9
   

Is the Head of the IMF a Sex Criminal?

 
 
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sat 28 May, 2011 04:22 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
hawk--does it not bother you a little, and Bill, that ff seems much more eager to take on your arguments that she does mine. Mine she just says don't interest her which is a common way out. Very common in fact.

I haven't been arguing anything--I really have been trying to discuss the DSK case.
Hawkeye made a half-hearted attempt to discuss the DSK case before using it as a springboard to go into his usual feminist/unjust laws rant. BillRM still can't get over the false accusations he claims his first wife made against him, so his interest in DSK is only in assuming the maid is lying and wants to get rich. And you don't really seem to want to discuss the DSK case at all, and your general musings really don't interest me.

So, don't feel left out, Spendi. I don't find any of you particularly interesting. But, I am flattered that all three of you seem to be vying for my attention. I just can't return the compliment.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 May, 2011 04:34 pm
@hawkeye10,
Hawkeye in my opinion Firefly had a very low opinion on everyone intellect on this system but her own.

Otherwise she would not try to get away with taking the position that any law passed by any state legislator elected by the people should be view with respect.

Or that it the law is another statement she take great pleasure in, trying to imply that because it is the law it have some positive connections with reality or morals.

Then of course she thinks that her words games are so very clever that no one can see through them.

She had less respect for the fools who supported her then either you or I and for once I happen to share her low opinion of her supporters intelligent.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 May, 2011 05:14 pm
@firefly,
Well ff-- if the laws have arrived at a point where men can't take a bit of a hot-blooded grab at the admittedly extraordinary "evolved sexual characteristics" of the modern woman, driven, as Ms Perkins Gilman explained, by Darwinian natural selection, which I have little doubt you have contributed your valiant efforts to establish in your younger days, without being thrown into a cell and charged an arm and a leg, as well as being publicly humiliated by the NY "justice" business operation, it seems to me that the fear engendered in men will result in the process of the refined exaggeration of the sexual characteristics of modern women, which was very striking in the pub tonight, being a complete waste of time, money and effort even though they are designed to render men into a state similar to that of a hungry dog with a raw steak just out of reach. Unless your ideal man is a panting onlooker: of course.

The dressing table preparations for an evening on the town will become nothing more than a meaningless reflex of ingrained habit. Like compulsive hand washing. Billions of dollars to satisfy an urge to see men just pant cannot possibly be what you are aiming for because it would soon get boring.

Wouldn't it?

0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Sat 28 May, 2011 05:36 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
I just can't return the compliment.


Phew!! That should save us all risking sharing the fate of DSK. I have often felt that women offering me compliments were to be treated suspiciously.

I have always felt safer with a standoffish, snooty, educationally qualified and snobby female when attempting to get one jabbering like a lemur monkey and performing that feat Frank Harris described which I am too refined to repeat on a thread such as this.

Stay aloof. We can cope. Don't forget though that you need somebody to boss and humiliate. And love.

I never laughed so much for weeks as I did when Judge Obus made his dramatic statements. I save my serious side for Joplin.

0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sat 28 May, 2011 05:51 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
So, don't feel left out, Spendi. I don't find any of you particularly interesting. But, I am flattered that all three of you seem to be vying for my attention. I just can't return the compliment.
a statement proven false by your couple thousand posts in the various rape/sex law threads, with your repeated claims to be done with us but in fact every time coming back for another round. I am certain that it just kills you that you have not been able to ram your will down here, that you continue to find sustained well thought out resistance to your agenda. I also note with interest that these days more oft than not you are arguing alone, as the mob seems to have had second thoughts about the wisdom of following you. Hell, even mame now says that we have some good points....that has got to hurt.
Ionus
 
  0  
Reply Sat 28 May, 2011 06:15 pm
@firefly,
A sure indication that you are losing an argument is where you resort to cartoons . Do you think everyone is as emotionally drawn to sneering and snickering like you ? Having failed to win on an intellectual basis, you appeal to the emotions . Or is it you realise your position is not defendable and you use cartoons out of fear ?
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 May, 2011 06:27 pm
@Ionus,
Quote:
A sure indication that you are losing an argument is where you resort to cartoons .
I take it as her lame attempts to appear to fit in with us commoners, you know, those who are not as smart as her. She reminds me of when Nixon would do the same thing by trying to talk about sports during interviews, which always felt forced...off.
0 Replies
 
MonaLeeza
 
  2  
Reply Sat 28 May, 2011 09:58 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
I also note with interest that these days more oft than not you are arguing alone, as the mob seems to have had second thoughts about the wisdom of following you.

I think you are very wrong to make assumptions about this. There is no logic in thinking that other people's silence means you have won your argument . I for one have been reading this thread but am not joining in because I can see that its pointless to argue against such firmly entrenched misogyny. However well-reasoned and based on basic human values like fairness, empathy and compassion the arguments against you are it is clear that you will never change the hateful view of women which underpins all your arguments in this case. I suspect not many people have even been reading this thread because you and your ilk are so predictable and it's also depressing to be reminded every day that there are really people out there with such repugnant attitudes.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sat 28 May, 2011 10:39 pm
@MonaLeeza,
Quote:
I suspect not many people have even been reading this thread because you and your ilk are so predictable and it's also depressing to be reminded every day that there are really people out there with such repugnant attitudes.
There is no reason to suspect, as we are given both the post totals and the view counts. This thread gets ten views for every post, which is very healthy. We know that people are interested in this thread.
Quote:
However well-reasoned and based on basic human values like fairness, empathy and compassion the arguments against you are it is clear that you will never change the hateful view of women which underpins all your arguments in this case.
You are aware of course that I maintain that my position is the well reasoned fair empathetic and compassionate one. I have come to this position after over 25 years married to a survivor of childhood sexual assault, I was for many years active in online survivors and partner of survivor communities, I was brought up in a home with alcoholism, child neglect and domestic abuse issues, it somewhat amazes me that some many people think that they can trot out the script as if I have not heard it before and expect me to change my mind on the spot. Come up with something that I dont know, that I have not lived through, then I will take notice, and if it proves my position wrong I will change my mind, but till then I will keep my position.

Quote:
There is no logic in thinking that other people's silence means you have won your argument
Not only is silence assent but the where people choose to spend their time shows much more clearly than does what they say what they care about. I will take the fact that A2K'ers by and large leave Firefly to carry on on her own to indicate lack of support for her position, or perhaps for her. But what the **** does logic have to do with it? People are only partly logical, if you are trying to read people with your logic then you are lost.


0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 May, 2011 11:51 pm
@MonaLeeza,
Quote:
I think you are very wrong to make assumptions about this. There is no logic in thinking that other people's silence means you have won your argument . I for one have been reading this thread but am not joining in because I can see that its pointless to argue against such firmly entrenched misogyny.

"Other people's silence " just means that most of us simply think it's pointless to engage in debate with people who hate women & question everything they say, by whatever (fair or foul) means, MonaLeeza.

I have stopped arguing with them. And why not? What's the point?
What else do you do with people who appear to have a pathological hatred of half the human race?
Most of their fervent "arguments" amount to little more than that. Irrational hatred of the "opposite sex".
Any anti-women argument, from whatever source, relevant to the actual thread subject or not, will be produced, non-stop.
Personally, I can't figure out why some women here continue to attempt to try to have a civilized discourse with men who are so obviously determined to be unreasonable & uncivilized.
For the record, I actually like most of the men I come into contact with, in my everyday dealings in the world out there.
I don't hate or despise them as some sort of enemy "group".
You really have to wonder what causes such persistent jaundiced thinking from the tiny number of men on this forum who are relentlessly pushing their own obscure agendas.
Most of us just want to get along, as human beings, as best we can.
Why is that so hard for this tiny number of men here to understand & accept that?
Beats me. Confused

0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 12:35 am
msolga wrote:
Why is that so hard for this tiny number of men here to understand & accept that?


The exact same thing can be said about a tiny number of women...
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 12:39 am
@Francis,
Really?

Do you actually think so, Francis?

Do you actually think that is reflected in the thread discussions here?

I don't think so.
Francis
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 12:50 am
@msolga,
Really, msolga.

I use to ponder both sides' arguments.

And, as usually, both sides have valid points.

But they go to such stretches that it's not even worth discussing..

Fight with pigs and you both get dirty, but pigs like it..
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 12:51 am
@Francis,
Quote:
The exact same thing can be said about a tiny number of women...


And what exactly do you object to in the words of this "tiny number of women", Francis?
Francis
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 01:08 am
@msolga,
I do object to any argument that would make different the treatment of men and women.

In this case, man and woman are treated quite differently.

I don't know if DSK commited a crime, felony or whatever.

He was (is) treated as guilty.

I don't know if the accuser was victim of rape, rape attempt or whatever.

She is protected a lot more.

If DSK commited a crime, let him rot in prison.

But if he is innocent, how can you restablish his good reputation?

If the accuser lied, why is that that she will not rot in prison?

My objection is that some people here find it perfectly acceptable...
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 01:32 am
@Francis,
Quote:
I do object to any argument that would make different the treatment of men and women.

In this case, man and woman are treated quite differently.


You honestly can't see that there was some difference between the two, in terms of the evidence that we all now know about, Francis?

Quote:
If DSK commited a crime, let him rot in prison.

Why not wait for the court case to happen, then?

Quote:
My objection is that some people here find it perfectly acceptable...

I find the process of the law quite acceptable.
What other process (including forensic evidence) would you accept, to establish guilt or innocence, instead?
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 01:38 am
@Francis,
At some point Francis you are going to have no choice but to hold your nose and admit that the swine have a point, that the power redistribution effort carried out by the state of America against its citizens in the name of equality has in fact become a source of injustice, as the state rewards the "special" people at the expense of those who would have gained the rewards under the old system of meritocracy, the producers.

There are only two groups who do well in America now, those who already have money, and those who are willing to play the victim. The rest of us suffer at the hands of the state, as our rights are continually abused. What about those who work hard and play by the rules as Clinton famously championed? We are the chumps in this story, screwed six ways till Sunday by our government.
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 01:41 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
At some point Francis you are going to have no choice but to hold your nose and admit that the swine have a point,

Exactly who are you referring to as "swine"?
0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 01:44 am
@msolga,
msolga wrote:
You honestly can't see that there was some difference between the two, in terms of the evidence that we all now know about, Francis?

No, I honestly can't.

The evidence provided was only provided in terms of media show, not in terms of justice.

msolga wrote:
Why not wait for the court case to happen, then?

That's what I'm doing, unlike the tiny group of men and women here.


msolga wrote:
I find the process of the law quite acceptable.
What other process would you accept, to establish guilt or innocence, instead?

I don't find it is a law process, it's a media show, intended for the public to judge beforehand.

I would find it quite equitable if one identity is hold, the other should be too.

Then, let the justice proceed according to the laws of the state..
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 02:05 am
@Francis,
Well, Francis, I have no particular barrow to push regarding his guilt or innocence.

There is a clear difference, in my understanding, between what some elements of the media might be saying & what would actually be admissible as evidence in a court of law.

What do you actually object to, in terms of the case this man is required to respond to in a court of law, compared to your objection to media speculation?

Do you believe there is a case he should answer to or not?

 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Friends don't let friends fat-talk - Discussion by hawkeye10
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/08/2021 at 12:45:20