorite all-time “movies to cry by” are. Please don’t tell me “Steel Magnolias”.
By kimberly
October 6, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this
So he tied her up and went golfing.
And this, Jack, is precisely why I’m not interested in marrying again. One person is tied down and ingored while the other does what they want. “Dating” is much more fun, as the gentleman only shows up when he has a pointed interest in NOT ignoring me! {;->
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
Kimberly - so much for anything that might resemble a meaningful relationship. LMAO.(didn’t you say cheap thrills on a Friday night were a dime a dozen?)
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this
Mara, don’t worry. I have no attraction for you, and don’t “collect” your posts on my computer. I was actually looking for clues about ALL OF YOU because, from the point of view of a sociologist, there appear to be some interesting folks here.
I copied your post because it shows what a HYPOCRITE you are to think it’s okay to show your azz in public, but not be subjected to rude comments.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this
So, are you good at “handling horses�, kimberly? That is meant to be interpreted on many levels of reality. ; > }
Trying not to get angry….
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this
kimberly, what might your responsibilty be to “remedy” your situation of picking losers to throw your lot in life in with??
Most people pick losers to hang with because it bolsters their own low self-esteem. Also, all women like to play the martyr role to a point. I once heard it said this way: Women aren’t happy unless they’re suffering. How true!!
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
Have you ever given a reason to a man to stick around other than your pu$$y??
Sorry for the blunt, crude talk, kimberly. Remember, truthful words are ugly. If you want to hear only sweet talk in Life, get ready for a bunch of Lies.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this
I don’t see how any sane man would ignore you. :0)
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:33 AM | Link to this
You may not like to hear it, kimberly, but the beginning of the abuse cycle is often when one person feels ignored. They shout louder and louder for attention, until they start receiving “negative attention”. Coming together for you at all???
And even though “negative attention: may not be what the person is ultimately looking for, they will usually settle for “negative attention” rather than NO ATTENTION AT ALL.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this
Sorry for the offense, Jack. I’m trying to “help” kimberly see the light about her ongoing poor choices in Life. Maybe she doesn’t want my “help”, and that’s okay too. She can just ignore my posts.
Ultimately, it is usually the teacher who benefits the most in the teacher-pupil arrangement anyway, something most teachers forget.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this
Crass MF aren’t you? If you talk to females this way in my presence, you wouldn’t have a good day.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this
In applying this concept to myself, I crave intellectual stimulation of the highest magnitude. Unfortunately, there aren’t many people who can hang with me in that regard, and even fewer women.
So, usually I find myself shouting louder and louder to half-wits like BC and Mara.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this
Don’t worry, Jack, I only talk to the ones in counseling that way. They usually get REALLY REALLY P** at me, but 99% of the time this anger at me helps motivate them to start seeing the light and helping themselves.
Many, many women have actually thanked me years later for getting them p** off like that.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this
Because you’re basically a healthy person, Jack, your immediate response to FEAR is ANGER. Most women have difficulty making this healthy leap to get out of the fearful mindset. For many reasons, they are taught that displaying anger is wrong for women to do. Of course, after it gets bottled up like that, you can imagine I’ve seen some big explosions before when that anger finally gets rolling good.
By kimberly
October 6, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this
Mrs. Jack is the luckiest woman alive! I know you’d take him down for me. No worries, Hon. Leg-humping little yippers do not intimidate me. Sure, they might give a nasty little bite on the ankle, but nothing a good kick and my trusty pitbull can’t handle.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this
You see, Jack, you use your power as a man to PROTECT. Guys with problems will use this same power as a WEAPON. My trick is to give ladies just a little “hand-spanking” to prepare them to deal with that other kind of guy. To me, a litlle “hand-spanking” is worth it if it prevents an assault, a rape.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this
As you can imagine, my counseling sessions are usually brief, but effective. These other buffoons get these ladies hooked into years of co-dependent therapy, which is not only necessary, but terribly harmful ( lots of CADH involved, too). I know I could have made a lot more money being a crook, but my conscience never let me do that.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this
SWo once again, ladies, send your fee to me to charity. The Breast Cancer Society is a very worthy charity.
By lozen
October 6, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
Renee, Mara, Chilao thank you, thank you for the laughs. Jack, same old, same old put downs of women and marriage. I thought you were a happily married man! You disappoint me. Shall I tell a few “why cucumbers are better than husbands” jokes for your benefit?
By Doc
October 6, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this
If you want to make the final step to mental health, Jack, one day you will have to face the fact that your anger at other men for treating women poorly is actually a reflection of your own guilty conscience for not being the “perfect man” yourself.
That one was very hard for me to learn.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this
ladies hooked into years of co-dependent therapy.
Just like chiropractors, or as I call them, chiroquackers.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this
kimberly, me and you wouldn’t work out anyway. I would likely end up spending all my time counseling you for your past scars, then end up getting p** off because I wasn’t getting what I wanted.
By Mara
October 6, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this
there aren’t many people who can hang with me in that regard, and even fewer women
Ah, now I understand. Women aren’t people…
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this
If you want to know my M.O. kimberly, I always end up with alcoholics. I started asking ladies on the first date how much they drank, and all of them told me “None”.
So my guess is that because I feel an e-attraction to you, you must be an alcoholic. So how much wine do you guzzle??
By lozen
October 6, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this
Oh Kimberly, you and I are in total agreement on this one:
*So he tied her up and went golfing.
And this, Jack, is precisely why I’m not interested in marrying again. One person is tied down and ingored while the other does what they want. “Dating� is much more fun, as the gentleman only shows up when he has a pointed interest in NOT ignoring me! {;->*
By kimberly
October 6, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this
The sadistic personality disorder in a middle-aged, lonely man often manifests itself in a game in which lonely, middle-aged man pretends to care, in order to get to know people, and then uses what he learns about them to torture them emotionally. If he can perceive that he’s reached in and clawed open a raw nerve, he is most pleased with himself. This gives him the illusion of power and control he lacks in his real life. This then gives him a wood-like reaction, which he tends to alone, feeling satisfied that he has actually accomplished something that day.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this
Since I don’t drink, it took me a while to realize that the connection with me to alcoholic women was simply a common addiction to hot sex. I’m talking about the kind that can move Stone Mountain.
Interestingly enough, Stone Mountain is actually on my long list of “outdoor encounters” here in GA. Lots of parking lots, too. Hey, when the spirit moves you, who can wait to get home?
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this
Lozen - they are called JOKES. from Jack.
but on that cucumber thought, I never can seem to get mine to last very long in the fridge, they spoil so quickly, and I have to make sure they are put in a salad or sandwich quickly(least you think I use them the same way you might..LOL). Have you given any thought to something a little more durable? DowChemical has created many materials, that have better durability. And are reusable. Most are available on-line and ship in discreet packaging even. LMAO
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this
How did you know that I was a chiropractor, Jack?? Nothing like a good neck cracking!! But if you were my patient, you would have been fixed in 4-5 visits, maximum.
I agree with you 100%, Jack, the vast majority of chiropractors are dishonest quacks. Just like psychotherapist, and maybe auto mechanics, and home repair people, and……
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this
Kimberly - Good one. LMAO
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this
So maybe I will win a date with kimberly after all when she realizes what a set of skillful hands can do for a woman!!
Of course, I’m not hurting for booty. After nearly 25 years of rubbing on the old gals, my phone doesn’t stop ringing. All ‘hos, everyone of them. Right, Chilao?
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this
Lozen - and yes, we would love to hear your cucumber jokes.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this
So kimmy, how many bottles of wine in your frig?? Seems like a simple question to answer. Of course, if you’re like the rest of my ‘hos, you will lie through your teeth about that one.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this
Oh Lozen. They are jokes from my in-box. You know I love females.
Doc. There is no “perfect man”
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this
Aw, kimmy, you know you can’t resist my type. So why fight the feeling anymore?
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:25 PM | Link to this
Here’s another good one for you Jack, “Quackerpractors”, as in “please come quack my back”.
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this
when was Dog going to be out? Dang, I was planning on going to Toronto in a week. I would certainly hate to miss a nice week on the blog. Not in stone yet, not in stone.
By lozen
October 6, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this
Oh, Chilao, it’s JUST a joke ;-)
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this
But please, keep the insults rolling in. they help keep me humble. Then hopefully, I will develop a poor self-image and work my tail off the rest of my life to prove to everyone else what a great guy I really am.
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this
Actually the word “Ho” is not in my vocabulary, other than to reference professional streetwalkers/escort girls. And when you have to PAY for it, it is a sad state of affairs. Can’t see I have ever known one. Wait, there was a former neighbor of a buddy, she used to come by and visit him and his family. Seems she was available for hire.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:33 PM | Link to this
The main thing you might learn from me, kimberly, is somethig called aikido. Instead of meeting forces head on, like in karate, practitioners of aikido try to redirect the opponents energy. The nice guys in aikido, like me, try to redirect the opponents energy in a way that doesn’t harm either person. It’s just a game to me.
Of course, some of the mean SOBs out there will redirect the opponents energy to actually cause harm to the opponent. This is not the true spiri of aikido, however.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this
Ooops, I forgeot, kimmy, you’re more into the pharmaceuticals, like prozac, paxil, etc.
If you do want to continue taking that poison, at least consider Effexor. It is water soluble, unlike Prozac which is fat-soluble, and therefore leaves your system more quickly.
Of course, you being the bright girl I believe you are proabably already found out about Effexor.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this
“Billy Jack” was a good flick. Now there was a “protector”
By kimberly
October 6, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this
Mongrel, you are right. I know your type all too well, hence the well-established immunity. The sensation that rises up and tingles when you enter the room is not arousal, rather, an army of antibodies forming an impenetrable defense.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this
So anyone want me to “quack” their back for them?? I still work on occason to help out a buddy of mine. It’s a lot better than prozac.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:42 PM | Link to this
You’re telling me you don’t “pay” for sex, Chilao? Remember, “payment” doesn’t mean only CASH. A guy told me once who had been married for 60 years: If they didn’t have that thing between their legs, there would probably be a bounty on ‘em.
Of course, I never feel that way. ; > }
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this
I really am a “nice guy”, kimberly. Don’t forget that I have four sisters and a mother whom I adore. I had to switch to the Agrippa, the “bad boy” image, however, after I found out that nice guys don’t get laid very often. The “mercy F” thing will only get a man laid once or twice, in my experience.
That’s why I consider my self a true Scientist, by how much P I’ve gotten over the years. Any guy who tries to tell you any other measure of success counts for a man is LYING. Would you trade places with Bill Gates, Jack?? He can have his money, I’ll take my P.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:52 PM | Link to this
Well, I gotta run for the day. I think a W2W “love connection” might be kinda fun, kimberly. I haven’t had a blind date in probably 20 years or more. Might be fun. I’ll be the guy in the red shirt. Hey it worked for Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan, didn’t it?
Plus, then you can come back on W2W and tell everyone whether it really was 9” as advertised. P.S. Where do you think they came up with the name NIN??
By lozen
October 6, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this
Cucumbers won’t tell you a vasectomy will ruin it for them.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this
One last P.S. I used to like blonde carpets only, but found out about three years ago that the red carpets are the best.
Of course, the carpet can’t be dyed.
Bare wood floors aren’t bad either. What do you think, Jack?
By lozen
October 6, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this
Cucumbers won’t leave hair in the sink or a ring in the tub. Cucumbers don’t leave dirty shorts on the floor. A Cucumber never forgets to flush the toilet A Cucumber doesn’t flush the toilet while your taking a shower. With a Cucumber the toilet seat is always the way you left it.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this
The grass is always greener.
By lozen
October 6, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this
A Cucumber won’t ask for a transfer just when you’re up for a promotion. Cucumbers don’t care if you make more money than they do. A Cucumber won’t wear a leisure suit to your office christmas party. You don’t have to wait till half time to talk to your Cucumber. A Cucumber won’t ask to be put through med school. Cucumbers never expect you to have little Cucumbers.
By kimberly
October 6, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this
Doc, Effexor is evil sh-t. Readers, beware. Do NOT take that sh-t. EVER! Please. (Who are you going to trust, me, or mongrel?) Don’t EVER take it. If you’re on it now, start weaning, call your sister to come stay with you, and fight the demons yourself. It’s E-V-I-L!
BTW, mongrel, I have a chiropractor who took away my pain so I could sleep at night, move and exercise, and take responsibility for my own health. Now I eat right, work out, am slim & healthy, and NO MORE PILLS! Sorry Dude. May have been once, but not needy and confused any more. I know that’s disappointing for you to hear.
By lozen
October 6, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this
The Average cucumber is at least six inches long (and does not make false claims about being 9’!)
By Jack
October 6, 2006 01:06 PM | Link to this
The color of the carpet is not important. What is underneath is.
By lozen
October 6, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this
This is Chilao’s fault! No more cucumber jokes! And I would never, ever say a cucumber is better than a man; just better than a husband ;-)
By Doc
October 6, 2006 01:09 PM | Link to this
So, are you into “Tatooed Love Boys”, kimberly. I got them just for you. No earrings, however. Those are for f*.
By Chrissie Hynde
October 6, 2006 01:11 PM | Link to this
Cuz I shot my mouth off and he showed me what that hole was for.
By Doc
October 6, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, Are you sure I wasn’t your chiropractor? That’s how all my patients end up. I can’t tolerate co-dependent patients.
By lozen
October 6, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, I have had great experience with chiropractors also. You have to be very careful about who you go to, but a good chiropractor can do wonders.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this
Here you go Lozen:
GEOGRAPHY OF A WOMAN:
>
Between 18 and 20 a woman is like Africa , half discovered, half wild, naturally beautiful with fertile deltas.
Between 21 and 30 a woman is like America , well-developed and open to trade especially for someone with cash.
Between 31 and 35 she is like India , very hot, relaxed and convinced of her own beauty.
Between 36 and 40 a woman is like France - Gently aging but still a warm and desirable place to visit.
Between 41 and 50 she is like Yugoslavia , lost the war - haunted by past mistakes. Massive reconstruction is now necessary.
Between 51 and 60, she is like Russia , very wide and borders are un-patrolled. The frigid climate keeps people away.
Between 61 and 70, a woman is like Mongolia , with a glorious and all conquering past but alas, no future.
After 70, they become Afghanistan . Almost everyone knows where it is, but no one wants to go there.
THE GEOGRAPHY OF A MAN:
Between 15 and 70 a man is like Iran - ruled by a dick.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 01:46 PM | Link to this
Top Seventeen Redneck Country Songs
I Hate Every Bone In Her Body But Mine
It’s Hard To Kiss The Lips At Night That Chewed Your A* Out All Day Long
If I Can’t Be Number One In Your Life, Then Number Two On You
If The Phone Don’t Ring, You’ll Know It’s Me
How Can I Miss You If You Won’t Go Away?
I Liked You Better Before I Got To Know You So Well
I Still Miss You Baby, But My Aim’s Getting Better
I Wouldn’t Take Her To A Dogfight ‘Cause I’m Afraid She’d Win
I’ll Marry You Tomorrow But Let’s Honeymoon Tonight
I’m So Miserable Without You It’s Like You’re Still Here
If I Had Shot You When I First Wanted To, I’d Be Out Of Prison Now
My wife Ran Off With My Best Friend And I Sure Do Miss Him (Theme from Brokeback Mountain)
She Got The Ring and I Got The Finger
You’re The Reason Our Kids Are So Ugly
Her Teeth Was Stained But Her Heart Were Pure
She’s L ooking Better After Every Beer
And the Number One song .. .
I Ain’t Never Gone To Bed With an Ugly Woman, But I’ve Sure Woke Up With A Few
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this
Good cucumber jokes, Lozen. thanks. curiousity, did you edit the ‘9 inch’ part? LOL
By the ‘non-cash’ payment related to ‘getting some’, you can argue EVERYONE pays for sex, in some way. I have probably been luckier than many guys in that I don’t ply with alcohol, or pay all the bills. And needing someone just to bust a nut also not very important to me. Being more selective about who I sleep with allows me to make sure we are both on the same page, in many ways. Cuts down on dealing with bozos or alchies, just to ‘get some’.
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this
But I have a brother like that, spends enormous sums of money, just to ‘get some’ from basically barflies.
By Chilao
October 6, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this
What is it about alcohol that some people can drink all their lives, in moderation, say 2-3 times a month, never have to go to AA, and then there are others end up with DUIs and AA meetings?
willpower? self-control? genetics? If we were to apply the crack-law rules, it obviously would be a deficient morals or something like that.
By Jack
October 6, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
Everyone have a great weekend! See ya.
By Monica
October 6, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this
Chilao, Genetics. It’s all genetics!
Have a great weekend. Watch out for those pesky trolls! :)
And if you’re a dawg fan, I’m sure you’ll be watching the game like me!