Woman to Woman

By lozen

June 26, 2007 12:25 PM | Link to this

This is a test.

By Chilao

June 26, 2007 12:40 PM | Link to this

Is there some symbolism involved with the topic being tortoises and this subject being posted “late”, tortoises not known for being fast movers and all. Just a thought. (j/k).

Now if those dang tortoises could be taught to stop fornicating/breeding and made to realize they have to share the planet with other species, and there are limited resources for all, we would not have this problem. Ooops, wrong species…

I came around the bend recently on my country road near a pond, and there smack dab in the middle of the road was the largest painted(water) turtle I had ever seen, the back was probably 15 inches long(supposedly they do not get that large, but I picked it up and moved it and it was, and HEAVY as well). I actually turned around since I had seen smashed turtles there before. And removed (assume her) out of the road, since I did not want some local in a 1978 GMC pickup with off-road tires to come by with a “I kin hit dat” mindset. (Someone said she may have been that far out of the water to lay eggs).

I hear pileated woodpeckers on my place regularly, see them less frequently(they are extremely shy). I have been warned to not let the government know, since I will not be able to cut down trees, etc(maybe). But it is not a hardship not to cut down trees. Besides, I like hearing them, and have been lucky enough to have three within 30 feet of me, making a huge racket, until they saw me. talk about WOW.

Yeah, Humans Rule, we have the biggest guns, tanks, aircraft, earth-movers, bulldozers, etc. What good is a planet if you can not destroy it?(sarcasm).

By Chilao

June 26, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this

and to put 1.3 million acres of Florida land in public hands in perspective, that is 3.77 percent of the land.

Florida is 53,926.82 square miles, at 640 acres per square mile, is 34,513,164.8 acres. the 1.3 million acres would really need to be compared to other states’ ratio.

to paraphrase an interview I heard with Steve Miller, who has a (quote) “small ranch in Washington State”. Interviewer asks “how many acres?” (seems it is 40,000 acres). Interview replies “How can you call that small?” and Steve Miller replies “well, some of my friends in Texas have ranches in the 700,000 to 800,000 acre range”. One ranch almost as much as ALL the public land in Florida even. LOL

By Important Issues

June 26, 2007 1:53 PM | Link to this

Pro wrestler Chris Benoit strangled his wife and smothered his son before hanging himself in his weight room.

By JokesOn

June 26, 2007 2:28 PM | Link to this

Police on Tuesday had said no gun was used in the killings, but they declined to say how the three died. Autopsies were scheduled for Tuesday at the GBI Crime Lab in Decatur.

Where do you get your info? If accurate, I would not mind reading the story.

By nemo

June 26, 2007 2:49 PM | Link to this

Just another man goin’ crazy, killing wife and son and then offin’ himself. What’s news about that?

By Important Lesson

June 26, 2007 3:05 PM | Link to this

That’s what happens when you fall in love.

By Anonymous

June 26, 2007 3:25 PM | Link to this

You shouldn’t post a link to Fox News if your ID is “Facts,” by the way.

By Facts

June 26, 2007 3:39 PM | Link to this

You shouldn’t post a link to Fox News if your ID is “Facts,” by the way.

excellent point!

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/more/06/25/wrestler.dead.ap/index.html?cnn=yes

By Lily Toad

June 26, 2007 3:57 PM | Link to this

Sounds like the only disagreement between Diane and Shaunti is who should pay to move the tortoises. One calls them turtles and the other calls them tortoises.

By NetBanker

June 26, 2007 4:07 PM | Link to this

Environmentalists are notorious for skating around the economic realities, and this case is no exception.

My response to Shaunti’s statement is that conservatives often skate around the environmental realities and as a person of religious conviction I wonder how much she’s skating around the religious realities. What I’m referring to is the interconnectedness of life to which Diane refers. I am not a full-fledged tree hugger or anything (not that there’s anything wrong with that) yet as I become older and more knowledgeable about life, the universe, and everything it is more apparent that the cause and effect of our actions have not been well enough understood and often to our detriment. Far too frequently one can read about completely unknown species of life being discovered in the rainforests and in the seas. The number of medical and technology discoveries (recall that black widow spider bite ditty I posted last week) from these new species grows also. When a species of any living thing becomes extinct who knows what we’ve lost?

My reference above to religious realities is God’s directive (not really sure that directive is the proper word, but you’ll get what I mean) to man that he is to be a good steward of the Earth. Can we as species or Shaunti as a woman of faith really claim to be a good steward when ‘economic realities’ are judged more important than respecting a form of life that God put on this Earth? The destruction of a natural habitat in favor of economic gain certainly doesn’t seem to fall into the classification of ‘good steward.’ My guess is that God made sure that we had everything we needed on the Earth to survive and solve any problem or cure any illness. In our own selfishness, self-importance, and greed we’ve placed ‘economic realities’ as a higher priority than the environment and have probably caused the extinction of some part of the eco-system that would have cured the common cold, or cancer, or led to cheap, renewable energy, etc. I’m not going to say that we won’t need to make hard decisions that would sacrifice a species in favor of the greater good, but I can’t in good conscious call condos and retail outlets reason enough.

By Lily Toad

June 26, 2007 4:14 PM | Link to this

Wal-Mart + Palm Beach = economic reality? Don’t think so!!

By Important Issues

June 26, 2007 4:17 PM | Link to this

In the accompanying petition for protection from domestic abuse,Benoit, 43, claimed she was intimidated by threats of violence from her 40-year-old, 5-foot-10, 220-pound husband, who was known as the “Canadian Crippler.” Benoit, the petition said, “lost his temper and threatened to strike the petitioner and cause extensive damage to the home and personal belongings of the parties, including furniture and furnishings. Petitioner is in reasonable fear for petitioner’s own safety and that of the minor child.” In another count, she claimed Benoit had destroyed furniture in the home.

Now another woman & child have been murdered by another abusive man. It’s so common it’s not even a big deal anymore, or was it ever?

Why are these animals allowed in society?
Why are so many violent sports acceptable? Why are so many violent video games allowed in homes? Why do so many people allow their kids to see violent movies?

Makes me sick our world creates monsters like this.

By Don't Give Up

June 26, 2007 4:24 PM | Link to this

True love = respect, which begins with self-respect. Simple in theory, difficult in practice. Don’t settle for anything less.

By JokesOn

June 26, 2007 4:42 PM | Link to this

NetBanker,

Remember that chuck and others like him interpret biblical writings to mean that animals are humans property and we should be free to treat them how we wish. Cruelty is not an exception.

By Don't Give Up

June 26, 2007 5:04 PM | Link to this

Love to all…..

By Archie

June 27, 2007 8:35 AM | Link to this

My answer to the topic question is maybe. Maybe development should trump the rights of tortoises but like Shanti says we can still do the right thing by the animals. I am not an animal lover but I probably would come close to wrecking my car rather than outright running over a cat, however, as humans we have the ability to judge what is right and wrong and we need to do that with respect to the tortoises.

By JokesOn

June 27, 2007 9:38 AM | Link to this

Don’t Give Up,

Yaaaawn.

By BBT

June 27, 2007 9:40 AM | Link to this

Environmentalism can regulate all of us into a box where we will soon have to obtain a license from our government to drive to the store. At the same time, our government is the biggest polluter in subsidizing corn - a crop that requires loads of pesticides, fertilizers, and other poisons that drain into our rivers and oceans and moves up the food chain. The government also has ignored and even confiscated patents for alternative energies such as the free energy from the earth’s ionosphere proposed by Nicola Tesla, the father of the modern power company.

By lozen

June 27, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this

Netbanker, as usual a very well thought out post. Lily Toad how funny and true: “Wal-Mart + Palm Beach = economic reality? Don’t think so!!” I heard a story last week about a co-housing community in Decatur where people really are committed to living in an environmentally responsible way. They recycle, refuse to use toxic weed killers, have a five acre organic garden, beehives which they refuse to use chemicals on, etc. Last week two of the residents watched a large turtle slowly make her way into the field where she dug and dug and then laid her eggs. All the time this was going on, one of the cats stood by and watched and then accompanied the turtle when she left after laying her eggs. Now they’re protecting the nest and hoping the kids there can see the turtles hatch and make their way to the pond! One person is writing a children’s book because she was so blown away by the experience. They also have green tree frogs there (along with several other species), and a scientific team is studying the frogs because it’s so unusual to find them here esp. in an urban environment. Our world would be so much better with more places like this and less Walmarts IMHO.

By Theory

June 27, 2007 10:52 AM | Link to this

Looks like most of us are ignoring another stupid topic which is not what most women are worried about right now.

Now to add to the other topic here: I am confronted everywhere these days with man’s HATRED of women. It seems to sprout out of the “Madonna complex” in that men seem to believe there are two kinds of women. The righteous or the damned, and both somehow anger men. How do these world views get started in men? How do they relate to violence against women? How can we have influence in these situations?

I think that much of it stems from:

a) the fact that boys often aren’t socialized the same as girls. They aren’t taught to be in touch with their feelings.

b) boys grow up believing that if they’re mad, then someone made them mad and if they’re sad then someone made them sad, etc.

c) boys are taught to affect the world. If someone does something “wrong”, take action! Make it “right”, and so when they meet a woman who “makes” them mad, sad, etc.

d) boys aren’t taught to ask for help. In many ways, but most specific to this topic, they aren’t going to ask for help if they’re unable to cope or depressed.

e) they lash out. They blame a woman/women for their mental anguish and inability to cope with it, so they do the animal thing.

Any more theories out there? Here’s a sad thought, even if we can identify why there is so much male violence, are any of us going to do anything about it? Are any of us going to throw away those violent games & music? Stop paying to see violent movies? etc. Stop encouraging overly aggressive & disruptive behavior in our boys?

By lovelyliz

June 27, 2007 11:43 AM | Link to this

The question should be at what cost? Big business wants us to accept that just because they can, we should let them do whatever and pretend that there are no consequences to their actions.

Funny thing is that when there are serious consequences to what these guys are doing, who is left paying for it? Us the taxpayers, that’s who.

By .

June 27, 2007 11:56 AM | Link to this

It’s just plain decadent and arrogant and disdainful….

By JokesOn

June 27, 2007 12:06 PM | Link to this

Here’s a sad thought, even if we can identify why there is so much male violence, are any of us going to do anything about it?

As discussed many times many men take responsibility for change. If the reasons for the existence of the male/female strife is 50/50, men’s 50% being what you stated, I would like to know what you intend on doing for your half?

You rail against that possibility every time this comes up.

By Tiker

June 27, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this

Its the second time I visited your web site. Looks interesting.

By Theory

June 27, 2007 12:39 PM | Link to this

JokesOn I personally do not support or watch violent films, TV shows & a lot of sports. I tell people why. I don’t allow porn in my home. I tell people why. I do not purchase or listen certain types of music. I tell people why. Don’t associate with abusive people. I tell people why. I do not associate with men who frequent strip clubs. I tell people why. I vote for Pro Choice Pro woman candidates. I tell people why. I do not support any person, group or country that openly abuse women using the religious excuse. I tell people why. I encourage independence & strength to all my girlfriends & worship all the good men I know. I give out my famous chocolate fudge cookies to the men I love & tell them why I love them so much & why they are so wonderful & there should be more like them.

By Theory

June 27, 2007 12:43 PM | Link to this

You rail against that possibility every time this comes up.

Why are women responsible for male violence? Because women are the primary caregivers & we are raising boys to become abusive and/or dangerous? Not sure what you are saying.

Is a woman 50% responsible if her husband kills her? Is that what you mean?

By Important Issues

June 27, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this

Isn’t the most danger to women is when a marriage is in the process of divorce?

By JokesOn

June 27, 2007 1:05 PM | Link to this

I encourage independence & strength to all my girlfriends & worship all the good men I know.

And I do all those same things, but with good men, to promote their type of mentality.

You jump to conclusions too quick. Is a woman 50% responsible if her husband kills her? Is that what you mean?

Just as I have no control over the wrestler’s behavior that may have led up to the instance, neither do you over his wife’s. They both chose a life that has a lot of violence in it nor did either of them adhere to most of the things you mentioned you do as your part.

Yet, if you are going to use your basis as a starting point (the a-e list), where is her responsibility in rectifying those issues? As well as the general population of males or females.

My point is to explain to you that addressing guys only in this is not even half of the equation. Proof is given in your own words “women are the primary caregivers” in most families still.

Reread your post….MEN this, and MEN that. Not “these” men (quantified to address reality) that perform “these” acts…

By Theory

June 27, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this

Reread your post….MEN this, and MEN that. Not “these” men (quantified to address reality) that perform “these” acts…

OK, I’ll change that to a LOT of men, but not all men.

Did you know the man who just murdered his pregnant wife had harrassed his ex girlfriend for over a year? They had only dated a few months & he became abusive & violent. She broke up with him only to be stalked & harrassed so much she had to get an order of protection & finally was forced to move away. Women like her end up murdered all the time just becuase they tried to break up.

By Snuffy

June 27, 2007 1:31 PM | Link to this

but why are women the primary caregivers? because their men don’t step up. i read the posts a while ago when you guys discussed how it was women who got the call from school when the kids sick, not the man (if i recall correctly, the men were whining that the women in the office were always leaving to deal with a kid, leaving all their work on their male co-workers). its usually the woman who stays home with the kid when the daycare/sitter falls through, and on and on. maybe if so many men werent running after that boney 20 year old instead of focusing on their families the women wouldnt have to be the primary caregivers.

there was a study a while ago about young male elephants in some preserve were attacking and killing rhinos. the study said that the preserve had only females and young elephants. when they introduced older male elephants into the preserve the antisocial behavior stopped.

By JokesOn

June 27, 2007 1:55 PM | Link to this

OK, I’ll change that to a LOT of men, but not all men.

Even that is incorrect. You and I did the numbers (resulted in about .05% of men). This is what I was/am refering to when saying that you rail against the truth.

Snuffy,

*because their men don’t step up. *

Is that all the reasoning you can come up with? Not that it WAS functional for one parent to stay at home, and as that functionality naturally dissipated people resisted change as they ALWAYS do - whether it is good or bad change?

the men were whining that the women in the office were always leaving to deal with a kid, leaving all their work on their male co-workers

First, are you able to leave out the left-handed interjections like whine? If not, you can debate this alone.

Second, has it dawned on you that many men would get fired for that same behavior, but would gladly take on that responsibility otherwise?

If either of you (same person likely) wanted to debate this to get to truth, you would look at the whole spectrum of reality and leave out the insulting interjections.

Instead you want to spur on a fight, not unlike part of the issue of violence that we are discussing. Violence is easily thought of as a purely physical subject, yet covers more than that. Your words are mental/emotional violence in progress, and you are women, proving you are part of the equation to end violence.

By .

June 27, 2007 2:22 PM | Link to this

People who complain about working mothers dashing off to rescue the sick/hurt kids need to get a clue.

First, as mentioned, the fathers in the workplace married to women in the workplace shouldn’t complain because THEY are off the hook when it comes to dashing off. So, in a sense, working more to help out the working mother in your office is like working more to help out your own working wife who dashes off from HER workplace to rescue the kid.

Second, even if you don’t have kids at one time you WERE one. And one of your parents dashed off to rescue you, probably your mom. If she hadn’t, then you’d be dead by now and no help to anybody.

Third, if you want to use this as an argument to support the idea that women shouldn’t work outside the home then FINE. Marry yourself into that situation. But realize that you or your spouse aren’t contributing financially to the economy other than adding a warm body, an investment that won’t see return for years to come. And, in that end, your situation is equal to that of the working mother - both types of marriages are trying to cope.

Fourth, if you never had parents or had crappy parents then feel free to just hate on everyone. But no one will understand you, so live with it.

In the end, everyone stop complaining about everyone elses lifestyle and realize the grass is just not greener in your neighbors cubicle…

By Snuffy

June 27, 2007 2:39 PM | Link to this

youre saying that a man cant leave work to pick up his sick kid without getting fired but the women can? and no woman has ever had to worry about losing her job because the kid gets sick alot? riggghhhhtt. never heard that one, never seen it in action, but it sure makes a great excuse doesnt it?

ever heard the saying “sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me”? my ‘violent’ words may hurt your feelings but i guarantee that they’ll never kill anyone. men kill women a whole lot more often than women kill men and yet YOU say that its OUR fault? maybe if we just stfu the men wouldn’t feel the need to beat us to death? mmmm-hmmm. sure.

By Important Lesson

June 27, 2007 2:44 PM | Link to this

maybe if we just stfu the men wouldn’t feel the need to beat us to death? mmmm-hmmm. sure.

Actually, that’s how it was explained to me…. that rant accompanied the explanation of what was and was not my “job.”

By theory

June 27, 2007 2:58 PM | Link to this

resulted in about .05% of men

Millions of men are dangerous in this country. Millions for different reasons. Abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, violent, rapists, breeders without taking responsibility etc.

.05% makes it seem so insignificant. Not when most women are abused by a spouse or boyfriend during their lifetime. Not all abusive men ever get arrested, or if they do they don’t spend any real time in jail, so current prison stats aren’t even close to what the real numbers are.

Why did it take 20 years to execute that man who murdered his wife & 2 children?

By Theory

June 27, 2007 3:05 PM | Link to this

I think all professional sport players must live by a strict moral code. Most of them act like thugs, getting into trouble & going to strip clubs acting like pimps. It’s sick what they get away with. But because they’re GUYS, well that’s just what guys do. No wonder young men grow up & become what they are. If they want that high salary, they have to act like decent human beings.

By JokesOn

June 27, 2007 3:06 PM | Link to this

ok.

Once again you proved unable to work towards a healthier place. Mkkay yourself;)

Buh-Bye, to you anyways.

By JokesOn

June 27, 2007 3:21 PM | Link to this

FYI - Part of what I also do to curb violence is NOT participate in it on any level. I suggest you add that to your list asap. You spur on a lot of hate.

By Theory

June 27, 2007 3:27 PM | Link to this

I’d like to know why these boys thought this was OK? What do you do with kids like this? You can’t execute them, so basically they’ll be a burden on society forever along with being 2 more males to avoid.

Two teenage boys have been arrested in the killing of a 17-year-old girl whose burned body was found in the desert near Florence, a sheriff said Wednesday. “Basically they just didn’t like her and for whatever reason were planning to kill her,” Vasquez said. “They went to her home and — through a combination of beating, stabbing and choking — killed her.” The teens, whose names were not released, will be booked on first-degree murder charges, and other charges are likely, Vasquez said. They likely will be charged as adults. “From what I’m told this girl fought for her life in that home, and she didn’t die easy — it was very brutal,” Vasquez said. “If they had been adults I would be screaming for the death penalty in this case.” “It’s amazing in today’s society how vicious 16-year-olds boys can get,” the sheriff said.

By GOB

June 27, 2007 3:28 PM | Link to this

I think all professional sport players must live by a strict moral code. Most of them act like thugs, getting into trouble & going to strip clubs acting like pimps. It’s sick what they get away with.

Actually, the opposite is true. Most professional athletes are normal people with families, though the happen to have a lot of money. There is certainly a segment of the athlete population that wants to be seen as a thug and lives the “strip club” life. Those just happen to be the ones that make the news everyday.

We dont see stories in the paper and on tv about people doing what they are supposed to be doing because it wont sell. If you were to take what you saw on in the media and extrapolate it out and believe that the whole world was like that, I dont think I would ever leave my house. Luckily, I can look at reality and feel much better though.

By Theory

June 27, 2007 3:34 PM | Link to this

GOB that’s true about prof sports, the perception is most of them are acting like thugs. Why don’t they fire the ones acting so horrible? Instead they aren’t really punished, get all the publicity, & kids look up to them.

By JokesOn

June 27, 2007 3:40 PM | Link to this

the perception is most of them are acting like thugs.

You stumbled upon what you have been missing! Now apply that to the world!

RAH! One giant leap for this woman, one small step for womankind!

By GOB

June 27, 2007 3:52 PM | Link to this

Why don’t they fire the ones acting so horrible?

I am guessing that you dont follow professional sports, but the pro leagues have started to come down on players a lot more harshly than they have in the past. The NFL in particular is going all out. They suspended a player for a full year because he kept getting in trouble, an another player for half a year for having guns and driving drunk. His team just cut him too, which is the same as firing him.

By Theory

June 27, 2007 3:54 PM | Link to this

lol i knew when I typed that you would say something JokesOn.

I can’t apply the same wording when it comes to male violence. We KNOW who the sports guys are, we have no idea which ones are the dangerous guys. Because of that all men are under suspicion. Don’t get mad at me get mad at all the criminals out there making it difficult for everybody, but for sure harder on us women. And don’t critisize me for being suspicious of men. Aren’t you the same person putting women down & blaming them when abuse or violence occurs?

I do think if teams start firing & making examples out of the bad ones it would help a lot of kids.

By Important Lesson

June 27, 2007 3:57 PM | Link to this

Bloggers and “guests” are posting their said feelings about the tragic loss of the wrestler they adored, the sports hero their kids adored, and how they remember the joy this man brought to them via wrestling…. Oh, boo hoo….

WHAT? He’s some great guy that will be missed, so let’s flash his picture for days and say how much we’ll miss him? He KILLED his wife and innocent child! He’s a f—-ing murderer! Show THEIR pictures instead! But nah…. their lives meant nothing apart from his. The testosterone realm will “grieve this tragedy” and their loss of a great guy. ‘Scuse me whilst I go hurl, then cancel my subscription to match com.

By Theory

June 27, 2007 4:00 PM | Link to this

GOB what about that disgusting Vick guy? Why is he not in jail right now? Is he still playing?

By GOB

June 27, 2007 4:18 PM | Link to this

No Vick isnt in jail, but the investigation is still ongoing. He hasnt been charged with anything yet, so it would be weird for him to be in jail. I would be quite shocked if he doesnt at least get suspended for a portion of the season.

Surely you arent suggesting that we through out due process and just put men in jail because it sounds like they did something bad. Right?

By Theory

June 27, 2007 4:32 PM | Link to this

Surely you arent suggesting that we through out due process and just put men in jail because it sounds like they did something bad. Right?

NO not at all, just seems they keep busting him doing stuff, but nothing really is ever done. Wasn’t he linked to dog fighting before? I guess if you have that kind of money you can get out of most anything.

Unless you are a young woman named Paris.

By JokesOn

June 27, 2007 4:47 PM | Link to this

We KNOW who the sports guys are, we have no idea which ones are the dangerous guys. Because of that all men are under suspicion.

Once again you cannot make sense of your own words. lol

Aren’t you the same person putting women down & blaming them when abuse or violence occurs?

Never did that, but I am sure you have/will accuse me of it anyways. You are quite unable to blog/discuss rationally.

Surely you arent suggesting that we through out due process and just put men in jail because it sounds like they did something bad. Right?

Yes, she has and will suggest that again. She is the example of one who acts in a manner that they themselves abhor.

That type of thinking always leads to a poor and sullen life filled with confusion and blame. Sad really because they are usually suicidal.

By elisabeth

June 27, 2007 4:51 PM | Link to this

turtles (and nature in general) should rule over any development. Read Carl Hiaasen, not only for entertainment, but for his insight on how Florida (apply also to other ‘developing’ states) is being ruined by developers. Relocate turtles? Oh please. Leave them where they are and don’t build. period. They were there first and overdeveloping land causes more damage than moving turtles (or tortoises…) to another environment. Too much cement causes flooding (doesn’t FL have enough of that?) among other ills. And screw another low cost supermarket or parking lot or whatever it is they want to make money with. As Diane rightly put it, the eco system left alone works well and consequences of ruining it can be devastating. Go retire in Arizona but leave what little is left of Florida to nature itself. This coming from an American living in Belgium….

By Theory

June 27, 2007 4:59 PM | Link to this

Jokes on are you saying I should not be on guard around men I don’t know when I am out & about? When I’m driving home at night? When I open my door to a stranger? When I date? You make no sense & now you are making women feel bad about keeping themselves safe?? You’re a nut lol.

You said women are 50% responsible when men commit crimes & violence.
I’m not the one who is suicidal my dear. Apparently a lot of men getting dumped are.
If they can’t have her, nobody can. I don’t get that, just break up & go away. Why do so many men feel the need to murder a woman breaking up with them? What can I do as a woman to help end that kind of thinking in men?

By Theory

June 27, 2007 5:03 PM | Link to this

OK I’ll add to the topic this week. Why do we need to tear down any forest? Tear down all the run down housing & empty buildings before you dig into untouched land.

By Cruise e

June 28, 2007 2:04 AM | Link to this

Your know last news! What is this? Discounts!

By Mara

June 28, 2007 9:00 AM | Link to this

very, very funny vent in todays paper -

“Dick Cheney is the most dangerous man in America today, with the possible exception of Ann Coulter”

ROTFL!!

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 9:10 AM | Link to this

You said women are 50% responsible when men commit crimes & violence.

Your ability to lie is astounding.lol

Based on your criteria (a-e list), those same edicts apply to the mother of the children.

Told you that your only reason to talk this subject is to return to slamming (all) guys and not to reach an actual solution.

Talk about not caring about the subject. Your personal agenda is more important to you than reducing violence. lol

By Eric

June 28, 2007 9:14 AM | Link to this

Diane is definitely right on about the need for humans to value other life equally. Screw the economy, Shaunti. Enough is enough!

By 2D

June 28, 2007 9:58 AM | Link to this

I just got back from Florida this past week and had the opportunity to get into Canaveral National Park and see the Loggerhead turtles lay some eggs. Absolutely amazing. Those turtles come back exclusively to the North East Florida shore to reproduce. They come back to the same spot where they hatched and do it at great peril to their own lives.

The peril, is we humans. We hunt them illegally (at least in the US) for food and their shells. We capture them in fishing nets and kill them. We polute the waters, they eat the trash and subsequently starve to death. that’s my turtle story.

Another development predicament I learned about was the natural sand dunes. Canaveral National PArk has 29 miles of undeveloped, relatively undisturbed sand dunes. They are covered with scrub palm, sea oats, sea grass, etc. I find it beautiful. Most probably do not. Anyway, a couple of years ago, when a hurricane swept through, New Smyrna lost eight feet of sand. Canaveral National Park GAINED sand. Why? Because the natural foilage caught the blowing sand from the hurricane and added it to the dune. The park rangers indicated that New Smrna could get their natural dunes back in 6-8 years with the proper plantings.

Bottom line is, we need to make a decision as a nation to protect and respect all of the various life forms that live around us. We need them. They make up the ecosystem in which we live. Without them, we very well may not have this wonderful place to live. Do we really need ANOTHER WAL MART?

Most conservatives don’t like my environmentalist stance. MY spouse calls me a “crunchy conservative”. Not really sure what that means, but I like it.

By Theory

June 28, 2007 10:07 AM | Link to this

The REASON this needs to be talked about, every day, no matter what is to remind those who choose to ignore the problem that this war on women is real & is ongoing without anything being done about it. People like you try every excuse in the book to shut us up. What are you afraid of? Upset women are demanding that men stop abusing, killing & raping? Upset you are being reminded of this war on women? Unable to feel superior to women because you are also male?-the ones who have been committing these types of crimes against others since the dawn of time?

I heard last night ANOTHER pregnant woman was murdered. Does anyone have more info on that?

And about that murdering wrestler monster: Vince McMahon did some kind of a tribute to Benoit the pig wrestler.

Yes, wonderful, some kind of tribute eh? What a fking hero!

He had bound his wife’s wrists and ankles before he strangled her, and smothered their son. There was a “Bible” found next to their bodies.

Excuse me, but excusing it as possible steriod use and the WWE making a tribute for this man is beyond belief.

A woman and child were violently murdered in another senseless act of violence, by someone who had at one time professed to love them. What a joke this country is. No wonder so many boys grow up to be criminals.

By Mara

June 28, 2007 10:09 AM | Link to this

JokesOn - hate to sound like I’m “siding” with Whiley…er, I mean…siding with “Theory”…though you tried to qualify it with an “if” and a question mark, you DID imply that man-on-woman violence was 50% the womans fault …

“If the reasons for the existence of the male/female strife is 50/50, men’s 50% being what you stated, I would like to know what you intend on doing for your half?”

I personally believe that one’s actions are the responsibility of the individual and NOT a 50/50 split, as you say. No matter what provocation someone may use to rationalize violence, to harm another is still the decision of one person and one person only…the assaulter.

just my opinion, though.

By Mom

June 28, 2007 10:13 AM | Link to this

I wouldn’t let my child watch wrestling ever. Those events fill stadiums ! It’s sick. McMahon’s brand of wrestling is built around misogyny. Anytime a woman appears, it is around the context of hypermasculine violence. This is what your boys are watching from an early age & it’s only ONE example of what they are exposed to.

By Archie

June 28, 2007 10:14 AM | Link to this

GOB, I really love your 3:28 post yesterday*Actually, the opposite is true. Most professional athletes are normal people with families, though the happen to have a lot of money. There is certainly a segment of the athlete population that wants to be seen as a thug and lives the “strip club” life. Those just happen to be the ones that make the news everyday.

We dont see stories in the paper and on tv about people doing what they are supposed to be doing because it wont sell. If you were to take what you saw on in the media and extrapolate it out and believe that the whole world was like that, I dont think I would ever leave my house. Luckily, I can look at reality and feel much better though.*

People are so caught up in their prejudice that they cannot see what they’re doing. Here in my home state Columbia,SC I have been embarrassed twice by the actions of people of two different generations. A couple that fell off a building trying to have sex and a state treasurer that’s an admitted drug addict. People are people I don’t know why athletes are expected to be perfect, I mean if a 44 year-old man with a great life can do something stupid well what should we expect of a 25 year-old person. I have major issues with most sports commentators. GOB that post yesterday is something that I wish could get posted every week until people get the message.

By Important Lesson

June 28, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this

It’s partly the woman’s fault because she trusted him. What’s the alternative? Not everyone can be gay.

Greedy developers suck. They destroy everything, for what? So we can buy cheap crap we don’t need and delude ourselves that it means something! Developers need to marry roid-head pro wrestlers.

By Archie

June 28, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this

First of all to Mara,Kimberly and any other women here no woman deserves to die because of a bad choice. I agree with what JokesOn is trying to say in principle because I have a problem with some women never taking the blame for anything or apologizing to other women when they do wrong by them. JokesOn said 50% of strife between men and women is the woman’s fault, well isn’t that true? He did not say that the woman is 50% of blame for getting a beat down. My point is the female was 50% at fault for going to the top of a pyramid-shaped building to have sex and that needs to be said. It was a female who helped Mr Cutts even though he allegedly killed a female. It was a female that snuck over to that pastor’s for 14 years while his wife was getting hair done and that female knew the man’s wife and it was a female that asked me over and over if I was married even though I wear my ring all the time. I know JBM has admitted to faults in relationships but so many women just won’t apologize to another woman and won’t vote for another woman. I was in awe as to how that woman slept with Reverend Paulk for 14 years!!! and came out as if she were a victim but never saying I am sorry to the man’s wife.

By Mara

June 28, 2007 10:32 AM | Link to this

oh, and this applies ONLY to individual assault, not war, not self-defense, no to protect another, etc. Just wanting to be clear.

@D - a “crunchy conservative” is a person of conservative ideology that indulges in what is best about the lefties. Like fresh organic vegies, conservation environmentalism, etc.

I didn’t know either so I googled it :^)

“Crunchy cons prefer old houses and mom-and-pop shops to McMansions and strip malls…. Many of us homeschool our kids, and cheerfully embrace nonconformity. I read Edmund Burke and wear Birkenstock sandals. Go figure.”

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5256754

By Archie

June 28, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this

I would like to compliment Mara on her maturity even though we disagree sometimes. Wow, she no longer takes things so far out of context that you wonder what she’s getting at and she posts some great links. Please help me to stop rambling at times.

Also a radio show had this same conversation about male/female relationships yesterday and one of the female hosts had pain in her voice at the thought of another female messing with her husband so if you are a woman and you knowingly mess with another woman’s husband you do cause pain to that woman.

By Mara

June 28, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this

Mom - I’m with you about watching pro-wrestling. But it’s not just the violence, most contact sports are violent. What bugs me is that they market it as “family entertainment” and yet they feature such “family-friendly” fare as “lingerie matches” and “bra-and-panty” matches where the object isn’t so much to pin your opponent as it is to divest her of as much of her costume as possible. A few weeks ago one of the skits required one of the “divas” to get down on all fours in her lingerie and bark like a dog. A week later they did the same with two of the retired grand dames of ladies wrestling.

Meanwhile, out in the audience, there are hundreds of young kids, boy and girls, watching and listening to their elders hoot, holler, and cheer at this kind of stuff. Might as well just take ‘em to a peep-show.

By Mara

June 28, 2007 10:59 AM | Link to this

er…thanks Archie…(I think!) ;^)

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this

Mara,

men’s 50% being what you stated,

What was being discussed was how to curb future violence. I agreed with the list that whiley provided. I also asked her if she realized that same list applies to women.

You both have turned the discussion to the current (adult) violence taking place and retroactively applied my post to that subject.

Do not make such large leaps in thought or post and you would see my point is quite clear and realistic.

By Important Lesson

June 28, 2007 11:16 AM | Link to this

if you are a woman and you knowingly mess with another woman’s husband you do cause pain to that woman.

That’s right! So stop blaming the husband!! He is not choosing to cause pain to the women in his life, they MADE him do it, and it’s THEIR fault!

By Archie

June 28, 2007 11:16 AM | Link to this

Mara you’re good. I just to want to debate hard and not insult or get insulted personally because I am too old for that behavior.

Meanwhile, out in the audience, there are hundreds of young kids, boy and girls, watching and listening to their elders hoot, holler, and cheer at this kind of stuff. Might as well just take ‘em to a peep-show.

I agree with you on that one.

By Mara

June 28, 2007 11:35 AM | Link to this

JokesOn - the list applies to females also?! You might want to go back and re-read them. The only one that could generally be perceived as equally valid for girls or boys is the beginning of “a”: Girls are socialized differently than boys.

As for “turning the discussion to current violence…” I’d like to point out that the first post on gender violence was regarding the Benoit crime. NOT what I’d call “old news”

I’ve said previously that I disagree that the victim of violence(whatever their gender) is 50% responsible for the assaulter decision. You disagree. Easy enough to understand.

By Mara

June 28, 2007 12:04 PM | Link to this

Archie, that’s exactly what I wish we had more of too! Civil and respectful debate. I think most of us here try to be reasonable, but some issues are nearer and dearer than others so sometimes hyperbole gets the better of reason. I mean, just because someone doesn’t agree with a particular POV is no reason to vilify them. I like to debate and argue but I hate being demeaned when I happen to disagree (that just brings out the sarcastic byotch in me). Sometimes that disagreement is not so much about substance as style, about HOW one makes their point, the words they use, the turns of phrase, etc. You and I went through that when you first started posting because my style is kind of literary and yours is more down-to-earth. Neither style is “better” but it can lead to misunderstanding the point or counterpoint. It seems that sometimes the forum talks past each other because one poster thinks that the discussion is about one issue and another may think they’re discussing something else entirely!

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 12:08 PM | Link to this

Mara,

Girls are socialized differently than boys.

And who does the socializing? Men and women - that was my point.

And in the situation of the wrestler, his wife was in the field before they married and had a child in that environment.

The issue I have with you is you took a post from whiley and jumped to conclusions without reading my position.

Same goes for turning the discussion. “The discussion” is referring to the one you were interjecting your post - the one whiley and I were having.

Sorry if I expect a more thorough thought process before claiming I stated that a person was 50% to blame for being murdered, or taking sides on that issue. I take murder kinda seriously as well as that type of claim.

As Archie posts: I just to want to debate hard and not insult or get insulted personally because I am too old for that behavior.

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this

Archie,

The trend I am seeing with nearly all women is this “either or” binary thinking. Either I am a w******* or a saint/ either I am a great wife, or crap. Either it is the guys fault or the girls.

Gets really tiering to have to keep bouncing back and forth when it is both reasons, yet rarely equal 50/50.

Bahhh!

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 12:15 PM | Link to this

I think that much of it stems from:

a) the fact that boys often aren’t socialized the same as girls. They aren’t taught to be in touch with their feelings.

b) boys grow up believing that if they’re mad, then someone made them mad and if they’re sad then someone made them sad, etc.

c) boys are taught to affect the world. If someone does something “wrong”, take action! Make it “right”, and so when they meet a woman who “makes” them mad, sad, etc.

d) boys aren’t taught to ask for help. In many ways, but most specific to this topic, they aren’t going to ask for help if they’re unable to cope or depressed.

e) they lash out. They blame a woman/women for their mental anguish and inability to cope with it, so they do the animal thing.

So, by your position that women do not have responsibility in these areas. Only men should raise boys. See how the binary logic + not reading fully puts stupid words in another’s mouth?

By Mara

June 28, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this

sigh whatever…

By lozen

June 28, 2007 12:48 PM | Link to this

Mara, your 9:00 was so funnnnniiiiiieeee! How anyone can think Benoit’s wife (and child if you take it one step further) should share half the responsibility for being bound, strangled, smothered is beyond me! Denial is really amazing. Just deny the huge number of women, children (and other males) killed, raped, beaten, shot down at school by males. Pretend the situation doesn’t exist or at least isn’t as bad as she says it is! Just a few questions: 1) Have you ever told or laughed at a joke about how dumb, slutty, nagging, incompetent women in general are? 2) Have you ever taken part in a conversation about how some women need to be slapped around “cause ya can’t shut em up any other way?” 3) Called a woman names like “… you worthless piece of blue-haired trash” on a blog? 4) Responded to a woman with total disrespect (sorta like some respond to Whiley)? 5)Threatened violence to make a woman do what you want or stop doing what you don’t like? 6) Enjoyed a porno flick where women were forced, raped, tricked? If your answer is yes to any of these question, please don’t keep telling yourself male violence has nothing to do with you!

By Mara

June 28, 2007 1:31 PM | Link to this

lozen - careful. that was a discussion between Whiley and JokesOn…evidently the rest of us aren’t supposed to interject our opinions into their discussion.

later.

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 1:34 PM | Link to this

sigh whatever…

Precisely. Now a statement that was never made fuels a hate filled person instead of one that could resolve issues.

Yes, sigh…

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 1:42 PM | Link to this

1) Have you ever told or laughed at a joke about how dumb, slutty, nagging, incompetent women in general are?

Yet your only jokes on friday are male bashing.

2) Have you ever taken part in a conversation about how some women need to be slapped around “cause ya can’t shut em up any other way?”

yet you “rah” on whiley when she promotes castration for all males.

3) Called a woman names like “… you worthless piece of blue-haired trash” on a blog?

But misogynist, vagina hater, and little peniz is fine.

4) Responded to a woman with total disrespect (sorta like some respond to Whiley)?

See any of your or whiley’s multi-peronality’s posts.

5)Threatened violence to make a woman do what you want or stop doing what you don’t like?

See castration and prison for all males comments made by you and whiley.

6) Enjoyed a porno flick where women were forced, raped, tricked? If your answer is yes to any of these question, please don’t keep telling yourself male violence has nothing to do with you!

And finally, if a woman molests a boy, you call him “lucky.”

You are part of the problem. I know you hate it, but you are;)

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this

lozen - careful. that was a discussion between Whiley and JokesOn…evidently the rest of us aren’t supposed to interject our opinions into their discussion.

You really are that dumb, huh? You jumped in without being informed as lozen is doing now.

MMMMkay? Got it, or just gonna warp that too?

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 1:52 PM | Link to this

Archie, that’s exactly what I wish we had more of too! Civil and respectful debate.

Bu!!!s**. Or you would adhere to it and get informed before jumping to bs conclusions like you did.

You want those nice rules to apply to yourself, but to be expected to follow them would be an insult.

Otherwise you would have simply corrected your mistake. Something you are unable to do, that archie and many others associate with being female. What other stereotypes do you like to further?

By Monica

June 28, 2007 2:18 PM | Link to this

Do we really need ANOTHER WAL MART?

As if anyone in Palm Beach shops at a WalMart?? Do the WalMarts there have a Starbucks inside? Do they carry clothes that are also found at Nieman Marcus?

I guess I am stereotyping, huh?

By Mom

June 28, 2007 2:21 PM | Link to this

I am of the belief that the true fear out there that pornography, aggressive sports & movies, mysogynistic music DO impact all of us & help fuel a lot of bad behavior-and everyone deep down knows that to be true.

I doubt very seriously people would give up their wrestling, football, boxing & porn. That they would throw away their Girls Gone Wild, horror & murder movies, cancel subscriptions to online porn. Something about all that agression & sexual mysogny helps create the criminals we are talking about here. I can only do my part & don’t participate or financially support any of it. It would be devistating to raise a loving child only to have him grow up to be a criminal, particularly one that commits a crime against a woman or child like we hear about daily.

By Archie

June 28, 2007 2:21 PM | Link to this

I have to defend JokesON because he has not advocated violence against women and also as for looking at porn, I have. I have not seen any rape on a porn movie but I have seen wild,kinky sex on a porn movie and I guess that what you mean by tricked. However, I have seen a female porn star brag about her portfolio,house, and cars so why isn’t she a part of the problem? Frankly the male in those movies has a problem,too, because I don’t know anyone that comes home to his mother or wife and says “hey, y’all look at this” with pride. Let’s face it people who do porn have kinda run out of options and they need quick money, male or female. Also I know some women that have threatened violence to make a woman do what she wants. Women have told jokes about how incompetent,slutty, women are. Whiley needs to be responded to with total disrespect at times because no man wants to be blamed for everything that goes bad done by other men. That list posted at 10:52 am was straight up male-bashing and JokesON has every right to nail it. A friend of mine has told me she has a friend that purposefully goes after someone else’s husband so I definitely understand JokesOn when he says 50% of the problem with male/female strife is women. He is right about that. At no time has JokesON defended murder and it is disingenuous to suggest that he did.

By GOB

June 28, 2007 2:25 PM | Link to this

JokesOn - Cleary civil and respectful debate isnt something you are interested in either…

By Mara

June 28, 2007 2:27 PM | Link to this

did you or did you not say “If the reasons for the existence of the male/female strife is 50/50, men’s 50% being what you stated, I would like to know what you intend on doing for your half?”

does it or does it not ask what whiley is going to do for “her half” of the male/female violence? (You call it “strife” but whiley was talking about violence done to women.)

and lastly, I’d like to see the post where I have called you “dumb”, or “uninformed”, or hypocritical. You disagree with me and I…do what? Insult you? Demean you? Call you names? Nope, I post your own words right back at you. I disagree with you and you bash me. I responded to what you actually wrote, not what you might think you wrote.

I didn’t compose your posts, you did. If you can’t express yourself or your point clearly, that’s not MY fault and I’m under no obligation to try and parse out any deeper meaning you might have buried in your writing.

By Archie

June 28, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this

JokesON cool off man!!!!Bu!!!s. Or you would adhere to it and get informed before jumping to bs conclusions like you did.

Some people are pulling your chain but I would like to see the women address the Paulk situation and I would like to see if the women believe a woman owes another woman a symbolic apology when she sleeps with the husband of said woman if she knows the man is married. Let me flip the situation and ask should a wife put spending time with her close male friend high on her priority list? See we already know men cheat and do wrong but I want to address the other side in relationships and that’s why I take JokesOn’s side.

By Whiley Fan!

June 28, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this

no man wants to be blamed for everything that goes bad done by other men.

But these same guys don’t do SQUAT to stop the men that ARE DOING ALL THE S** in this world ! ! !

Pizses me off when guys get all defensive everytime a woman complains about the rape, abuse & murder we have to put up with. WORLD WIDE abuse. You think the guys who are doing all this give a crap? Who else can we go to, to make the bad men in this world STOP?? who???!! And we’re not allowed to get mad about it???? Enough is ENOUGH ! WHAT in the hell does JokesOn have to be angry about anyway? Afraid women might be able to walk around without the threat of rape? That maybe we won’t hear about pregnant women being murdered by a boyfriend or husband? That he won’t get to hear of another child being abducted & raped & killed?

JokesOn needs to walk in a woman’s shoes for a little while & see what it’s really like to live in world full of male violence. See how he likes it from OUR point of veiw. Whiley I know you’re here don’t stop posting!

By Archie

June 28, 2007 2:57 PM | Link to this

But these same guys don’t do SQUAT to stop the men that ARE DOING ALL THE S* in this world ! ! !*

The entire 2:38 pm post is stupid but particularly the aforementioned sentence. JokesOn please understand some of these posts are stupid and loony because many women have sons and these women do not want their son’s to be talked about this way. I know I couldn’t beat Benoit in a fight mainly because we live in different states and even here in my home state I have no way of knowing which man is crazy or sane. I want my female relatives to deal with good men and I have confidence that they can find them but they must use valid criteria in evaluating them. I haven’t seen anything practical for women by women on this blog today. I mean since we know people will have relations how about some comments on how to find a good man or woman??? I have heard Mara make many nice comments about her spouse but the rest of the commentary about men has been negative and impractical. Why do women deal with guys already in jail? Why do women dog out nice guys? I want to see one woman brave enough to apologize to another woman and admit they fall short when it comes to evaluating men.

By p

June 28, 2007 3:10 PM | Link to this

not sure how you can call yourself a christian while having the audacity to compare a monetary cost to an animal’s life. it costs up to $4000 to protect the lives of these innocent tortoises, you say. that’s a fact, and it’s a fact that we all have to do our jobs and earn a living for our families. perhaps though, you should reevaluate your christian morality as you clearly have demonstrated you are willing to put a price tag on god’s creatures. the “economic engine” you speak of does not make any place a good habitat for homo sapiens - no, i’m not blaming walmart for “the world’s evils” but it’s sickening that you, as a mother support wal mart’s exploitation of child workers.

By p

June 28, 2007 3:10 PM | Link to this

shaunti,

not sure how you can call yourself a christian while having the audacity to compare a monetary cost to an animal’s life. it costs up to $4000 to protect the lives of these innocent tortoises, you say. that’s a fact, and it’s a fact that we all have to do our jobs and earn a living for our families. perhaps though, you should reevaluate your christian morality as you clearly have demonstrated you are willing to put a price tag on god’s creatures. the “economic engine” you speak of does not make any place a good habitat for homo sapiens - no, i’m not blaming walmart for “the world’s evils” but it’s sickening that you, as a mother support wal mart’s exploitation of child workers.

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 3:14 PM | Link to this

JokesOn - Cleary civil and respectful debate isnt something you are interested in either…

BS. It has happened and will again. And if you watch closely you will see a trend, responding to what someone posts and not what you think they were trying to say.

I do not treat others with greater respect than they do to me and that includes incorrectly telling me what I said.

What I posted that was not read in full and comprehended before responding mara was:

Is a woman 50% responsible if her husband kills her? Is that what you mean?

Just as I have no control over the wrestler’s behavior that may have led up to the instance, neither do you over his wife’s. They both chose a life that has a lot of violence in it nor did either of them adhere to most of the things you mentioned you do as your part.

Yet, if you are going to use your basis as a starting point (the a-e list), where is her responsibility in rectifying those issues? As well as the general population of males or females.

Pretty clear to me, but instead of you scrolling up and reading you persist, and I have to do the work for you bc of your lack of respect.

Your continual dodging your error is nerve racking.

By Mara

June 28, 2007 3:21 PM | Link to this

Archie - could you give me some info on the Paulk situation because I honestly don’t know anything about it…

as for the apology thing…

Anyone (female or male) who cheats on their spouse or partner is without honor and worthy only of contempt. If the person they are cheating with knows they are in a relationship, they are just as contemptable. I think the spouse would deserve a bit more than a symbolic apology at that point (not that I could imagine anyone wanting to have any contact with the “other woman”, even if it was for an apology).

It gets a bit more nuanced when the “other woman” doesn’t know about the wife. That situation might be the place for the symbolic apology, not that she would really have anything to apologize for, having been lied to herself. But still….

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 3:23 PM | Link to this

Arhcie,

When was of taking responsibility for choosing a mate, even in benign ways like what to look for are applied, it is blaming the woman on here.

And the wrestler’s wife had MANY red flags that she acted on, but she did not follow through. What can you do when someone won’t even listen to herself?

Although a nice notion, I firmly believe people know these things (red flags) already, which leads me back to the notion that people feel they deserve the bad relationships. That in turn does lead to child rearing (whileys a-e list is HALF), encompassing both males and females.

One simply cannot separate the two sexes from this debate, but most women will not have the debate if it does include them both.

By Monica

June 28, 2007 3:26 PM | Link to this

I doubt very seriously people would give up their wrestling, football, boxing & porn.

Can we just keep football? Of course I don’t play, but I love watching it! :)

There is another theory about contact sports as well. Many believe that men are naturally more aggressive and physical, and playing a sport of that nature is a healthy release of that aggression. Just a theory.

By GOB

June 28, 2007 3:35 PM | Link to this

BS. It has happened and will again. And if you watch closely you will see a trend, responding to what someone posts and not what you think they were trying to say.

BS?? So you can read over your comments from today and truly say that you want to engage in a civil and respectful debate? Mara hasnt called you names, but you are awfully quick to get upset and defensive. Seems as if the problem in on your end.

And are you really complaining about the “trend” of people responding to what you actually post, and not your intentions? Really?

Also, I dont believe I have read Mara calling you dumd or ignorant.

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 3:40 PM | Link to this

Arhcie

Archie*

Sorry about that.

Monica,

I think there si truth to that statement (playing a sport of that nature is a healthy release of that aggression) but to a degree and if in moderation.

Just like anything, to little can be bad as well as too much.

By Mara

June 28, 2007 3:41 PM | Link to this

and your continued harping about how nobody (well, me)is reading your posts the way you meant them to be read and NOT the way you wrote them is equally as annoying and nerve wracking.

It’s not my “lack of respect” (though any I had for you is rapidly disappearing) that’s the issue, it’s your inability to clearly state you point.

By GOB

June 28, 2007 3:45 PM | Link to this

Also, I dont believe I have read Mara calling you dumd or ignorant.

And I dont think she as called you dumb either…

By Dumb Male

June 28, 2007 3:48 PM | Link to this

It gets a bit more nuanced when the “other woman” doesn’t know about the wife.

Mara—Please clue me in how you could date a man for any length of time and possibly become intimate with him without being aware that he is married?? I’m thinking either you have to ignore some pretty major clues (e.g. never being invited to his house), or that the intimacy was rushed, before any verification of basic info could take place.

Also, glad to see that you acknowledge that cheating is despicable for all parties. I can’t tell you the hundreds of times married ladies said to me “My husband doesn’t understand me the way you do”, and then suggested we get together for coffee. Many called me at home after hours, and a few even came to my house and waited in my driveway for me to get home.

By NeverTooLate

June 28, 2007 3:56 PM | Link to this

for There Goes The Neighborhood.

By Mara

June 28, 2007 4:04 PM | Link to this

Hey GOB. <<>>

Dumb Male - good question…I like to believe that I wouldn’t be fooled but…I had a friend, smart as a whip, who actually went out with a guy for six or eight months before she found out. See, he worked days and the wife worked nights so he’d have her over occasionally after work, like a normal guy. His story was that he was divorced and had never gotten around to redecorating (it’s not as if my friend was going through closets or anything). Because she had the bigger house, better TV, better…everything just about, they usually hung out at her place or went out. You could say that she was blind, or stupid, or too trusting and you could be right. But she is also generous to a fault, she believes the best of folks, and she trusts people. Naive? Sure, but who wants to be around someone who is always suspicious, always thinks the worst of people, or never takes a chance on love?

anyhooo…peace out blog buddies. I’m gone

By Whiley Fan!

June 28, 2007 4:05 PM | Link to this

ohhh WE DON’T WANT TO HURT the widdle boys feelings now do we? Don’t take away their violent video games & sexest music & movies ! ewwwww don’t want to point out bad male behavior now do we ! Don’t want to hurt the widdle boys young egos ! Boys will be boys don’t make them feel bad for getting in fights ok.

In the meantime we have to teach our girls about males, how to not get date raped, how not to get abducted, make sure to not walk around alone, watch out for pedophiles online, careful of parking lots, don’t leave your doors unlocked, what to do if your boyfriend starts bossing you around, pushing, slapping or stalking you. What to do if an uncle or teacher tries to feel you up etc. How to not get caught up in the cyle of abuse via lack of self esteem. etc.

In the meantime a lot of your sons will grow up to be abusers, criminals, rapist, child molesters & wife beaters. GOOD GOING THANKS FOR HELPING!

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 4:10 PM | Link to this

So you can read over your comments from today and truly say that you want to engage in a civil and respectful debate? Mara hasnt called you names, but you are awfully quick to get upset and defensive. Seems as if the problem in on your end.

And if you read them I directed mara (not a whole slew of bloggers) to the post that Archie understood without any needed assistance.

As for describing her behavior accurately, I see no issue with that. This “description” was given after she persisted to try to “defend” her position that was based on ignorance (not knowing) or stupidity (unable to comprehend).

If I asserted that you, GOB, hated all asians, and continued to in spite of a clear post by you that others understood; how would you reply the 5th time dealing with it? And then it gets dismissed with sarcasm?

I think you can catch my drift.

By Solutions

June 28, 2007 4:12 PM | Link to this

An officer who ordered two women to put on a “sex show” in a jail cell will be fired. Internal Affairs investigators found that Cappas ordered the two women to kiss and touch each other and expose their breasts in September 2003. The two had been picked up on suspicion of drug possession, but they had no drugs and were not charged with a crime. One of the women filed a civil lawsuit and was awarded $17,500. The city’s own lawyers concluded that she never should have been detained in the first place.

They’re ONLY GETTING FIRED? They committed a CRIME & they should be PUNISHED WITH JAIL TIME. They also should be required to register as sex offenders.

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 4:20 PM | Link to this

and your continued harping about how nobody (well, me)is reading your posts the way you meant them to be read and NOT the way you wrote them is equally as annoying and nerve wracking.

(well me) = The truth of what is. And I know, given other responses, that anyone could understand exactly what I stated. You have a bitter agenda and use only the bad or mis-interpret ideas for your personal use.

Which part of (post #3) is unclear?

Is a woman 50% responsible if her husband kills her? Is that what you mean? :Whiley

My reply: Just as I have no control over the wrestler’s behavior that may have led up to the instance, neither do you over his wife’s. They both chose a life that has a lot of violence in it nor did either of them adhere to most of the things you mentioned you do as your part.

Yet, if you are going to use your basis as a starting point (the a-e list), where is her responsibility in rectifying those issues? As well as the general population of males or females.

That is why I think she must be either 1)purposely malicious 2)stupid. Ignorant is no longer an option given it was posted and referred to numerous times now.

This is a perfect example of a person not able to accept they were wrong and apologize.

By Archie

June 28, 2007 4:23 PM | Link to this

Mara, I give you much credit for answering my question straight up, but frankly some women don’t want to know the truth they want a man to lie. The Paulk situation was written about in this newspaper months ago. You are right that some women are naive but is it wrong to ask women to look at the left hand first,first? I have had some commentary directed at me and I am wondering how could they not know I am married since I wear my ring. Of course a guy is going to remove it if he sees you trying to play the “I didn’t know he was married game”. At least you answered my question and you’re the only woman brave enough to do so at this point. I’m not a perfect person just blogging on a computer..later.

By Don%

June 28, 2007 4:35 PM | Link to this

Sure, but who wants to be around someone who is always suspicious, always thinks the worst of people, or never takes a chance on love?

Unfortunately, Mara, you just described the majority of single women I meet who are past 35 years old. To be fair, many have had truly horrible experiences with men, and maybe certain kinds of wounds never heal. It’s really hard to know how to love a woman who has had a rough life, though. The natural inclination for men is to want to “Rescue” the damsel in distress with the expectation of gratitude in return, but I’ve learned the hard way that “Rescuing” never works, and that the expectation of gratitude is spiritually wrong and is rarely forthcoming. Maybe I’ll get it right one of these days.

By JokesOn

June 28, 2007 4:37 PM | Link to this

ohhh WE DON’T WANT TO HURT the widdle boys feelings now do we? Don’t take away their violent video games & sexest music & movies ! ewwwww don’t want to point out bad male behavior now do we ! Don’t want to hurt the widdle boys young egos ! Boys will be boys don’t make them feel bad for getting in fights ok.

Would someone please take the pc away from the ten year old;)

By GOB

June 28, 2007 4:40 PM | Link to this

JokesOn - I find it highly ironic that you are complaining about someone not being able to admit when they were wrong. In your last post, you include a clarifying question from Whiley that you again did not answer. You beat around the bush, while still implying that the wife is at least somewhat responsible for her own murder.

To argue that someone is malicious or stupid because they are simply reading your words, which were never clearly explained (your repeated response to the question of “is a woman 50% responsible” was to cut and paste your previously ambiguous response).

From what you have posted, it is clear that you truly do believe that the woman is partially responsible if she is murdered by her husband. That is pretty f’d up.

By Important Lesson

June 28, 2007 4:48 PM | Link to this

That’s right! It’s the women who don’t want to know the truth. They could investigate if they did. Stop blaming the men who don’t want to tell the truth! The official “How to Get Sex” manual clearly forbids the use of truth, so who are they to argue? And certaintly don’t start in on the “sin” of omission because it is not a man’s job to confess to things. Neither is apologizing to anyone. If a woman sleeps with a married man, that woman should apologize to the wife, and the man should continue to say either (a) nothing, or (b) “She made me do it.”

By Dumby

June 28, 2007 5:01 PM | Link to this

Just because someone gives you a reason or twelve not to trust him, that’s no reason to be suspicious and think the worst.

By JokesOn

June 29, 2007 8:27 AM | Link to this

GOB,

In your last post, you include a clarifying question from Whiley that you again did not answer. You beat around the bush, while still implying that the wife is at least somewhat responsible for her own murder.

Try to understand the subject was regarding whileys suggestion for curbing violence. Then, read the posts that follow that were regarding THAT subject (raising boys). Then, explain to me why Archie totally understood my posts.

If you can explain why he shot back on my behalf without tons (any actually) of explaining your point might make sense.

My point was clear. In raising a child, her points apply to females equally, and for example this lady participated and was raising a child in a violent world (wrestling). It means that she is 50% responsible for what he becomes.

That point, if not mudded up by jumping to conclusions (I state my points - no need to ever ask “are you implying”) could then be extended to the irony that she was dealing with what that future man (her son) may become. So instead of passing the buck onto some other woman, she herself was experiencing that reality. That too is interesting since she does not have to go far to see what she (partly) is creating; yet still ignored those obvious red flags.

If you read back, the snotty posts began as soon as I applied some responsibilty to women as did the allegations that she deserved to die. There is a world of difference between “deserving to die” and not being surprise in what results from ignoring red flags.

I have ignored them (redflags) in the past and do take responsibility for the resulting issues (although the actions were theirs) because I CANNOT control the actions of others, but I can see what the trend is and sidestep potential issues.

By Archie

June 29, 2007 9:28 AM | Link to this

In fairness, some of the women on here have been dodging questions about responsibility except Mara and I am not sucking up to her but she is the second woman ever on this blog to say that a woman is wrong in certain situations and should apologize. Some women really have taken JokesOn 50/50 comments out of context. I went back to 6/27 and at no time has he implied a woman is responsible for being killed by her husband. I am asking women, other than Mara, to woman-up and stop dodging questions about your roles in relationships. JokesOn, just come right out and tell them you don’t believe woman are responsible for being killed. No woman addressed my examples about the lady that helped Cutts or the lady went up to top of building to have sex and ended up falling off and dying along with the guy. Even my spouse has told me of women that cheat during the day because it does not draw as much suspicion so let’s stop using JokesOn to dodge answering the tough questions. That troll-like thing of Whiley’s using different names doesn’t even try to read posts correctly. Everybody knows a husband is wrong to sex someone other than his wife but I asked about the woman’s responsibility to the wife and so far only Mara has been woman enough to even deal with it.

By GOB

June 29, 2007 10:33 AM | Link to this

I state my points - no need to ever ask “are you implying”

If this is true, why have you not just answered the yes/no question that was asked (are women at least partially responsible if they are killed by their husband?)? Instead of doing that, you went on and on complaining that people were responding to what you actualy wrote, rather than what you meant.

So far, it looks like one person was able to correctly read your intentions. That hardly qualifies as clearly stating your point. If you post something, and only 1 of 10 people reading it get what you were trying to say, I would argue that issue isnt with them, but with your ability to convey a message.

By JokesOn

June 29, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

JokesOn, just come right out and tell them you don’t believe woman are responsible for being killed.

I do not think she deserved to die. I also do not think she was responsible for her death.

I really did not want to jump directly to that point is the problem because I do not think that she was ignorant to the dangers she faced. What to do with that is interesting, but know that honest debate regarding that issue is not applicable here.

It does parallel Arhie’s question of how responsible are all the people involved in a love triangle. There are always signs. And if the people choose to ignore those signs, are in some way culpable?

By JokesOn

June 29, 2007 10:52 AM | Link to this

So far, it looks like one person was able to correctly read your intentions.

And one person misunderstood (not 10) following that 2 people played lawyer for that person’s point without stating what they actually believed.

All stemming from whileys statement that was loaded bait to argue instead of answering my initial question, which I let go of and have not complained about yet. Plus, I did clarify why/what I was asking and that it was on the basis whiley stated as a beginning point to lessen male/female violence.

why have you not just answered the yes/no question that was asked (are women at least partially responsible if they are killed by their husband?)?

Because that was not the subject and is not clearly black/white. Also you just now added “partially” to the statement, furthering the grey area.

Those are clear tactics to evade a real issues that you do not want to have to confront.

Would you state that she does not have ANY responsiblity WHAT-SO-EVERin her situation with this man and its result and that she is a total innocent that was blindsided? (see how applying absolutes to a question posed to you puts you in a difficult position?)

By GOB

June 29, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this

In your last post you start by saying that she wasnt responsible, but then immediatly qualify your statement, and then finally say that anyone who ignores the signs is in some way culpable.

So clearly you DO believe she was at least partially at fault for her own murder. According to what you wrote, at least. Let me know if I got your intentions wrong though. It could be totally my fault…

By GOB

June 29, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

And one person misunderstood (not 10) following that 2 people played lawyer for that person’s point without stating what they actually believed.

I assumed that you could read my intentions by posting (I mean any idiot can do that, rght?) a response to you. I guess I misunderstood you too. Uh oh, the numbers are tipping…

Also you just now added “partially” to the statement, furthering the grey area.

Those are clear tactics to evade a real issues that you do not want to have to confront.

Would you state that she does not have ANY responsiblity WHAT-SO-EVERin her situation with this man and its result and that she is a total innocent that was blindsided? (see how applying absolutes to a question posed to you puts you in a difficult position?)

True, this is the first time I used the word “partially”, but previously I said “somewhat.” I am assuming that you understand that those two words are synonyms.

Also, applying an absolute to this case in no way puts me a more difficult position. She bears some responsibility for the situation she was in (married to an apparently abusive man), but that doesnt mean she bears any responsibility for being killed. As far as being murdered goes, yes, she most certainly was “totally innocent and blinsided.”

By Archie

June 29, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

I do not think she deserved to die. I also do not think she was responsible for her death. JokesON good job.

Also whether she was or was not ignorant to the dangers she faced you can’t make her culpable for her death. Hey,dude, sometimes people snap and you just didn’t expect it. Some women make some bad choices in relationships but there is no way they deserved to die for them. My main thing is strife in a relationship is fifty-fifty as you said. You can blame women for making passes at a guy that has on his wedding ring or for sex in the case of Paulk that they know is married. You can blame for pimping out their goddaughters or just outright going after a man they know is married as has been documented in Essence magazine articles. Keep in mind the guy involved is also wrong but my issue has been why is is so hard to say that women do wrong. Also the evaluation process is different,almost strange at times that some women use to evaluate guys. I mean if he openly cheated on his ex-spouse there’s a great probability he will do the same to you if you date him so why would said woman react so angrily. Then some ladies mess their friend’s husband and actually try to remain friends with the spouse.

By JokesOn

June 29, 2007 11:23 AM | Link to this

GOB,

We disagree on some of the issues then:

As far as being murdered goes, yes, she most certainly was “totally innocent and blinsided.”

Since she had filed for restraining orders because of physical threats and violence acted out on things around her, I do not think she was neither an innocent or blindsided. Once again, this does not mean she “deserved” to be killed, only that she made multiple choices to take the risks she was aware of.

If I am on a train tracks and hear feel the vibrations while walking, I am surely in some way culpable for the injuries that I may incur. If I look behind me and see it steaming ahead right for me and turn my head away, that surely makes me partly responsible for my injuries as well.

If I hire a hooker and get VD or murdered for my wallet, I then too am partially responsible for my injuries.

I simply apply responsibilty to each and every individual which is NOT tied to the responsibilty of the other party members nor does it VOID out the those responsibilities.

By JokesOn

June 29, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this

Also whether she was or was not ignorant to the dangers she faced you can’t make her culpable for her death. Hey,dude, sometimes people snap and you just didn’t expect it. Some women make some bad choices in relationships but there is no way they deserved to die for them.

That is a mixed bag for me as described in the previous post. In the way it is worded above, it conveys an absolute in each case and I do not think it is that simple. Especially if we are talking, as the discussion started, about solving/reducing these issues.

By Mara

June 29, 2007 11:31 AM | Link to this

GOB - So clearly you DO believe she was at least partially at fault for her own murder

that’s what I’m getting from him. While he doesn’t actually think the woman is responsible for being harmed, he seems to say that she is, at least partially, at fault. From what I can deduce, he figures that if a woman is too stupid or too trusting or too blind to see that she’s in danger (i.e. she “ignored the signs”)…well….there ya are. After all, if she hadn’t been with a guy who she must have known was dangerous, she wouldn’t have been killed. And of course, women are perfect judges of character and can always see “the signs” if they aren’t willfully blind to them. Never mind that one of the most dangerous situations for a woman is when she tries to leave an abusive relationship. Even then, I suppose, she could be seen as being partially responsible for anything that happens because she didn’t see “the signs” sooner…

but, like you, I could have misunderstood what he were saying…

By lozen

June 29, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this

Archie, I don’t think most women want an apology from the “other woman.” The person she wants an explanation and apology from is her husband. He is the one who betrayed her and broke his vows to her. Each and every one of us, male or female, is responsible for our actions. Just as I cannot imagine a man going to the husband of the woman who cheated with him to apologize, I can’t imagine a woman going to the wife of a man who cheated with her to apologize to that woman. The person who needs to apologize is the cheating spouse to the husband or wife they cheated on. I wouldn’t care about the woman who cheated with my husband. She didn’t make any vows to me and she didn’t betray her promise to me. It would be my husband’s betrayal I would be concerned with. (Not all women feel this way. I was with a woman recently who kept cursing the woman her husband cheated with. This was not the first woman he cheated with, but my friend was obsessed with the other woman. IMHO she needed to be thinking about her husband and his continued cheating with several different women. I guess she had to excuse him to continue being married to him and was displacing her anger onto the insignificant other woman.) You should check out Oprah’s website this month. She talks about her conversation with seven men who cheated. What she was struck with is that we all want to be important to someone, appreciated, cared for, listened to, and loved. The men she talked with seemed to get that from the “other woman” and she says none of them thought about how much their actions would hurt their spouse. Martial infidelity isn’t a simple thing with a simple answer. So many people get married and think they don’t have to pay any attention to their spouse anymore. They take their spouse for granted and don’t try to keep the love alive. I know that’s why most women cheat. It isn’t for sex. It’s because the “other man” makes her feel important, loved; he listens, romances, appreciates. That’s why a lot of men cheat too. Each case is different.

It’s the cultural attitude that makes me angry. When a man cheats - “Oh, well, that just the way men are.” When a woman cheats “she’s a no good, sorry ho”.

By JokesOn

June 29, 2007 12:03 PM | Link to this

he figures that if a woman is too stupid or too trusting or too blind to see that she’s in danger (i.e. she “ignored the signs”)

Do you not find a difference between too stupid or too trusting or too blind and ignored the signs (your words) and that she filed for and later dropped charges against him because of violent behavior?

I surely do.

So clearly you DO believe she was at least partially at fault for her own murder

She was partly responsibly for the situation she was in and its result because she was totally (documented) aware of that situation.

By Archie

June 29, 2007 12:06 PM | Link to this

JokesON:If I am on a train tracks and hear feel the vibrations while walking, I am surely in some way culpable for the injuries that I may incur. If I look behind me and see it steaming ahead right for me and turn my head away, that surely makes me partly responsible for my injuries as well. You are responsible in this case.

If I hire a hooker and get VD or murdered for my wallet, I then too am partially responsible for my injuries. You are responsible for the VD but not for the murder. Dude, because a person commits a wrong choice does not mean they are responsible for killed, period.

Let me say this JokesON at this point you are on your own because you are making an illogical argument and these women on this blog will continue to light you up. How old are you? Are you joking? Benoit’s wife took out a restraining order in 2003 and also no one thinks their husband is going to strangle them if things have been going well for a long time. If you have ever been in a relationship you know some harsh things are said between men and women and that’s why I agreed with you about strife,strife not murder. If a man is shooting up the house the day before I blame the woman for a bad choice but nothing else. You will never get these women on your side with your line of thinking. Hell, remember Fred Lane the football player blown away by his wife, was he at fault because he came back to get his things? His wife was a bank robber and had shot in the house before but let me tell you this behavior occurs in male/female relationships all the time and most of the time it does not result in a murder. Do you know how bizarre it is for someone to hang themselves? Also as men we make tons of bad choices and women will let us know about them. Let me list a few: a. Getting a woman pregnant but you’re married to someone else. b. bringing Mara’s friend to your house and you’re married. If Mara’s friend really did not know he was married there’s a chance she would just stop by—when his wife was home. c. Going grocery shopping with your girlfriend except you’re married. JokesOn you need to tighten up your post because these women will blog beat like SusieH beat that guy last week.

By lozen

June 29, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this

Archie, Keep in mind the guy involved is also wrong but my issue has been why is it so hard to say that women do wrong. It looks as if this is what we really disagree about. I think society judges women much more harshly than it judges men about infidelity (or anything having to do with sexuality).

By JokesOn

June 29, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this

So clearly you DO believe she was at least partially at fault for her own murder

A good question would be “how could she control his behavior?”

My position is she could not (none of us can control another’s behavior) and therefore you must control your own as your only recourse.

I also would like to know why one would think this is the type of person they deserve as a lifelong mate?

And if it is learned (back to some of whiley’s list), how to teach differently (whiley’s list applies here too)?

By Archie

June 29, 2007 12:15 PM | Link to this

Thanks Lozen. I was thinking about Bill Campbell and Paulk when I posted and other church situations that I am aware of. I still think it’s a copout to say well “he was one took the vows”. Lozen, thanks. You are the second woman to deal with that issue head on. I will check that Oprah site. I am not a perfect person but I asked that question because on a radio show I listen to men get blamed for anything wrong in a relationship. Hey, Lozen y’all can dog out JokeOn if he doesn’t tighten up his posts.

By lozen

June 29, 2007 12:26 PM | Link to this

Now a response to JokesOn’s comment from yesterday: 1) Have you ever told or laughed at a joke about how dumb, slutty, nagging, incompetent women in general are? Yet your only jokes on friday are male bashing. Absolutely untrue! My Friday jokes have several different topics. Pay more attention, please. 2) Have you ever taken part in a conversation about how some women need to be slapped around “cause ya can’t shut em up any other way?” yet you “rah” on whiley when she promotes castration for all males. Again, absolutely untrue. I never ever, agreed that all males should be castrated. 3) Called a woman names like “… you worthless piece of blue-haired trash” on a blog? But misogynist, vagina hater, and little peniz is fine. I know misogyny when I see it. I thought it was clever the way she got “peniz” by the censors on this blog. I don’t remember v.h. comments. 4) Responded to a woman with total disrespect (sorta like some respond to Whiley)? See any of your or whiley’s multi-peronality’s posts. Show me my multi-personality posts please. Whiley is Whiley. Lozen is Lozen. 5)Threatened violence to make a woman do what you want or stop doing what you don’t like? See castration and prison for all males comments made by you and whiley. Untrue. I did not say anything about castration and prison for all males. Again you confuse me with Whiley. 6) Enjoyed a porno flick where women were forced, raped, tricked? If your answer is yes to any of these question, please don’t keep telling yourself male violence has nothing to do with you! And finally, if a woman molests a boy, you call him “lucky.” Untrue, you have confused me with someone else. You should pay more attention to who says what. You are part of the problem. I know you hate it, but you are;) That is your opinion and your opinion only. And since you don’t seem to be able to keep me separated from Whiley I wonder if I really am the person you think is part of the problem!

By Archie

June 29, 2007 12:32 PM | Link to this

It looks as if this is what we really disagree about. I think society judges women much more harshly than it judges men about infidelity (or anything having to do with sexuality).

Lozen 20 years ago I think society did judge women more harshly about anything having to do with sex but now I think it has caught up but I could be wrong, I could be wrong. I just I have had some judgemental comments directed at me and I know for a fact that women go to strip clubs and anywhere else they want to compared to 20 years ago.

By Makin' the Arch-man happy....

June 29, 2007 12:33 PM | Link to this

Yes, I slept with the husband of another. He told me she left and filed for divorce. He told me their love was over long ago. He told me she broke his heart and he was finally ready to move on. He told me I made him feel new again. He told me he loved me, and that we had something special. But that’s NOT why I did it!!

Why did I do it? Because I am a low-life, sleazy, skanky, stupid, self-serving, gold-digging, warped, twisted SL-UT who has no morals, no virtue, no ethics, so self-esteem, no sense of right and wrong, and furthermore, I am a selfish, ugly, hateful, skanky BI-TCH! Did I mention SKANK! Yeah, I’m a skank. As soon as I hit “Post” I am going to telephone this woman, tell her how sorry I am for being such a skank, tell her not to blame her dear sweet husband, because it was ALL MY FAULT! Then, I’m going to kill myself the way Ben-WAH did, because I don’t deserve to live on this planet with fine people like Archie.

ARE YOU HAPPY NOW?

By Mara

June 29, 2007 12:44 PM | Link to this

Archie - bringing Mara’s friend to your house and you’re married. If Mara’s friend really did not know he was married there’s a chance she would just stop by—when his wife was home

I don’t know about you, but I don’t even stop by my BFF’s house without calling first to make sure she’s home. I was taught that it wasn’t polite to “just drop by”. My friend is the same way. And with the proliferation of cell phones, it’s easy enough to say “I’m not home right now. How about if I stop by your house when I get done here?”

I still think it’s a copout to say well “he was one took the vows”

I think lozen’s point was that he was the one in whom trust was invested, not the “other woman”. As I noted previously, neither party would have anything to be proud of, but I personally would be far more angry with my partner than with the woman he cheated simply for that reason. I also agree with lozen that “society judges women much more harshly than it judges men about infidelity (or anything having to do with sexuality)”.

on your other point about women accepting some blame for problems in relationships - people are people. Women are as likely to be rotten as men are, but the rotten men are more likely to cause physical harm than are women.

By Dumb Male

June 29, 2007 12:46 PM | Link to this

lozen, please enlighten me why Bill Clinton continues to get a free pass from the Libs—especially the women Libs—for his open infidelity??

Also, I’d like for Mara to explain her attraction to the doctor on the show “House”. I’m not a fan, but I understand that he is basically an unrepentant sociopath. Ditto for the Jack Bauer character for the lady fans of the show “24”. Ditto for all the ladies who get hot and bothered by watching football games.

Finally, why did both Charles Manson and Ted Bundy attract large fan clubs of women after they were convicted of horrible crimes?

You women keep saying that you don’t support male misbehaviors and that you’re not a part of the problem in any way, but I gotta wonder….

By Homey Rogers

June 29, 2007 12:59 PM | Link to this

There goes the ‘hood.

By MrRogers

June 29, 2007 1:18 PM | Link to this

Thanks, Homey, saved me a whole bunch of keystrokes.

By Dumb Male

June 29, 2007 1:46 PM | Link to this

ARE YOU HAPPY NOW?

kimberly—You have everything a good man is looking for: brains, beauty, spirituality, and a heart of gold. Forget about the past and look forward to your bright future, will you?

By JokesOn

June 29, 2007 1:49 PM | Link to this

Dude, because a person commits a wrong choice does not mean they are responsible for killed, period.

That statement is not what I said. Partly responsible for the outcome would be accurate.

Dude, because a person commits a wrong choice does not mean they are responsible for killed, period.

….partially….

I sure am not totally innocent.

What would you do/say if your daughter started dating a guy who physically abuse his last girlfriend? Why would you say “X” if she is not partially responsible for the choices she makes and what that brings her?

By JokesOn

June 29, 2007 1:54 PM | Link to this

I am 47 btw.

Old enough to learn that blaming others for the trouble I have received from their actions, no matter how wrong, does not change the fact that I am only in control of my actions.

Ever hear of ALANON? Know why it exists? I agree with the AA model when regarding ones own and others behavior.

By Joeho Toms

June 29, 2007 2:04 PM | Link to this

Uwil pay drtbg. Great site!

By Mara

June 29, 2007 2:19 PM | Link to this

Also, I’d like for Mara to explain her attraction to the doctor on the show “House”…etc.

when did I ever say I was “attracted” to a the doctor on House? (I assume they are talking about the fictious “Doctor Gregory House” played by the actor Hugh Laurie?) I confess to liking the program, which is a medical drama full of science, sharp repartee, mystery, and humor. I enjoy the interaction between the characters of the entire ensemble cast. And I confess that I do find Hugh Laurie nice to look at. I also think Jesse Spencer and Omar Epps are pretty, pretty men. So? I enjoy a drama in which one of the fictitious characters is a brilliant-but-antisocial doctor. Make of it what you will (and I’m sure you will make something of it).

By JokesOn

June 29, 2007 2:27 PM | Link to this

Women are as likely to be rotten as men are, but the rotten men are more likely to cause physical harm than are women.

3 weeks ago I would have completely agreed with that statement. But I found that physical domestic violence is nearly a 50/50 ratio, it just does not get reported by males bc they are in no real danger due to the physical size difference - unless the woman decides to use crazy glue and a knife while sleeping.

I would be interested in the number of time a guys have been slapped versus women. Oddly, it is perfectly socially acceptable to slap a guy that says something rude to a woman.

By Don%

June 29, 2007 2:33 PM | Link to this

Mara—Let me complete my argument for you. The reality of dating and mating is that ultimately, the woman chooses the man, not the other way around. And the first thing every “nice guy” learns in life is that “nice guys” are almost never chosen by the hot chicks. They seem to like the as-sholes. What’s your opinion?

By Mara

June 29, 2007 2:37 PM | Link to this

please enlighten me why Bill Clinton continues to get a free pass from the Libs—especially the women Libs—for his open infidelity

I’m not lozen but how “open” could it have been if it took a congressional investigation and millions of tax-payer dollars to find out about it?

By Archie

June 29, 2007 2:46 PM | Link to this

Mara, Lozen she made her point well but I disagreed with her slightly and only slightly* think lozen’s point was that he was the one in whom trust was invested, not the “other woman”. As I noted previously, neither party would have anything to be proud of, but I personally would be far more angry with my partner than with the woman he cheated simply for that reason.* Since I am on a woman to woman blog I would have expected more answers like the one you gave yesterday. I used to drop by my then girlfriend’s house without calling but I knew her schedule.

I like this: Anyone (female or male) who cheats on their spouse or partner is without honor and worthy only of contempt. If the person they are cheating with knows they are in a relationship, they are just as contemptable.

I will admit some guys are pretty smooth but how she could come over and never suspect anything is amazing because there are pictures of me an my spouse as a couple present as soon as you come in. Maybe some sociologist should take a survey to see who is judged more harsh in today’s world when it comes anything sexual. I will admit that my spouse feels like Lozen when it comes to the judging of women and since that’s the case that’s why I asked about apologies. I have always said men are more likely to cause physical harm but for me my issue was when do women acknowledge wrong and accept culpability and you and Lozen answered my questions satisfactorily. We don’t have to agree on everything but both Mara and Lozen,”womaned-up” which is a pleasant thing on this blog. Neither Lozen or Mara took my post out of context. Now for JokesOn Partly responsible for the outcome would be accurate. You cannot be 47 and say that because a murdered person is not responsible for that outcome,period. Now, women should be blamed for calling up Charles Manson while he is in the jailhouse, I mean my goodness. Also Monica Lewinsky has got to be blamed for her behavior, I mean she has never acknowledged the fact that she never had the right to be with Clinton in the first place. He has apologized publicly and said he did it because he could. Lewinsky has never acknowledged any wrongdoing and she still thinks the man was going to leave his wife. She is 32 or 33. Please see Mara’s comments above. I do agree that you are only in control of your actions and that’s exactly why a man or woman is not partially responsible for being murdered. Here in SC a man killed his wife of 50 plus years, but keep in mind she was sick and his mental capacity was gone so you see she did not have the capacity to make a choice and from my understanding the incident has been treated as a mental health issue on his part so like Lozen said each situation is different which is why I think you have lost the debate. You can easily beat that Whiley thing JokesOn but I think Mara and Lozen have little more logic. Also if you really are 47 I apologize.

By Mom

June 29, 2007 2:48 PM | Link to this

There are many types of violence, some not so obvious as others. If we compare women in Muslim countries to women in the West, you’d say it’s obvious that the Muslim women are subjected to violence constantly - war, genocide, systematic rape; punishment for learning to read or wearing anything other than a burka; being sold into marriage or sexual servitude as young children; and the horrible practice of female genital mutilation. Men in those countries won’t even shake hands with women sent to represent our government. Women can’t leave their homes unescorted because of the possibility they’ll be abducted, raped and killed. A woman’s own family may murder her if they feel she has dishonored them in some way. A woman’s in-laws may murder her if her dowry isn’t large enough. No human should live in these conditions for any reason. Women in America suffer violence as well, though it is rarely as overt as it is in the Middle East. If your husband beats you to death while the police sit outside in their car and do nothing, are you luckier than a woman forced to wear a burka? If you are gang raped and video taped by your classmates and the courts don’t punish your attackers, are you luckier than a girl not allowed to go to school?

Right now there is the case against Genarlow Wilson, the young man who is still in prison for having sex with a 15 year old when he was 17.
The uproar is why should a 17 year old be punished & considered a sex offender for life for having sex with another teenager? The answer is, which nobody seems to care about is this: Genarlow was one of a couple of THUGS that were giving drugs & alchohol to 15 year old CHILDREN. They thought it was hilarious to get them very intoxicated, stand around & watch a young girl getting gang banged while they all stood around filming it & laughing. It was clearly a crime & all those boys should be punished to the full extent of the law.

The media fails to leave out those details of course. Why do have teenage boys that think this type assault is acceptable? It is so sad, & even sadder the media won’t tell the entire story.

By Reason

June 29, 2007 3:03 PM | Link to this

I’m not lozen but how “open” could it have been if it took a congressional investigation and millions of tax-payer dollars to find out about it?

Answer: Everyone knew about it, it took millions of taxpayer dollars for him to lie about it to the public under oathe.

By Archie

June 29, 2007 3:05 PM | Link to this

This Mom person has me fired up because the truth is the young lady admitted the sex was consensual, consensual. Don’t be an idiot but perhaps this Mom is another alias for that Whiley thing. There are plenty of women including some that write for this newspaper that support Wilson and even the girls mom has spoken up for Wilson. If you’re going to contribute then contribute something that makes sense. Hell that many women can’t be wrong because they have been through the bad relationships, wrongful touching, etc. If women are backing Genarlow then I can’t see what the problem is and I dare say it’s the men that are keeping Genarlow in jail. On that issue most women have stood up quite well.

By Mara

June 29, 2007 3:09 PM | Link to this

Don% - sorry to hear that the only women you seem to meet are bitter, suspicious, and ugly…or so I gather from your two posts.

As for why “hot chicks” don’t choose “nice guys”…don’t know as that is true. If the “nice guy” is also a great-looking guy, my bet is that he won’t have any problem attracting “hot chicks”. Birds of a feather and all that…

Ever seen the movie “Hitch”? In my experience, lovely women are more likely to date a sweet-but-not-terribly-attractive man than a handsome man is to gravitate toward a plain-looking woman.

By Nice Guy

June 29, 2007 3:15 PM | Link to this

Wah wah wah…. Girls dont like me they only like aholes. I lie to girls so they will think I am a ahole to but I am not raelly an ahole when I do it because I am different. Why do they hate me? Wah wah.

By Dumb Male

June 29, 2007 3:33 PM | Link to this

Don% - sorry to hear that the only women you seem to meet are bitter, suspicious, and ugly…or so I gather from your two posts.

Not the case, Mara. I’ve met—and dated—all kinds of ladies, both bitter and non-bitter, suspicious and non-suspicious, super-attractive and plain in looks. And, rightly or wrongly, I didn’t treat each of them the same. The ones I perceived as being bitter and suspicious, despite my best efforts to treat them well, I ultimately became angry and frustrated with and didn’t treat well in the end. I’m not proud of that, and am trying to be a more compassionate person in life and not take such things so personally.

By Mom

June 29, 2007 3:35 PM | Link to this

A 15 year old girl is a child that cannot give consent especially under the influence of drugs & alcohol. That young girl probably feels like it is her fault another person is in jail, even tho it was the young man that committed the crime. It is made worse by the fact those thugs were providing illegal drugs & alcohol & thought gang banging a 15 year old drunk child while video taping it was funny. That is all I’m saying. They participated & filmed a sexual assault of an underage girl whom they provided illegal drugs & alcohol to. Horrifying.

By Mara

June 29, 2007 3:40 PM | Link to this

Archie - how she could come over and never suspect anything is amazing because there are pictures of me an my spouse as a couple present as soon as you come in

Well…I guess it’s all in your taste in decorating. Some folks have bare walls with nary a picture on them. And me… well, I suppose you would find it odd to walk into my home because there’s not a single personal portrait displayed. Not even our wedding pictures. We do have a lot of photographs but they’re all in albums tucked into the credenza, nice and tidy. What we do have on the walls are paintings. A couple oils, some multi-media, three pretty nice water-colors…things that we’ve fallen in love with that give us pleasure to look at.

I find it odder for people to “gallery” their photo’s than I do for them to NOT have any pictures. But that’s just my decorating taste.

By Mara

June 29, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this

okay. I answered a post by Don%, who turns out to be Dumb Male, who in turn will be unmasked as…JokesOn or Dog, I suppose.

Nice way to illustrate how one lying sack-of-crud can affect someones decision on whether to be open and welcoming to new peole or to just call it a waste of time even talking to them…

I’m disgusted and I’m outta here. Jerk.

By JokesOn

June 29, 2007 4:04 PM | Link to this

each situation is different

I agree, which is why I was speaking of situations where the person was sane and knew of the issues involved.

By Archie

June 29, 2007 4:05 PM | Link to this

Mara hang in there for a few more minutes because it’s good to talk to an intelligent female. Sometimes on this blog you just don’t get that. You have disagreed with me but made your points well. This Mom person on the other hand completely ignores the fact that other women have supported Genarlow Wilson completely. Women willingly take drugs at all ages and they do all kinds of rotten things as Mara says so I think all of these troll like things need to go. Each time we have a reasonable debate some nut comes along and takes things out of context. There is no way I believe some of those posting are as old as they say they are because experience teaches a few things.

By JokesOn

June 29, 2007 4:22 PM | Link to this

okay. I answered a post by Don%, who turns out to be Dumb Male, who in turn will be unmasked as…JokesOn or Dog, I suppose.

You “suppose” wrong frequently. Scorn of a woman they say. Like camels, they hold a grudge even when it hurts them more than others.

Not seeing the intelligence in Mara Archie to be honest, but my opinion is all.

By ANGIE

June 29, 2007 4:30 PM | Link to this

It’s odd that Diane can see the importance of the lives of even cockroaches but thinks unborn human children are fair game to be killed. One is “inhumane” and the other is a legal right to kill your own child.

What’s sick is that people will be upset over a premature baby dumped in a garbage can but wouldn’t bat an eye over one killed in the womb a the same gestation.

Legalized abortion is just one more thing that has contributed greatly to people devaluing human life.

Save the turtles…save the whales… Save a baby…go to jail!

Hypocritical don’t you think?

Same old blog…have a nice weekend.

By Mom

June 29, 2007 4:43 PM | Link to this

Archie should a 15 year old child’s rapist not be convicted because she made a mistake? Because her parents did not supervise her properly or warn her enough about drugs & boys? Sexual assault of a drunk person, particularly a child is a crime. Videotaping the crime makes it even worse. The public is not getting the full story here. The fact that a 15 year old child took drugs that were given to her does not mean the gang rape of a minor child should not be prosecuted.

Even OJ had supporters. The public is not getting all the facts. Plus there are a lot of people out there that don’t think getting a 15 year old drunk by older boys while gang banging her while taping it is a bad thing either.

I can see you think it’s a cool thing to do too & not a big deal.

By Dumb Male

June 29, 2007 4:49 PM | Link to this

Not seeing the intelligence in Mara Archie to be honest, but my opinion is all.

JokesOn—I will say that Mara is more mellow than when I first came to the blog. She uses sarcasm and mockery far less than she used to, and has cut back on her unnecessary use of “big words”.

I still think you should give kimberly more credit, though, JokesOn. Whether you agree or disagree with her point of view, the quality of her compositions is undeniable. If she ever decides to get serious and write a novel, I think she has a chance to become famous. Of all the bloggers, it is she who has made me think the most and re-evaluate my own weaknesses and hypocrisies. She’s one tough cookie.

By lozen

June 29, 2007 4:55 PM | Link to this

“Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realize we cannot eat money.” —Cree Indian Saying

By lozen

June 29, 2007 5:03 PM | Link to this

Angie, neither Diane nor anyone I know who supports abortion rights for women believe “unborn human children are fair game to be killed.” A fetus is not a child. A woman who is pregnant is the only person who can decide whether a child born to her at this time will be okay. I truly hope you are working to change what’s going on in this country so that people (young people especially) have access to birth control and birth control information, and that research money is available to improve birth control methods until we have something that’s 100% effective. That’s the way to stop abortion.

By JokesOn

June 29, 2007 5:12 PM | Link to this

I still think you should give kimberly more credit, though, JokesOn. Whether you agree or disagree with her point of view, the quality of her compositions is undeniable.

I really don’t mind the disagreeing. You know that first hand. It is the “putting words in ones mouth” and sarcasm coupled by the “hey don’t call names” double standard that I find total bull. Cake and eat it too seems the rule with these women.

What does impress me is the ability to discuss a point, even when you do not agree with it and explore other angles than the ones that come easily to you. I showed that by adhering to whileys original premise. That was the basis of the debate, until it no longer served her purpose and she choose to put loaded words in my mouth starting all that hoopla. No-one showed the awareness to understand the topic was derailed by whileys screwyness again.

This happens with everyone when they deal with her. She tricks you with a sane question and freaks out 2-3 posts into the topic; beginning her “vagina-hater routine.”

By Don%

June 29, 2007 5:14 PM | Link to this

The All-Time W2W greatest blogs:

Thank you for sharing here on W2W.