Women Are Not Trash...Women Are NOT Disposable

I usually recycle my women after I have finished using them... although I must admit, sometimes separating them is too much work. I tried reusing them, but I always forget them and I ended with too many of them stored under my kitchen sink.

That's because they're inflatable.

There is Absolutely NOTHING HUMOROUS ABOUT YOUR REPLY
My post is a Very, Very, Serious Post, and Subject Matter, and thus the reason for it being posted.

I agree with you about the lack of humour in Max's post but I have to say your post doesn't sound serious and reasoned at all.

You're talking about something that happened a number of years ago, you're very vague about what happened, (not everybody follows links,) you jump to conclusions about what it means and then you post in a very accusatory manner.

What has anyone on A2K got to do with the incident in question?

Nobody is going to argue that women are trash and disposable even if they think they are.

Responses like Max's that mock posts like this are the ones you're most likely to get because you sound a bit deranged.

Try to talk in a more reasoned and sober manner and don't be so vague. You might get some sensible responses that way.

Firstly I this is a ABLE TO KNOW (a2k) as you abbreviated, is discussion forum, and thus I have brought the the attention of the readers,
How Women are Not disposable... I thoughts regarding the subject, matter.

I am NOT deranged, and any normal, and clear minded individual, and easily ascertain, from reading the post.

You on the other hand, in your reply to me seem to have a negative connotation , and motive, I only speak, and articulate, in reasonable terms, and thus have had many, many compliments, on my ability to accurately verbalize, articulate, communicate effectively.

The responses are what people are thinking at the time, and thus he expressed, and conveyed, his opinion, in a non-humorous manner.

And I did not find, any humor in the reply, and anyone can clearly see that there was nothing accusatory, or jumping to conclusion as you say.

You say "talk in a more sober manner"
I am very sober because I don't Drink...

Think you incorrect on this one

If you are starting a discussion on whether or not women are disposable, you have to be open to the contrary position (or what is the point in even starting the discussion).

I am taking the position that women are disposable.

Izzy is always negative, ignore him. If you want to make your case that women arent disposable, you might want to start with some facts.

I can't see anything regarding the post you refer to here:
"THIS IS A REPOSTED ONLINE DISCUSSION MESSAGE FROM MYSELF SEVERAL YEARS AGO"

Your profile indicates you have been a member since 19 November 2019.......is it possible you were a member of A2K at a different time under a different name? Or maybe this is post from a different forum?

I'm not arguing with you, I just don't know what you are referencing. Violence against women is a serious issue, it is not a joking matter, I certainly agree with you. Violence has been increasing in this country so rapidly I can't keep up. School children are practicing how to hide in case an active shooter targets their schools, It's mind-numbly dreadful.

Maybe you could repost the entire beginning of the thread you are referencing. I'm not sure what else to suggest.

This is factually incorrect.

Violent crimes committed against women have been decreasing every year since the 1990s and is now at an all time low. Violence against men has increased slightly in the past 4 years, but is down significantly from the 1990s.

At least get your facts straight. Liberal hand wringing outrage shouldn't change your grip on reality.

I find it a little amusing to see outrage feminists thumb down a post showing violence against women on the decline. I think they would prefer more violence against women.... it is good for their narrative.

The sentence you are nit-picking is gender neutral.

You said violence is increasing. The facts say it is decreasing. You were factually wrong.

That is hardly nit picking. Facts matter. Violence against women, and violence in general, are both going down. I would hope this good news makes you happy.

The issue would be your "facts" only show to 2003. Hate to break the news to you but this is 17 years into the past. Please provide updated statistics to prove this decline you speak of.

Yes, facts do matter. As long as it's relevant to the time period in question.

Not all women have this much trouble using Google, Neptune. In at least this case, I am not claiming your gender has anything to do with it.

(Max... spends about 16 seconds searching google).



https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/17/facts-about-crime-in-the-u-s/

In all serious I think that outrage feminists have a problem with facts that contradict their narrative even when it is good news. Neptune and Glitterbag should be happy that violence is going down rather than sticking their heads in the sand.

I guess good news isn't appreciated by people who live in a continual state of entitled outrage.

You're the one who brought it graphs and "facts." So, at least be accurate with the **** you spew. The link you provided is for property crime, not crimes against women. Cherry picking data to fit your narrative seems in character for you.

Can't you read Neptune? The first graph up there is for "violent crime". Do you see it?

Glitterbag's claim was that violent crime was increasing. I have now posted two graphs showing that violent crime is actually decreasing for the past 20 years through last year.

Do you want to take your shot at googling?

Neptune, Your eagerness to see more violence against women illustrates my point perfectly. Your outrage is more important to you than facts, or even results.

I am happy when violence against women, and violence in general decreases.

All you have to do is google Federal Govt statistics on violent crime. There are a ton of stats you can see. I can't seem to transfer the data to A2K. But it is available up thru 2018.