The Misogynists Handbook
Jessy.00000101.00111100.00000011
the interest it deserves.
As a suggestion, perhaps you could post your new sections there as well.
"Lester Burnham" <indu...@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:3CBBF011...@swbell.net...
> Hi there guys and girls,
>
> I am a retired psychotherapist writing a book for men about dealing with
> women. I am posting different parts of it to this and some other
> newsgroups. Flames, feedback, critiques and support os appreciated.
>
> Here is the introduction
>
> copyright 2002 Lester Burnham
>
> Men today, more than any other time in history, face a quandary with
> women that seems beyond resolution. We are driven to pursue them by
> forces of nature beyond our control, yet, if we are speaking honestly,
> most of us find relationships with them much more difficult and
> troublesome than they are worth.
>
> Seldom does our experience with women match our hopes for what that
> experience could have been. Most of us enter relationships with the
> reasonable and healthy expectation of partnership, friendship and above
> all, harmony. Few of us have realized this. Most of us become
> embroiled in emotional messiness and control games that we could do
> without. Sadly, many of us struggle futilely while our partner's
> dramatics, selfishness, manipulation and insatiability suck the life and
> the goodness out of the relationship.
>
> Our experience with this is universal. I've met very few, if any, men
> who couldn't identify with wondering just what, if anything, would make
> her more than transiently happy. Most men I have talked to know too
> well the exhausting tension of waiting for the next episode of what she
> is upset about and why it is his fault.
>
> It seems to be our lot in life. When I have questioned men about their
> unusually high tolerance for this, they usually write it off to the cost
> of being in a relationship. Most men cope with it as best they can.
> Often they find themselves jumping through hoops, trying to maintain
> peace. Or worse, they assume they are actually doing something wrong,
> trying harder each time to find the right words, actions or jewelry to
> quiet the turmoil.
>
> It rarely works. More often it is just a cycle of repetitive and
> predictable problems.
>
> Such directness about women is difficult, even dangerous. Like life in
> the old Soviet Union, there is a party line on matters of gender, and
> most of us march to it without much thought. And though we might not
> admit it, most of us who actually do think about it are too afraid to
> say anything.
>
> With good reason.
>
> Saying what needs to be said carries risks. Women will hate this book.
> In fact, most of them would likely toss it into a fire before they
> finish this introduction. They will undoubtedly hate me for writing it,
> and will hate you for reading it if you are not smart enough to keep it
> with the porn you have hidden away.
>
> Why? Because in these pages you will read a lot of truths that they
> would just as soon you not know about. It will arm you with ways to
> attract women and keep them around with a lot more peace of mind than
> you are probably used to. Most importantly, it will put you on to the
> games that you are likely used to losing, and in fact, enable you to
> win.
>
> If you are looking for a way to make yourself more emotionally
> available, more in touch with your feelings and more sensitive to the
> needs of women, then you'll want to toss this book in the fire
> yourself. Better yet, go get your money back and save it for a hooker
> because thinking like you think, your probably not getting laid anyway.
>
> If you are looking for a way to find the right woman and live happily
> ever after, then that is a trip to the fireplace as well. I can't claim
> to help with any such lofty ambitions. Nor do I believe anyone who says
> they can. Finding such relationship bliss is exceedingly rare, at best,
> and likely more to chance than the best of planning.
>
> However, if you are interested in attracting more and better women,
> while hanging on to your peace of mind, keep reading. Or if you want to
> hang on to more sanity in the relationship you have, you're in the right
> place. The information is here if you are willing to make use of it.
>
> Make no mistake about it, though; you are starting with two distinct
> disadvantages. The first is biology. You are unfortunately hard-wired
> to pursue women whilst they enjoy being pursued. You've been programmed
> to do this by impressing them. It is not your fault; it's in your
> genes. Blame God if you want to, but it won't do you any good. What
> you can do, however, is learn way to impress women that are more
> successful and less costly than you are used to. And by costly, I am
> referring to your heart and your ego as well as your wallet. There's
> more on this in the chapters ahead.
>
> The second disadvantage you have is the sexual politics of our times.
> You are living in an age when most men feel forced to start
> relationships on the defensive. For a lot of men, first dates feel more
> like job interviews or background checks than the pursuit of romance.
> You are likely to feel scrutinized, screened actually; to make sure you
> are not a drunk, drug addict, woman beater, stalker or other form of
> human refuse bent on making her life miserable.
>
> The reason for this is simple. It is plainly obvious that the great
> majority of men are not the realization of her fears. But, over the
> past thirty years, we have succumbed to a neurotic and distorted view of
> men and women. The details and history of all this is not really
> important. But understanding the reality of it is crucial. Our
> unconscious views of men and women not only color our perspective, they
> drive our behavior.
>
> These ideas about the sexes have been injected into our culture, and our
> minds, in a barrage of repetitive sound bites and clichés. It may be
> expressed a thousand different ways, but the conclusions are invariably
> the same:
>
> Women are loyal and men fear commitment.
> Women are oppressed and men are oppressors.
> Women are emotional pillars and men are emotionally unavailable.
> Women are victims and men are victimizers.
> Women are peaceful and men are violent.
> Women are powerless and men are power hungry.
>
> In short, women are good and men are bad.
>
> Embracing these absurdly narrow and distorted views has two results. The
> first is superficial acceptance. We are actually recognized for being
> enlightened if we claim to subscribe to these stereotypes. The second
> result is the reality of always being at a disadvantage with women. If
> we are indeed worthy of such caution, then they are justified in
> treating us all as dogs till proven otherwise. As long as we deify women
> and demonize men, we can expect the mere illusion of their acceptance
> and the reality of their ridicule and dominance.
>
> Consciously rejecting this feminized political nonsense is all that is
> needed to start. There is no need to address it past that point. In
> fact, it is sexual suicide to even discuss it with women. Intrinsic to
> modern women's identity is the idea that they are victims and that the
> world, meaning men, owe them something for it. Any attempt top shatter
> this illusion is self-defeating. It is enough that you know it and can
> be mindful of it in dealing with them. Besides, there are practical
> matters that serve a more useful purpose. It is the pragmatic and
> informed approach to women that will get you more of what you really
> want, and little else.
>
> I run the risk of making all this sound easy. It isn't. At best, it is
> a challenge. For men who are plagued with a pathological fear of
> rejection, it will be nearly impossible. But regardless of where you
> are starting, I assure you it works, if you can keep your expectation
> based in reality and if you can summon the balls to follow through.
>
> Happy hunting.
>
>
>
>
>
Lester Burnham
post the follow ups to both lists.
Lester
Andre Lieven
> Hi Lester, I am forwarding this to soc.men, where it will be critiqued with
> the interest it deserves.
> As a suggestion, perhaps you could post your new sections there as well.
Fair enough. Comments follow within the body of the introduction.
> "Lester Burnham" <indu...@swbell.net> wrote in message
> news:3CBBF011...@swbell.net...
>> Hi there guys and girls,
>>
>> I am a retired psychotherapist writing a book for men about dealing with
>> women. I am posting different parts of it to this and some other
>> newsgroups. Flames, feedback, critiques and support os appreciated.
>>
>> Here is the introduction
>>
>> copyright 2002 Lester Burnham
>>
>> Men today, more than any other time in history, face a quandary with
>> women that seems beyond resolution. We are driven to pursue them by
>> forces of nature beyond our control, yet, if we are speaking honestly,
>> most of us find relationships with them much more difficult and
>> troublesome than they are worth.
Truth.
>> Seldom does our experience with women match our hopes for what that
>> experience could have been. Most of us enter relationships with the
>> reasonable and healthy expectation of partnership, friendship and above
>> all, harmony. Few of us have realized this. Most of us become
>> embroiled in emotional messiness and control games that we could do
>> without. Sadly, many of us struggle futilely while our partner's
>> dramatics, selfishness, manipulation and insatiability suck the life and
>> the goodness out of the relationship.
Yes.
>> Our experience with this is universal. I've met very few, if any, men
>> who couldn't identify with wondering just what, if anything, would make
>> her more than transiently happy. Most men I have talked to know too
>> well the exhausting tension of waiting for the next episode of what she
>> is upset about and why it is his fault.
>>
>> It seems to be our lot in life. When I have questioned men about their
>> unusually high tolerance for this, they usually write it off to the cost
>> of being in a relationship. Most men cope with it as best they can.
>> Often they find themselves jumping through hoops, trying to maintain
>> peace. Or worse, they assume they are actually doing something wrong,
>> trying harder each time to find the right words, actions or jewelry to
>> quiet the turmoil.
>>
>> It rarely works. More often it is just a cycle of repetitive and
>> predictable problems.
>>
>> Such directness about women is difficult, even dangerous. Like life in
>> the old Soviet Union, there is a party line on matters of gender, and
>> most of us march to it without much thought. And though we might not
>> admit it, most of us who actually do think about it are too afraid to
>> say anything.
Theres the rub. No matter the price, we have to stop being afraid.
>> With good reason.
>>
>> Saying what needs to be said carries risks. Women will hate this book.
>> In fact, most of them would likely toss it into a fire before they
>> finish this introduction. They will undoubtedly hate me for writing it,
>> and will hate you for reading it if you are not smart enough to keep it
>> with the porn you have hidden away.
<g>
>> Why? Because in these pages you will read a lot of truths that they
>> would just as soon you not know about. It will arm you with ways to
>> attract women and keep them around with a lot more peace of mind than
>> you are probably used to. Most importantly, it will put you on to the
>> games that you are likely used to losing, and in fact, enable you to
>> win.
>>
>> If you are looking for a way to make yourself more emotionally
>> available, more in touch with your feelings and more sensitive to the
>> needs of women, then you'll want to toss this book in the fire
>> yourself. Better yet, go get your money back and save it for a hooker
>> because thinking like you think, your probably not getting laid anyway.
This last sentence annoys me, and hers why. Its a very common tactic
for women and feminists to use sexual shaming in place of a refutation
of a point. I think that men, speaking in honesty, can and must do
better then that. So, I would excise that last sentence, and replace
it with something more like: " Better yet, go get your money back
and spend it on something that won't get you in more trouble with her. "
A touch of humour, tinged with the common men's experience of being in
" trouble " with the little lady, and no need to denigrate anyone's
sexuality.
When anyone, especially a woman or a feminist, makes a claim that one
said something and that it " proves that you can't get any ", its
simply not worth dignifying that non sequitor claim with acknowledgement.
Rather, one could say something like " I'm sorry you feel that way. It
must be so horrid, to be always wrapped up in what others are doing
sexually ". And, leave it at that. That way, their attempt at sexual
shaming *stays* on their end.
>> If you are looking for a way to find the right woman and live happily
>> ever after, then that is a trip to the fireplace as well. I can't claim
>> to help with any such lofty ambitions. Nor do I believe anyone who says
>> they can. Finding such relationship bliss is exceedingly rare, at best,
>> and likely more to chance than the best of planning.
Well, one useful form of planning is, when she tells you shes a
feminist... walk away.
>> However, if you are interested in attracting more and better women,
>> while hanging on to your peace of mind, keep reading. Or if you want to
>> hang on to more sanity in the relationship you have, you're in the right
>> place. The information is here if you are willing to make use of it.
Excellent.
>> Make no mistake about it, though; you are starting with two distinct
>> disadvantages. The first is biology. You are unfortunately hard-wired
>> to pursue women whilst they enjoy being pursued. You've been programmed
>> to do this by impressing them. It is not your fault; it's in your
>> genes. Blame God if you want to, but it won't do you any good. What
>> you can do, however, is learn way to impress women that are more
>> successful and less costly than you are used to. And by costly, I am
>> referring to your heart and your ego as well as your wallet. There's
>> more on this in the chapters ahead.
Good. I especially like that part about costly to the heart and the
ego. Well said.
>> The second disadvantage you have is the sexual politics of our times.
>> You are living in an age when most men feel forced to start
>> relationships on the defensive. For a lot of men, first dates feel more
>> like job interviews or background checks than the pursuit of romance.
>> You are likely to feel scrutinized, screened actually; to make sure you
>> are not a drunk, drug addict, woman beater, stalker or other form of
>> human refuse bent on making her life miserable.
>>
>> The reason for this is simple. It is plainly obvious that the great
>> majority of men are not the realization of her fears. But, over the
>> past thirty years, we have succumbed to a neurotic and distorted view of
>> men and women. The details and history of all this is not really
>> important. But understanding the reality of it is crucial. Our
>> unconscious views of men and women not only color our perspective, they
>> drive our behavior.
Indeed.
>> These ideas about the sexes have been injected into our culture, and our
>> minds, in a barrage of repetitive sound bites and clichés. It may be
>> expressed a thousand different ways, but the conclusions are invariably
>> the same:
>>
>> Women are loyal and men fear commitment.
>> Women are oppressed and men are oppressors.
>> Women are emotional pillars and men are emotionally unavailable.
>> Women are victims and men are victimizers.
>> Women are peaceful and men are violent.
>> Women are powerless and men are power hungry.
>>
>> In short, women are good and men are bad.
And, as one thing to remember is, that when you get around a woman
who buys into this crap, the fight to deprogram her will be long
and painful, and not likely to be successful. Don't try. People,
both men and women, change when they alone choose to. No one else
can " make " them.
>> Embracing these absurdly narrow and distorted views has two results. The
>> first is superficial acceptance. We are actually recognized for being
>> enlightened if we claim to subscribe to these stereotypes. The second
>> result is the reality of always being at a disadvantage with women. If
>> we are indeed worthy of such caution, then they are justified in
>> treating us all as dogs till proven otherwise. As long as we deify women
>> and demonize men, we can expect the mere illusion of their acceptance
>> and the reality of their ridicule and dominance.
Indeed. We men, as men, need to stop routinely agreeing, even if
tacitly, with any of these foul images.
>> Consciously rejecting this feminized political nonsense is all that is
>> needed to start. There is no need to address it past that point. In
>> fact, it is sexual suicide to even discuss it with women. Intrinsic to
>> modern women's identity is the idea that they are victims and that the
>> world, meaning men, owe them something for it. Any attempt top shatter
>> this illusion is self-defeating. It is enough that you know it and can
>> be mindful of it in dealing with them. Besides, there are practical
>> matters that serve a more useful purpose. It is the pragmatic and
>> informed approach to women that will get you more of what you really
>> want, and little else.
>>
>> I run the risk of making all this sound easy. It isn't. At best, it is
>> a challenge. For men who are plagued with a pathological fear of
>> rejection, it will be nearly impossible. But regardless of where you
>> are starting, I assure you it works, if you can keep your expectation
>> based in reality and if you can summon the balls to follow through.
>>
>> Happy hunting.
And, lets all be careful out there....
Andre
--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.
Jay Vonbriel
wrote:
>
>Theres the rub. No matter the price, we have to stop being afraid.
Oh, I don't know. The majority of DV abusers (men) seem to not be
afraid.
>
>
>This last sentence annoys me, and hers why. Its a very common tactic
>for women and feminists to use sexual shaming in place of a refutation
>of a point.
Sure. That's why you never see feminists called hairly legged dykes,
huh? LOL!
Lester Burnham
Joshua wrote:
> The pussy posse won't like a book like this, therefore you have a duty
> to publish it.
>
> Good luck.
<g> Indeed it is my duty to write it. I hope soneone feels the same about the
publishing end. Thanks for the support.
Lester
Lester Burnham
Countless thanks for your willingness to pitch in with the line by line. Giving
this effort appeal to men, especially those who are not as informed as the ones
in this list, is essential, and feedback like yours is invaluable to that end.
Please note my comments below.
Andre Lieven wrote:
>
>
>
> >>
> >> Such directness about women is difficult, even dangerous. Like life in
> >> the old Soviet Union, there is a party line on matters of gender, and
> >> most of us march to it without much thought. And though we might not
> >> admit it, most of us who actually do think about it are too afraid to
> >> say anything.
>
> Theres the rub. No matter the price, we have to stop being afraid.
Indeed, Andre, that is the rub. My intent in this effort is to expose the
mythological nature of that fear. I think what men are afraid of, singularly,
is rejection by women. That is why we see so many castrado apologists sucking up
to their delusions of persecution and oppression. My contention is that this
fear is not only unfounded, but contradictory to what women are actually
attracted to. Women love to publicly praise male fembots, but when it comes to
fucking someone's brains out they usually go for the guy on the Harley. Women
like the feeling of being with a man they think can protect them. It is innate.
And milquetoast girlymen who run around parroting the lies that women want to
hear do not come off at all as strong or confident enough to get the job done.
Anyway, I am sure you know this. I am just rambling through the ideas here.
>
>
>
> >>
> >> If you are looking for a way to make yourself more emotionally
> >> available, more in touch with your feelings and more sensitive to the
> >> needs of women, then you'll want to toss this book in the fire
> >> yourself. Better yet, go get your money back and save it for a hooker
> >> because thinking like you think, your probably not getting laid anyway.
>
> This last sentence annoys me, and hers why. Its a very common tactic
> for women and feminists to use sexual shaming in place of a refutation
> of a point. I think that men, speaking in honesty, can and must do
> better then that. So, I would excise that last sentence, and replace
> it with something more like: " Better yet, go get your money back
> and spend it on something that won't get you in more trouble with her. "
Well put and 100% accurate, IMO. I was actually attempting a shot at humor here,
but the fact is you're right. Consider it cut and replaced. My first posts will
all be the rough drafts (I am at about 50,000 words so far). I'll post the final
versions after several guttings and rewrites.
>
> Well, one useful form of planning is, when she tells you shes a
> feminist... walk away.
Hey!!! That is in chapter 3!!! ;-)
>
>
> And, as one thing to remember is, that when you get around a woman
> who buys into this crap, the fight to deprogram her will be long
> and painful, and not likely to be successful. Don't try. People,
> both men and women, change when they alone choose to. No one else
> can " make " them.
Well put and very insightful, IMO. It all goes back to a truism I subscribe to.
The only person you can change is yourself. This faulty thinking in women is
intractable and impervious to outside influence. Indeed, for most women in
Western culture, abandoning their roles as victims is to rob them of the only
identity they know. They are not going to do it. Ever. More to be said on that
in the book. Fair enough to say that the mistake most men who are enlightened
about this stuff make is trying to argue about it with them. It makes for fun
and interesting times in newsgroups, but will only further muddle a
relationship. IMNSHO, men will benefit from using their knowledge quietly.
Better to build a shelter than to argue with the sky about raining.
Thanks again for your comments and suggestions, Andre. I hope to get more of
them in the future.
Lester
Ian
(As long as in the prologue you mention that women kill X times the number
of children that men do, and you publish just how much tax men pay that
women don't.)
Regards,
Ian.
"Jessy.00000101.00111100.00000011" <evilinco...@yahoo.com> wrote in
message news:gUSu8.23355$Yt.11...@read1.cgocable.net...
Lester Burnham
Thanks for the kind intent. I'd love to mention these things, but they would be
off topic for the book. I do know about women and killing children. I live in
Houston, Texas.
More to come,
Lester
Jay Vonbriel
wrote:
> I do know about women
Doubt that.
>and killing children.
Well maybe you know about that.
>I live in
>Houston, Texas.
You have my sympathy.
Andre Lieven
> Hi Andre,
>
> Countless thanks for your willingness to pitch in with the line by line.
You're quite welcome. Its what we do, here.
> Giving this effort appeal to men, especially those who are not as
> informed as the ones in this list, is essential, and feedback like yours
> is invaluable to that end.
Conversations are a great tool for learning...
> Please note my comments below.
>
> Andre Lieven wrote:
>
>> >> Such directness about women is difficult, even dangerous. Like life in
>> >> the old Soviet Union, there is a party line on matters of gender, and
>> >> most of us march to it without much thought. And though we might not
>> >> admit it, most of us who actually do think about it are too afraid to
>> >> say anything.
>>
>> Theres the rub. No matter the price, we have to stop being afraid.
>
> Indeed, Andre, that is the rub. My intent in this effort is to expose
> the mythological nature of that fear.
Agreed, and that is an excellent goal.
> I think what men are afraid of, singularly, is rejection by women.
Exactly. Way too many women not only don't know or understand this
basic fact of men's lives, they hardly ever stop yammering about
*themselves* long enough for such a question to even appear on their
radar.
Consider the Toby Keith song and video " I Wanna Talk About Me "...
> That is why we see so many castrado apologists sucking up to their
> delusions of persecution and oppression. My contention is that this
> fear is not only unfounded, but contradictory to what women are actually
> attracted to.
Absolutely ! You've hit the nail exactly on the head, for the mass
of women. ( While there are many who do understand, when taken in
the whole of the NA and Western European female populations, their
overall numbers are but a small fraction of all women )
Even Dr. Phil, who, just by virtue of having to appease Oprah
each week, nonetheless, last week, sauid to the women in the audience,
that if they want their men, husbands, boyfriends, whatever, to
be like their girlfriends, that that just *wan't* going to ever
happen, nor ough it to ever happen.
> Women love to publicly praise male fembots, but when it comes to
> fucking someone's brains out they usually go for the guy on the Harley.
Thats correct. Go to any high school, and see how " well " the shy,
sensitive guys do. <sarcasm mode off>
The problem here is that what women *say* and what women *do* is
contradictory. now, over the years, I've come up with a very good,
I think, life rule that covers this sort of thing.
Its, *always* believe the *actions* over the *words*. 100% of the time.
Its in their actions where their truths really are.
> Women like the feeling of being with a man they think can protect them.
> It is innate.
Exactly. Whether they acknowledge it or consider it, or not, its always
there.
> And milquetoast girlymen who run around parroting the lies that women
> want to hear do not come off at all as strong or confident enough to
> get the job done.
Full agreement.
> Anyway, I am sure you know this.
<bg>
> I am just rambling through the ideas here.
Thats fine. These things ought to be clearly discussed, so that
anyone reading can take the opportunity to learn, if they so
choose. Its what we do here...
>> >> If you are looking for a way to make yourself more emotionally
>> >> available, more in touch with your feelings and more sensitive to the
>> >> needs of women, then you'll want to toss this book in the fire
>> >> yourself. Better yet, go get your money back and save it for a hooker
>> >> because thinking like you think, your probably not getting laid anyway.
>>
>> This last sentence annoys me, and hers why. Its a very common tactic
>> for women and feminists to use sexual shaming in place of a refutation
>> of a point. I think that men, speaking in honesty, can and must do
>> better then that. So, I would excise that last sentence, and replace
>> it with something more like: " Better yet, go get your money back
>> and spend it on something that won't get you in more trouble with her. "
>
> Well put and 100% accurate, IMO. I was actually attempting a shot at
> humor here, but the fact is you're right.
Writers who I know all tell me that funny is hard.... Thats why there
are multiple drafts, and a process such as what you offered up here.
> Consider it cut and replaced. My first posts will all be the
> rough drafts (I am at about 50,000 words so far). I'll post the final
> versions after several guttings and rewrites.
Kewl.
>> Well, one useful form of planning is, when she tells you shes a
>> feminist... walk away.
>
> Hey!!! That is in chapter 3!!! ;-)
<bg> What can I say... I channeled the chapter... :-)
>> And, as one thing to remember is, that when you get around a woman
>> who buys into this crap, the fight to deprogram her will be long
>> and painful, and not likely to be successful. Don't try. People,
>> both men and women, change when they alone choose to. No one else
>> can " make " them.
>
> Well put and very insightful, IMO.
Thank you very kindly. Life teaches many things. When we pay attention,
then we can learn some of them.
> It all goes back to a truism I subscribe to.
> The only person you can change is yourself.
Eight of the most important and most honest words ever possible in
the English language. No, thats not hype.
So many people get themselves into bad deals by trying to violate this
rule of life.
> This faulty thinking in women is intractable and impervious to outside
> influence.
Well, I do think that women can learn. Its just that, in so feminised
a culture as ours, they are emotionally rewarded for not learning
this important lesson. And, those who do learn it, are put down by
other women.
> Indeed, for most women in Western culture, abandoning their roles as
> victims is to rob them of the only identity they know.
The sad thing is that illusion of self awareness robs *them* of
better lives, as well as those near to them.
> They are not going to do it. Ever. More to be said on that in the
> book. Fair enough to say that the mistake most men who are enlightened
> about this stuff make is trying to argue about it with them.
Yeah, I think that, sadly, I have to agree with you on this, as much as
I might not want to. The women who will learn will only do it when
they will. Nothing that a man close to them can say, will change that,
anymore then a nice ol' gal, whose with a cheatin' boy, will get him
to change his ways, until *he wants to*.
> It makes for fun and interesting times in newsgroups, but will only
> further muddle a relationship.
Indeed. For any relationship to have a good shot at success, there
must be agreement on the basic life goals and values between the
couple in it. No matter the issue that is not agreed to, there
will be trouble from that issue, at some point, and bet on sooner
rather then later.
> IMNSHO, men will benefit from using their knowledge quietly.
> Better to build a shelter than to argue with the sky about raining.
Sounds good to me.
> Thanks again for your comments and suggestions, Andre. I hope to get
> more of them in the future.
Bet on it, Lester. <g> When I'm around, I do say whats on my mind...
Keep on posting, and a belated welcome !
Lester Burnham
savagely murdered. Besides, I like it here. Anyway, do you have a point
to make, or are you just a troll?
Lester
Daniel Fifth
> Your sympathy would be better placed with the children that Andrea Yates
> savagely murdered. Besides, I like it here. Anyway, do you have a point
> to make, or are you just a troll?
Jay is, as you guessed, just a troll. One of several Feminists that
hang around soc.men answering every nearly message with nastygrams.
--
When we misogynists talk about women, we mean in general, not
neccessarily categorically.
PETER BUONO
> Your sympathy would be better placed with the children that Andrea Yates
> savagely murdered. Besides, I like it here. Anyway, do you have a point
> to make, or are you just a troll?
>
> Lester
>
deletion.
Whattya folks think - another "Chive" alias.
Lester Burnham
I have placed her on terminal ignore.
Lester
Jet
Lester Burnham wrote:
>
> Hi Andre,
>
> Countless thanks for your willingness to pitch in with the line by line. Giving
> this effort appeal to men, especially those who are not as informed as the ones
> in this list, is essential, and feedback like yours is invaluable to that end.
> Please note my comments below.
>
> Andre Lieven wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > >>
> > >> Such directness about women is difficult, even dangerous. Like life in
> > >> the old Soviet Union, there is a party line on matters of gender, and
> > >> most of us march to it without much thought. And though we might not
> > >> admit it, most of us who actually do think about it are too afraid to
> > >> say anything.
> >
> > Theres the rub. No matter the price, we have to stop being afraid.
>
> Indeed, Andre, that is the rub. My intent in this effort is to expose the
> mythological nature of that fear. I think what men are afraid of, singularly,
> is rejection by women.
Gee, when I say that by saying the bitter boys are bitter because they
can't get any...
That is why we see so many castrado apologists sucking up
> to their delusions of persecution and oppression. My contention is that this
> fear is not only unfounded, but contradictory to what women are actually
> attracted to. Women love to publicly praise male fembots, but when it comes to
> fucking someone's brains out they usually go for the guy on the Harley.
Typical bitter boy line, "Women reject me because I'm just too gosh darn
nice."
Women
> like the feeling of being with a man they think can protect them. It is innate.
I must have missed that.
> And milquetoast girlymen who run around parroting the lies that women want to
> hear do not come off at all as strong or confident enough to get the job done.
>
> Anyway, I am sure you know this. I am just rambling through the ideas here.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > >>
> > >> If you are looking for a way to make yourself more emotionally
> > >> available, more in touch with your feelings and more sensitive to the
> > >> needs of women, then you'll want to toss this book in the fire
> > >> yourself. Better yet, go get your money back and save it for a hooker
> > >> because thinking like you think, your probably not getting laid anyway.
> >
> > This last sentence annoys me, and hers why. Its a very common tactic
> > for women and feminists to use sexual shaming in place of a refutation
> > of a point. I think that men, speaking in honesty, can and must do
> > better then that. So, I would excise that last sentence, and replace
> > it with something more like: " Better yet, go get your money back
> > and spend it on something that won't get you in more trouble with her. "
>
> Well put and 100% accurate, IMO. I was actually attempting a shot at humor here,
> but the fact is you're right. Consider it cut and replaced. My first posts will
> all be the rough drafts (I am at about 50,000 words so far). I'll post the final
> versions after several guttings and rewrites.
>
> >
> > Well, one useful form of planning is, when she tells you shes a
> > feminist... walk away.
Yeah, bitter boys hate feminism because it gives women the power to tell
them, "NO!".
J
(snip)
Jet
How would you know? Because you were a reject in HS?
>
> The problem here is that what women *say* and what women *do* is
> contradictory. now, over the years, I've come up with a very good,
> I think, life rule that covers this sort of thing.
>
> Its, *always* believe the *actions* over the *words*. 100% of the time.
> Its in their actions where their truths really are.
>
> > Women like the feeling of being with a man they think can protect them.
> > It is innate.
>
> Exactly. Whether they acknowledge it or consider it, or not, its always
> there.
>
Because you say so? I don't care about being with a man I think can
protect me. Protect me from what?
> > And milquetoast girlymen who run around parroting the lies that women
> > want to hear do not come off at all as strong or confident enough to
> > get the job done.
>
> Full agreement.
So what? That doesn't make it true.
(Snip of rest of "We agree, so it must be true" post.)
J
Jet
J
Jessy.00000101.00111100.00000011
"Jet" <thatje...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3CBD3039...@yahoo.com...
Anyone with half a brain knows that women do not usually approach men,
therefore shy men are less likely to score.
> >
> > The problem here is that what women *say* and what women *do* is
> > contradictory. now, over the years, I've come up with a very good,
> > I think, life rule that covers this sort of thing.
> >
> > Its, *always* believe the *actions* over the *words*. 100% of the time.
> > Its in their actions where their truths really are.
> >
> > > Women like the feeling of being with a man they think can protect
them.
> > > It is innate.
> >
> > Exactly. Whether they acknowledge it or consider it, or not, its always
> > there.
> >
>
> Because you say so? I don't care about being with a man I think can
> protect me. Protect me from what?
Yourself, in your case.
> > > And milquetoast girlymen who run around parroting the lies that women
> > > want to hear do not come off at all as strong or confident enough to
> > > get the job done.
> >
> > Full agreement.
>
> So what? That doesn't make it true.
>
> (Snip of rest of "We agree, so it must be true" post.)
Jet once again attempts to denigrate the efforts men make at communication.
>
> J
Lan
> Why do you hate women so much?
> J
> Ian wrote:
>> I'll donate a hundred quid to the heart research fund, if you publish
>> it.
>> (As long as in the prologue you mention that women kill X times the
>> number of children that men do, and you publish just how much tax men
>> pay that women don't.)
LOL!
Why do you call the truth hating women? Jet you dumbass female,
give up and go home. There is no way you can oppress logic and
truth, especially not on a place where freedom of speech rules.
--
Kill all feminists, make them feel the pain they are responsible for creating
so that it destroys them. Stop at nothing to make every single fucking evil
sexist female feel every thing they did do, plus everything they could have
done, and added to that everything they even ever wanted to do. DESTROY THEM
ICQ: 26027485
Lan
> Hi Ian,
> Thanks for the kind intent. I'd love to mention these things, but they
> would be off topic for the book. I do know about women and killing
> children. I live in Houston, Texas.
> More to come,
I'd say no. Because you introduced with the "women good, men bad"
cultural stereotype. Now you can disprove it.
Totally ontopic, at least as much as that introduction is.
Lan
> Your sympathy would be better placed with the children that Andrea
> Yates savagely murdered. Besides, I like it here. Anyway, do you have
> a point to make, or are you just a troll?
> Lester
Hehe. Well, 100 posts of sniping discussion-dodging and insults, and
not a single post where he addresses the logical process of a
discussion.
Yes he's a troll. I think he has an estrogen imbalance. Too much
estrogen is warping the the logic centres of his brain.
Jet
Lan wrote:
>
> Jet <thatje...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Why do you hate women so much?
>
> > J
>
> > Ian wrote:
>
> >> I'll donate a hundred quid to the heart research fund, if you publish
> >> it.
>
> >> (As long as in the prologue you mention that women kill X times the
> >> number of children that men do, and you publish just how much tax men
> >> pay that women don't.)
>
> LOL!
>
> Why do you call the truth hating women?
Strawman.
J
Max Burke
>> Lan wrote:
>> Why do you call the truth hating women?
> Strawman.
Of your making by your definition.....
This is an international debating forum specifically set up for men to discuss
issues and subjects that concern and interest them. That's why it's called
*soc.men.* Why a feminist such as yourself feels the need to dismiss, and
ridicule men doing that is something you could perhaps explain to the forum
sometime.....
----------------------
# Feminism is, above all, a crutch to lean on for those that believe in it; Only
by their professed belief in feminism can they believe in themselves.
--
mlvburke@#%&*.net.nz
Replace the obvious with paradise to email me.
See Found Images at :
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke
Lan
> Lan wrote:
>> Jet <thatje...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Why do you hate women so much?
>>> J
>>> Ian wrote:
>>>> I'll donate a hundred quid to the heart research fund, if you
>>>> publish it.
>>>> (As long as in the prologue you mention that women kill X times the
>>>> number of children that men do, and you publish just how much tax
>>>> men pay that women don't.)
>> LOL!
>> Why do you call the truth hating women?
> Strawman.
So, you are saying you do it AS a strawman approach, but WHY do you do
it as a strawman approach? You still haven't answered.
Jet, you are so damned stupid, its unbelievable, you can't even
answer a simple question STRAIGHT.
Ian
I could argue that women have no integrity or honesty, but
you're making a big assumption there. I don't hate women.
It's feminism I don't like. Women just happen to be collateral
damage.
Do I hate women? Or am I just angry that I paid $100K in tax
last year, and what has the government done for men in that
time?
I agree with the welfare state in that it helps out the people
who can't, but my definition of this is a man whose back was
broken while at work. Someone who actually tried to help himself.
Someone who isn't a leech.
My definition of tax aided support may go as far as helping
one particular group of disadvantaged out for a couple of years.
It certainly does not include a one way, never to stop almost
infinite amount of money, compounded over generations, from
one sex (male) to another (female), unless men get something
they want in return.
Justify to me Jet, exactly why you think men should pay
three or four times the tax that women do, and live seven
years less.
Explain to me why the average black man in London, does not
live to make retirement.
Explain to me why the average man in Durham, only lives for
four years after retirement.
Explain to me why the average woman lives 20 years after
retirement.
Explain to me why males killing is murder by the savage, yet
women killing is illness of the proponent.
Explain to me why I require 4 weeks notice to get a doctor's
appointment, whereas my wife can have one in under 24 hours,
when it is men who pay for it, and men who die seven years
earlier.
Explain to me why seven eighths of medical funding is spent
on women related problems.
Explain to me why fathers are displaced from the family
by law (in practice), even though mam kills five times as
many children as dad.
Explain to me exactly what I did to be told to "fuck off"
when I held a door open for one of suzanne boulins crowd
of bitches.
Explain to me why I and my fellow men are paying for women's
shelters, when women kill almost as many men in marriage as
men do wives and these women have done nothing but consume
money from the public purse.
In your explanation, please explain how the situation came
about that grannies are murdered in the streets.
Please explain how society has all of the above, and who
campaigned for it.
Explain what else feminism wants before men are given what
women already have.
Explain to me why, when it is clear to anyone that women
have no chance in a straight fight with a trained man, _I_
still have to pay money to the army for an experiment to
prove it.
Explain why Gordon Brown is taking another Ł2500 from me for
healthcare, when I already pay Ł15000 a year for that purpose.
I should get an appointment before ANY of the women who do not
work.
Explain to me why there are no intensive care beds for the
man who fell off his motorbike. It is exactly HIS taxes that
are paying for them.
Explain to me why when I have worked, at school, all my life,
and have nothing I did not earn, somehow you think it fair
that I pay some woman's rent, just because she's gone off her
husband.
Explain to me why 59% of my earning are directly taxed.
Explain to me why I should feed another woman's children.
Explain to me why feminism campaigns for more rights for women,
when men already don't have them.
Explain to me why, when it is clear that women can't cope with
raising male children, they still get custody, despite the
catastrophic effects on society. Is it because it is men that
will be taxed to repair the damage?
Explain to me why women aren't punished for failing to bring
up children properly. Yet men are punished to allow the woman
who will fail, because she isn't up to it, to do it alone,
despite the father wanting a hand in it simply because she
does not like it.
Explain to me why there is no law protecting male children
from rape by female teachers, but there is a law protecting
male children from male teachers, and protecting female
children from all teachers.
Explain to me why Gordon Brown is about to give Ł600 to single
mothers to encourage them to leave their husbands and raise the
next generation of schoolboy murderers.
Explain to me what society actually does for men, but tax them.
Explain to me what feminism has done for any man.
Explain to me what feminism intends to do about the really
fucked up society it has left us with.
Explain to me why SCUM is allowed to exist, whereas were I
to form SCUN (Society for cutting up Negroes) or SCUM (society
for cutting up muslims) or SCUJ or SCUW, then I would almost
certainly be jailed at some point.
Explain to me, why when men are better than women at just about
everything, women in court are simply given more credence, and
can just plain lie, without being prosecuted.
Explain to me how a woman can sleep around in marriage, and if
she ends up divorced, it is her husband who still pays?
All of these things were caused by feminists because they
hate men, and want nothing to do with them, but still haven't
the integrity to refuse the money. Explain to me why the want
the money, but nothing else from the man.
Explain to me why the average painter and decorator will spend
his life paying for women, and even in his death still be
paying, but society will, remove his children, take away his
rights, (and his liberty if he tries to do anything about it)
and charge him for doing so.
Explain to me, why when the average engineering graduate will
end up paying my pension and also paying the average liberal
arts graduates pension as well, he has to pay for that education.
Explain to me why if a man is attacked by his wife, it is he
that is arrested by the police.
Jet
Lan wrote:
>
> Jet <thatje...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Lan wrote:
>
> >> Jet <thatje...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>> Why do you hate women so much?
>
> >>> J
>
> >>> Ian wrote:
>
> >>>> I'll donate a hundred quid to the heart research fund, if you
> >>>> publish it.
>
> >>>> (As long as in the prologue you mention that women kill X times the
> >>>> number of children that men do, and you publish just how much tax
> >>>> men pay that women don't.)
>
> >> LOL!
>
> >> Why do you call the truth hating women?
>
> > Strawman.
>
> So, you are saying you do it AS a strawman approach, but WHY do you do
> it as a strawman approach? You still haven't answered.
And you say *I'm* stupid.
Let me explain it to you step by step. Can you count to 1?
1. I don't call the truth hating women.
>
> Jet, you are so damned stupid, its unbelievable, you can't even
> answer a simple question STRAIGHT.
Get laid, seeesh. You must have balls bluer than a pair of new jeans.
J
Giant Attitude
> healthcare, when I already pay £15000 a year for that purpose.
Do you know that I think that I could bear all of those things
stoically if it wasn't for the fact that on top of ALL of that, it is
MEN who are regarded as the oppressors?
THAT is too much to bear on top of everything else. Insult to injury.
Lan
> Lan wrote:
>> Jet <thatje...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Lan wrote:
>>>> Jet <thatje...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Why do you hate women so much?
>>>>> J
>>>>> Ian wrote:
>>>>>> I'll donate a hundred quid to the heart research fund, if you
>>>>>> publish it.
>>>>>> (As long as in the prologue you mention that women kill X times
>>>>>> the number of children that men do, and you publish just how much
>>>>>> tax men pay that women don't.)
>>>> LOL!
>>>> Why do you call the truth hating women?
>>> Strawman.
>> So, you are saying you do it AS a strawman approach, but WHY do you
>> do it as a strawman approach? You still haven't answered.
> And you say *I'm* stupid.
> Let me explain it to you step by step. Can you count to 1?
> 1. I don't call the truth hating women.
Then why did you ask why he hates women, after all he stated was the
facts.
>> Jet, you are so damned stupid, its unbelievable, you can't even
>> answer a simple question STRAIGHT.
> Get laid, seeesh. You must have balls bluer than a pair of new jeans.
Grow up you dumb shit female. What makes you women think that if you
are using sexual shaming tactics against males, then acting like 12
year old school kid jerk is OK? But otherwise its childish?
You stupid evil asshole female.
Mark Sobolewski
gianta...@my-deja.com (Giant Attitude) wrote:
> Do you know that I think that I could bear all of those things
> stoically if it wasn't for the fact that on top of ALL of that, it is
> MEN who are regarded as the oppressors?
>
> THAT is too much to bear on top of everything else. Insult to injury.
But of course, Giant Attitude! That's how they get away
with it not just politically, but emotionally as well.
And for good or ill, many men slurp it up and still treat
women in a chivalrous manner. As long as the peasants
throw their coats on the ground so that the nobility won't
get their shoes dirty, why should they think differently?
The good news is that many women are now complaining that
men are "ill mannered" meaning, of course, that these
men are treating these women just like they treat men.
I don't mind holding open the door for a lady. Of course,
I rarely meet ladies here in the states.
regards,
Mark Sobolewski
Lester Burnham
>
> I don't mind holding open the door for a lady.
Man, I do. They can ALL get their own doors as far as I'm concerned.
> Of course,
> I rarely meet ladies here in the states.
>
Damned if that's not the truth.
Lester
Jet
J
GodEvolved
> Can't get any, can you?
The ultimate female put down. If a man doesn't do everything to please
women, he can't be getting any. Are you so weak, so childish in your waif-
like state that you can't even get your own door?
--
-----------------
"...What you have to understand, young lady, is that the Greeks, not
content with dominating the culture of the Classical world, are also
responsible for the greatest, some would say the only, work of true
creative imagination produced this century as well. I refer of course to
the Greek ferry timetables. A work of the sublimest fiction. Anyone who
has travelled the Aegean will confirm this..." Professor Watkin - Dirk
Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
-----------------
Lester Burnham
GodEvolved wrote:
> Jet <thatje...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:3CCBAF83...@yahoo.com:
>
> > Can't get any, can you?
>
> The ultimate female put down. If a man doesn't do everything to please
> women, he can't be getting any. Are you so weak, so childish in your waif-
> like state that you can't even get your own door?
Indeed, Jetlag seems to think I would feel shamed by her tired remark. But the
thread reminds me of something I have had the opportunity to do. I actually
thought this out and was prepared for it before it happened, waiting for the
opportunity, so it wasn't spontaneous. But it was still a lot of fun.
I was going in to a convenience store, noticing there was a rather attractive
thirty something approaching the door at the same time I was, from a different
angle. I walked in and let go of the door as though she were not there. Sure
enough, she followed me in and huffed,
"Whatever happened to being a gentleman?!?"
"Feminism," I replied.
"Well, I am not a feminist!" she retorted.
"Of course," I said, "None of you are when it is not working for you."
This absolutely shut her up, and the guy working the cash register laughed so
hard he cried. The rest of my day was absolutely perfect.
Lester
GodEvolved
>
>
> GodEvolved wrote:
>
>> Jet <thatje...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:3CCBAF83...@yahoo.com:
>>
>> > Can't get any, can you?
>>
>> The ultimate female put down. If a man doesn't do everything to
>> please women, he can't be getting any. Are you so weak, so childish
>> in your waif- like state that you can't even get your own door?
>
> Indeed, Jetlag seems to think I would feel shamed by her tired remark.
> But the thread reminds me of something I have had the opportunity to
> do. I actually thought this out and was prepared for it before it
> happened, waiting for the opportunity, so it wasn't spontaneous. But
> it was still a lot of fun.
>
> I was going in to a convenience store, noticing there was a rather
> attractive thirty something approaching the door at the same time I
> was, from a different angle. I walked in and let go of the door as
> though she were not there. Sure enough, she followed me in and
> huffed,
>
> "Whatever happened to being a gentleman?!?"
>
> "Feminism," I replied.
>
> "Well, I am not a feminist!" she retorted.
>
> "Of course," I said, "None of you are when it is not working for you."
>
> This absolutely shut her up, and the guy working the cash register
> laughed so hard he cried. The rest of my day was absolutely perfect.
Very good. Now if only more men would do that.
Phil #3
news:Xns91FE7935F...@198.164.200.20...
This is the best
--
Phil
Giant Attitude
> GodEvolved wrote:
>
> > Jet <thatje...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:3CCBAF83...@yahoo.com:
> >
> > > Can't get any, can you?
> >
> > The ultimate female put down. If a man doesn't do everything to please
> > women, he can't be getting any. Are you so weak, so childish in your waif-
> > like state that you can't even get your own door?
>
> Indeed, Jetlag seems to think I would feel shamed by her tired remark. But the
> thread reminds me of something I have had the opportunity to do. I actually
> thought this out and was prepared for it before it happened, waiting for the
> opportunity, so it wasn't spontaneous. But it was still a lot of fun.
>
> I was going in to a convenience store, noticing there was a rather attractive
> thirty something approaching the door at the same time I was, from a different
> angle. I walked in and let go of the door as though she were not there. Sure
> enough, she followed me in and huffed,
>
> "Whatever happened to being a gentleman?!?"
>
> "Feminism," I replied.
>
> "Well, I am not a feminist!" she retorted.
>
> "Of course," I said, "None of you are when it is not working for you."
>
> This absolutely shut her up, and the guy working the cash register laughed so
> hard he cried. The rest of my day was absolutely perfect.
>
> Lester
That must have taken a great deal of willpower, Lester, if she was an
attractive woman.
If she was an attractive woman, my first impulse would have been to
get her attention.
But I approve of your actions.
As the late great World Wrestling Federation superstar Ravishing Rick
Rude once said (just before he stepped into the ring for a title match
against the Ultimate Warrior), "There's a time to be ravishing...and a
time to be RUDE!"
Jet
GodEvolved wrote:
>
> Jet <thatje...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:3CCBAF83...@yahoo.com:
>
> > Can't get any, can you?
>
> The ultimate female put down. If a man doesn't do everything to please
> women, he can't be getting any.
Nah, I just figure if a man hates women as much as you bitter boys do,
it's because you can't get any.
> Are you so weak, so childish in your waif-
> like state that you can't even get your own door?
I can easily get my own door, but men often get it for me. And I smile
and say, "Thank you". Do you have a problem with that?
J
Jet
Lester Burnham wrote:
>
> GodEvolved wrote:
>
> > Jet <thatje...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:3CCBAF83...@yahoo.com:
> >
> > > Can't get any, can you?
> >
> > The ultimate female put down. If a man doesn't do everything to please
> > women, he can't be getting any. Are you so weak, so childish in your waif-
> > like state that you can't even get your own door?
>
> Indeed, Jetlag seems to think I would feel shamed by her tired remark. But the
> thread reminds me of something I have had the opportunity to do. I actually
> thought this out and was prepared for it before it happened, waiting for the
> opportunity, so it wasn't spontaneous. But it was still a lot of fun.
>
> I was going in to a convenience store, noticing there was a rather attractive
> thirty something approaching the door at the same time I was, from a different
> angle. I walked in and let go of the door as though she were not there.
Not bitter at all, are you?
Sure
> enough, she followed me in and huffed,
>
> "Whatever happened to being a gentleman?!?"
>
> "Feminism," I replied.
>
> "Well, I am not a feminist!" she retorted.
>
> "Of course," I said, "None of you are when it is not working for you."
>
> This absolutely shut her up,
Yeah, she was tired of talking to an asshole.
J
Jet
What, act like bitter, nasty assholes?
J
Rich
Jet wrote:
[...]
> Nah, I just figure if a man hates women as much as you bitter boys do,
> it's because you can't get any.
Ignoring for the moment all the previous threads on how women seem
to prefer jerks, what's your take on why Chive hates men so much?
Rich
> J
Jet
Wow, you guys are rude, bitter assholes! See why I figure you can't get
any?
J
John Jones
>
> Jet wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Nah, I just figure if a man hates women as much as you bitter
boys do,
> > it's because you can't get any.
Faulty conclusion based and false premises. Poor logic-impaired
creature.
>
Jet
I killfiled Chive about 2 days after it started posting, skip any
threads with [Chive] in the front of them and those that seem "Chivish".
So, no, don't have a take on it.
J
> Rich
>
> > J
Jet
Yeah, I'm right.
J
>
> >
Rich
Feminists (and a large number of women) do have a logic of sorts,
or at least a philosophy of sorts, no matter who does what, no
matter what the circumstances, the man is always at fault or to
blame, always. No exceptions.
BTW, just bought a classic tape from a local store, The Day The
Earth Stood Still. It's kinda interesting to see the 1950's
philosophy on things (at least that of the movie makers). It's
still a well made movie. And I also recently saw 4 episodes of
Astroboy. Anybody remember Astroboy? An early 1950's anime
(although not as what we'd call anime today) it was from the
1960's sometime. Two of the episodes were set in the year
2000, giving the Japanese animators expectations to some
degree of the future. I should say that 2 episodes mentioned
the year, obviously all the episodes were in the same time frame.
They had cars that drove themselves, rockets all over the
place, robots that were for all intents and purposes human,
and if you read between the lines, it looks like Asimov's
laws of robotics are weakly included. I'll have to see when
I Robot was written now.
Later.
Rich
Rich
Jet wrote:
>
> Rich wrote:
> >
> > Jet wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > Nah, I just figure if a man hates women as much as you bitter boys do,
> > > it's because you can't get any.
> >
> > Ignoring for the moment all the previous threads on how women seem
> > to prefer jerks, what's your take on why Chive hates men so much?
> >
>
> I killfiled Chive about 2 days after it started posting, skip any
> threads with [Chive] in the front of them and those that seem "Chivish".
Whyfor? You and chive have so very much in common. You both blame men
for everything and women for nothing. You both see only one side of
every issue. You both give women credit for everything and men credit
for nothing. You both post a lot. So very much in common.
> So, no, don't have a take on it.
OK, is this a general principle? Would you say that Chive must hate
men because he can't get laid (whatever that may mean for Chive, although
there is only one obvious way to fill in this blank)?
Rich
> J
>
> > Rich
> >
> > > J
Jet
Rich wrote:
>
> Jet wrote:
> >
> > Rich wrote:
> > >
> > > Jet wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > Nah, I just figure if a man hates women as much as you bitter boys do,
> > > > it's because you can't get any.
> > >
> > > Ignoring for the moment all the previous threads on how women seem
> > > to prefer jerks, what's your take on why Chive hates men so much?
> > >
> >
> > I killfiled Chive about 2 days after it started posting, skip any
> > threads with [Chive] in the front of them and those that seem "Chivish".
>
> Whyfor?
For sheer volume, if nothing else.
You and chive have so very much in common. You both blame men
> for everything and women for nothing.
A lie. But don't let that stop you.
> You both see only one side of
> every issue. You both give women credit for everything and men credit
> for nothing. You both post a lot. So very much in common.
Other than posting a lot, you're lying. Next.
>
> > So, no, don't have a take on it.
>
> OK, is this a general principle? Would you say that Chive must hate
> men because he can't get laid (whatever that may mean for Chive, although
> there is only one obvious way to fill in this blank)?
Only if he wants to get laid by men.
J
>
> Rich
>
> > J
> >
> > > Rich
> > >
> > > > J
Phil #3
What about equality?
Shouldn't women be just as obligated to hold the door for a man or risk
being an asshole?... excuse me, "bitter, nasty assholes"?
How about a woman who fails to hold the door for another woman? Is *she*
also a 'bitter, nasty asshole'?
--
Phil
GodEvolved
How do you mean? You mean treating women as capable of opening their own
doors is being bitter and nasty?
Jet
I hold the door open for men, I don't let the door close in front of
anyone "as if they weren't there".
>... excuse me, "bitter, nasty assholes"?
He went beyond just not holding the door open.
> How about a woman who fails to hold the door for another woman? Is *she*
> also a 'bitter, nasty asshole'?
If she says the same kinds of things. Otherwise, she would just be rude.
J
>
> --
>
> Phil
Jet
By doing what he did, and then being nasty about it.
> You mean treating women as capable of opening their own
> doors is being bitter and nasty?
No, dummy.
J
Parg2000
>From: GodEvolved nos...@spam.com
>Date: 4/28/2002 11:42 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <Xns91FEAB7F6...@198.164.200.20>
{Parg} If you don't want to open a door for another human being, male or
female, don't do it but being a gentleperson of either sex means being polite.
You were not. Your sex/gender didn't matter.
GodEvolved
Nasty? He was merely being truthful. Feminism has had a lot to do with
the elimination of "gentlemanness"(tm).
>
>> You mean treating women as capable of opening their own
>> doors is being bitter and nasty?
>
> No, dummy.
Oh, it's the speaking of truth afterwards that hurts. Sorry.
Jet
Yes.
>He was merely being truthful.
No, he was not. And the two are not mutually exclusive. If you walk up
to a ugly person with bad breath, and say, "Wow, you are ugly and your
breath stinks", you would be truthful and nasty at the same time.
>Feminism has had a lot to do with
> the elimination of "gentlemanness"(tm).
True or not, that's no excuse for him being an asshole to that woman.
>
> >
> >> You mean treating women as capable of opening their own
> >> doors is being bitter and nasty?
> >
> > No, dummy.
>
> Oh, it's the speaking of truth afterwards that hurts. Sorry.
There was no truth, just his bitter, nasty behavior.
J
GodEvolved
Walking through door, I've quite often had them let go at me by someone
else, especially kids. Does that mean I should come up to them and say,
"Whatever happened to quality single-mother upgringing?"
>
>>
>> >
>> >> You mean treating women as capable of opening their own
>> >> doors is being bitter and nasty?
>> >
>> > No, dummy.
>>
>> Oh, it's the speaking of truth afterwards that hurts. Sorry.
>
> There was no truth, just his bitter, nasty behavior.
I know you'd like to disbelieve this, but feminism has had a large impact
in this area.
Lester Burnham
Giant Attitude wrote:
<lol> It is actually not hard at all. I figured out that my knee jerk reaction to please
attractive women was not in my best interest about five years ago(about twenty years overdue).
After a lot of study, I've decided that it isn't in any man's best interest to operate on that
reflex unconsciously. Ever. Sure, you sometimes have to offer a bit of courtesy to women you
intend to have sex with, but since I have that department taken care of, pleasing the elitist at
the store was not necessary.
I was given a boost in the matter by the woman herself. Asking "Whatever happened to being a
gentleman?" is the same as asking "Whatever happened to being a man?" It is a shaming technique
employed by women to get men to step and fetch for them. Had she not tried to shame a perfect
stranger into acting as her door man, she would not have gotten a dose of shame in return. This
is what Jetbag doesn't understand (among a thousand and one other things). She thought I was
being rude because she thinks it is OK to expect servitude from men, and to shame them if they
don't capitulate. This same insipid mentality is at the root of Jetsacks redundant claims that
the men she doesn't agree with must not be getting any sex. She relies on this because it
works, and works very well with men that operate unconsciously, which is most of them.
Lester
Jet
I don't know what you should do, but what he did was rude and nasty.
>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> You mean treating women as capable of opening their own
> >> >> doors is being bitter and nasty?
> >> >
> >> > No, dummy.
> >>
> >> Oh, it's the speaking of truth afterwards that hurts. Sorry.
> >
> > There was no truth, just his bitter, nasty behavior.
>
> I know you'd like to disbelieve this, but feminism has had a large impact
> in this area.
He can't blame women for his being rude and nasty.
J
John Jones
"Rich" <rpa...@attbi.someplace.comcom> wrote in message
news:3CCC4631...@attbi.someplace.comcom...
>
>
> John Jones wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Jet wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > Nah, I just figure if a man hates women as much as you
bitter
> > > > boys do, it's because you can't get any.
> >
> > Faulty conclusion based and false premises. Poor
logic-impaired
> > creature.
>
> Feminists (and a large number of women) do have a logic of
sorts,
> or at least a philosophy of sorts, no matter who does what, no
> matter what the circumstances, the man is always at fault or to
> blame, always. No exceptions.
>
> BTW, just bought a classic tape from a local store, The Day The
> Earth Stood Still. It's kinda interesting to see the 1950's
> philosophy on things (at least that of the movie makers). It's
> still a well made movie. And I also recently saw 4 episodes of
> Astroboy. Anybody remember Astroboy?
I remember Astroboy. A robot soul, right? Wasn't his
Maker/mentor's name Dr Elephant?
Jet
Yeah, because you are a nasty, bitter asshole. If you were a mensch, it
would have been hard.
I figured out that my knee jerk reaction to please
> attractive women was not in my best interest about five years ago(about twenty years overdue).
So, you were rude to her because of that?
> After a lot of study, I've decided that it isn't in any man's best interest to operate on that
> reflex unconsciously. Ever.
You sure are bitter! LOL.
Sure, you sometimes have to offer a bit of courtesy to women you
> intend to have sex with, but since I have that department taken care of,
Yeah, do it yourself.
> pleasing the elitist at
> the store was not necessary.
Again, we see your bitterness over constant rejection. She was just
walking into a store, how does that make her an "elitist"? LOL!
> I was given a boost in the matter by the woman herself. Asking "Whatever happened to being a
> gentleman?" is the same as asking "Whatever happened to being a man?" It is a shaming technique
> employed by women to get men to step and fetch for them. Had she not tried to shame a perfect
> stranger into acting as her door man,
Why shouldn't she have called you on your rudeness?
> she would not have gotten a dose of shame in return. This
> is what Jetbag doesn't understand (among a thousand and one other things). She thought I was
> being rude
You were.
> because she thinks it is OK to expect servitude from men,
LOL! "Servitude". LOL. Yeah, holding a door open is "servitude".
and to shame them if they
> don't capitulate. This same insipid mentality is at the root of Jetsacks redundant claims that
> the men she doesn't agree with must not be getting any sex.
Nonsense. I disagree with wd all the time, but he doesn't seem like a
bitter, woman hating asshole, like you. I assume bitter woman hating
assholes like you can't get any sex, and that's why you are bitter,
woman hating assholes.
J
John Jones
She means that women - being as they are - what warren Farrell
calls Genetic Celebrities, are somehow *owed* chivalrous
treatment by be despite the fact that it is seldom reciprocated
(not referring just to holding doors)
Jet
I quite clearly said I hold the door open for any and everyone in those
kinds of situations. I don't let a door shut in front of someone "as if
they weren't there".
J
Hope Munro Smith
> Why shouldn't she have called you on your rudeness?
>
> > she would not have gotten a dose of shame in return. This
> > is what Jetbag doesn't understand (among a thousand and one other
things). She thought I was
> > being rude
>
> You were.
>
> > because she thinks it is OK to expect servitude from men,
>
> LOL! "Servitude". LOL. Yeah, holding a door open is "servitude".
>
> and to shame them if they
> > don't capitulate. This same insipid mentality is at the root of
Jetsacks redundant claims that
> > the men she doesn't agree with must not be getting any sex.
>
> Nonsense. I disagree with wd all the time, but he doesn't seem like a
> bitter, woman hating asshole, like you. I assume bitter woman hating
> assholes like you can't get any sex, and that's why you are bitter,
> woman hating assholes.
So true. One can accomplish an agenda without rudeness.
Of this, WD is a shining example.
Parg2000
>Date: 4/28/2002 1:46 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <3CCC712B...@yahoo.com>
{Parg} It's the polite thing to do.
>
>
>J
>
>
>
>
>
>
John Jones
"Phil #3" <fa...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:aahi6q$ujc$1...@slb2.atl.mindspring.net...
Hell, I can hold my own door - I'd just like to see them stop and
help a guy change a flat once in a while. (And in case anyone is
wondering - I "get" as much as I want).
Rich
You have a good memory, but you're not quite right here. Astroboys
mentor was Dr. Elefan (correct spelling), with the schnozz like an
elephant, was his mentor. His creator was Dr. Boyton, who created
him to replace his son who was killed in an auto accident. I happen
to have episode 1. This web page has more info.
http://www.zip.com.au/~astroboy/other.shtml
Warning: Blast from the past!
I'm thinking of creating VCD's of these for some young relatives,
but I don't think they'd be impressed.
Rich
GodEvolved
news:EZZy8.75141$%U4.14...@twister.midsouth.rr.com:
Yeah, I know. Funny. We are forever told that men deserve no special
consideration because they are men. Why do women deserve special
consideration because they are women?
GodEvolved
I doubt he would've done *anything* if she hadn't made the "gentleman"
comment.
>
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >> You mean treating women as capable of opening their own
>> >> >> doors is being bitter and nasty?
>> >> >
>> >> > No, dummy.
>> >>
>> >> Oh, it's the speaking of truth afterwards that hurts. Sorry.
>> >
>> > There was no truth, just his bitter, nasty behavior.
>>
>> I know you'd like to disbelieve this, but feminism has had a large
>> impact in this area.
>
> He can't blame women for his being rude and nasty.
I said 'feminism'.
WhiteDragon®
"Lester Burnham" <indu...@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:3CCC23AB...@swbell.net...
By doing this you probably took a pretty decent "non feminist" traditional
women, and hardened
her heart just a bit toward men and what men have to endure today.
Indeed you may have created another feminist.
Congratulations, i hope the laugh was worth it.
~wd
WhiteDragon®
> >
> This is the best
>
> --
>
> Phil
Dont sit on this NG and bitch about the hatred women have for men, if the
only thing you can offer back
is more hatred toward them.
It solves nothing.
From what Lester described, this woman was probably a decent "non feminist"
(as she said)
traditional woman.
Why did he not place this game onto someone like a real feminist who
deserved it?
~wd
WhiteDragon®
This was NOT an example of equality Phil.
He played his game on a woman who he said himself was NOT a feminist.
This was just plain being an ass hole.
~wd
WhiteDragon®
No, not at all. There was no truth in this. Only hate.
What he did was take a women, who he himself said she said was not a
feminist and played his game,
and he probably created another feminist in the process.
> >
> >> You mean treating women as capable of opening their own
> >> doors is being bitter and nasty?
> >
> > No, dummy.
>
> Oh, it's the speaking of truth afterwards that hurts. Sorry.
This is not truth.
he did more then not hold the door for her.
He lacked common human decency to another human being.
His objective was to place his hate of feminism on her.
And he picked on someone who did not deserve this hate.
~wd
John Jones
"Rich" <rpa...@attbi.someplace.comcom> wrote in message
You'll have to forgive me for that, since I haven't seen it since
I learned to read. I just remember it becuase it (and deputy
dawg) were my favorite cartoons
WhiteDragon®
"Hope Munro Smith" <hop...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote in message
news:hopems-2804021701100001@cs6625172-
>
> So true. One can accomplish an agenda without rudeness.
Or total ruthlessness.
Well said Hope.
I bet you are a great buisness woman.
> Of this, WD is a shining example.
Thank you.
I find you to be a very reasonable person also in the complex issues raised
here.
But i do not want to be anyones shinning example.
And, I really do not have an agenda.
Unless you count me wanting to stop this insane madness and hatred between
men and women.
I want this for my grandchildren who will have to face this mess and these
issues in decade and a half.
And since i have spare time in my life right now,i can come here and try.
I doubt its helpful.
Because since i have been here i have come to realize,
the problem is really worse then i ever thought it was.
Especially when men slam a door in a womans face, just because she is a
woman.
And women do similar things right back.
Although i understand the hate that causes behavior like this, i do not
agree with it.
~wd
GodEvolved
news:ucotf9n...@corp.supernews.com:
Hatred? Who's talking hatred here?
>
> From what Lester described, this woman was probably a decent "non
> feminist" (as she said)
> traditional woman.
But as he said, most women will claim they're not feminists when it's
inconvinient to be one.
> Why did he not place this game onto someone like a real feminist who
> deserved it?
And, pray-tell, how does one tell the difference at first glance? Do they
have horns growing out of their heads? Or something?
>
>
> ~wd
GodEvolved
news:ucotil...@corp.supernews.com:
Actually, all he said is that she claimed she wasn't one. Besides which,
what does it matter if she was a feminist or not? Haven't men been told to
change their attitudes towards *women*, not feminists? Last time I looked,
that meant both feminist and non-feminist women. Talk to almost any woman
out there about men's rights and you'll get a blank stare that says "Men's
rights? Men have rights that don't conflict with ours?"
>
> This was just plain being an ass hole.
So she can demand respect, but can't respond?
John Jones
"WhiteDragon®" <serv...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ucot8l4...@corp.supernews.com...
Or removed the scales from her eyes
>
> Indeed you may have created another feminist.
So that's where they come from - not holding doors for them. You
seem to think that women are easily led down the path to
man-hating sexism.
By that reasoning, I would be justified in hating all women
because one passed by without helping while I was trying to get
my car started in the rain.
WhiteDragon®
> >
> >
> > Dont sit on this NG and bitch about the hatred women have for men, if
> > the only thing you can offer back
> > is more hatred toward them.
> > It solves nothing.
>
> Hatred? Who's talking hatred here?
I am.
Slamming the door in someones face, then laughing about it there and here is
hate.
He hates feminism, so he took it out on any women who passed by.
>
> >
> > From what Lester described, this woman was probably a decent "non
> > feminist" (as she said)
> > traditional woman.
>
> But as he said, most women will claim they're not feminists when it's
> inconvinient to be one.
Yes, but i doubt this was the case here.
>
> > Why did he not place this game onto someone like a real feminist who
> > deserved it?
>
> And, pray-tell, how does one tell the difference at first glance? >
You cant fool.
And you already know this, so why ask.
The fact is as he described it, was he had practiced what he was going to
do.
He said it was NOT Spontaneous *he had practiced it*.
He then proceeded to pick the first female he found to use his practice on
who came thru the door.
I dont find this funny as you did, i find it counter productive to the image
of men.
An image we need to clean up that image if we are to be taken seriously
about the rights we want
or want rights we want to take back.
> Do they
> have horns growing out of their heads? Or something?
No.
~wd
WhiteDragon®
Since when is letting a door slam in Anyones face right.
Reguardless of mens rights or womens rights?
~wd
WhiteDragon®
This example is NOT about women getting special treatment.
Its not a case of men wanting rights either.
This is a case of someone letting the door close on another persons face,
just to prove a point about feminism.
Childish if you want a finer point on it.
~wd
WhiteDragon®
"John Jones" <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote in message
news:JU_y8.75148$%U4.14...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
>
> "WhiteDragonŽ" <serv...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Right.
And right into the arms of feminism,
Who will be happy to not only hold the door, but open the door for her to
hate men.
>
> >
> > Indeed you may have created another feminist.
>
> So that's where they come from - not holding doors for them. You
> seem to think that women are easily led down the path to
> man-hating sexism.
Are you so foolish to believe 2 wrongs make a right?
And i think no such thing about women being easily led.
This issue is about whats right and wrong.
A side benifit for feminism would be to show this women how ALL men are
evil.
And by not treating her with the basic of courtesies, he has solidified in
her mind that HE is Rude
and therefore ALL men could be considered Rude.
This is not a difficult concept.
~wd
Scott Gilbert
> GodEvolved wrote:
[snip]
> > Are you so weak, so childish in your waif-
> > like state that you can't even get your own door?
>
> I can easily get my own door, but men often get it for me. And I smile
> and say, "Thank you". Do you have a problem with that?
Nope, it's when women act like it's expected rather than an undeserved
favor that we get pissed off. When a woman snarls at a guy for not
getting a door for her, she deserves whatever putdowns she gets.
[snip]
Phil #3
news:ucotf9n...@corp.supernews.com...
solves nothing.
I'm *certainly* not here to make a peace with feminists as they cannot
be trusted. Any hatred I feel for them is more than deserved.
Mostly, I am here to laugh at them and their antics trying to pick and
choose where and when they want equality as well as where they want
superiority and when they want to be treated like a lady.
> From what Lester described, this woman was probably a decent "non
feminist"
> (as she said)
There *are* no feminists when faced with the results of their own
machinations but assuming she is a non-feminist, she's just a casualty
of the war between the sexes. It gives her an insight to assist her in
making up her mind about which side she is on. Does she actually *like*
being equal or does she prefer being treated a bit special?
> traditional woman.
> Why did he not place this game onto someone like a real feminist who
> deserved it?
>
How can you tell them apart by sight? Ears different or something?
Notwithstanding some feminists dress and appearance seem to scream "dyke
feminist", others will ream you for holding the door when to all
appearances they are feminine (as opposed to feminist).
--
Phil
>
> ~wd
>
>
Phil #3
She may not have been but she wouldn't admit it after the fact of being
confronted with her own demands if she were, would she?
> This was just plain being an ass hole.
>
> ~wd
>
You missed the point. I was replying to jet about her opinion that this
was inappropriate. I just reversed the sexes and asked if it was still
inappropriate. (It rarely works out quite as bad when a woman does to a
man compared to the same treatment to a woman by a man for some odd,
unexplainable reason).
Feminists talk a great game of equality but when it comes down to it,
they still expect to be treated as ladies, even when they are most
definitely not.
--
Phil
WhiteDragon®
Go re read his post.
This was a clear example of practicing what he wanted to do, then acting out
what he wanted to do.
Which i think would have been great on someone who deserved it.
Besides, since when has 2 wrongs made a right.
>
> --
>
> Phil
>
>
> >
> > ~wd
> >
> >
>
>
Phil #3
way anyway. Instead of taking a chance on being treated this way once,
becoming a true feminist she will be demanding to be treated this way at
all times and more.
It seems to me that feminists never have flat tires but they demand to
be treated as if they were capable of changing any they have... that
until they actually have one. Suddenly, appears the 'victim'.
--
Phil
Rich
"WhiteDragonŽ" wrote:
[...]
> Go re read his post.
> This was a clear example of practicing what he wanted to do,
> then acting out what he wanted to do. Which i think would have
> been great on someone who deserved it.
>
> Besides, since when has 2 wrongs made a right.
Perhaps you need to revisit right and wrong then.
Chivalry made sense when women and men had different spheres is
influence, but it's suicide when men and men are competing in
the same sphere. It's long past the time chivalry died. Hold
the door for your wife or girlfriend, other women can receive
the same treatment they uncaringly give men. And I'm not
exaggerating. I've had women let the door slam in my face when
I had both arms full of groceries, *theirs* that I was carrying
for them. Fuck em, they can carry their own shit and open
their own doors.
You need to open your eyes, women *changed* what is wrong and
right, and you never heard a single woman object. They made the
bed, now they need to sleep in it. Clean, simple, and fair. It's
what they give men, in the best of times.
Rich
John Jones
Nothing therea bout letting the door close in her face. He just
let it close like she wasn't there. She could have been 10 feet
back.
Tell me, has anybody ever failed to hold a door for you?
[...]
John Jones
>
> "GodEvolved" <nos...@spam.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns91FECC40C...@198.164.200.20...
>
> > >
> > >
> > > Dont sit on this NG and bitch about the hatred women have
for men, if
> > > the only thing you can offer back
> > > is more hatred toward them.
> > > It solves nothing.
> >
> > Hatred? Who's talking hatred here?
>
> I am.
> Slamming the door in someones face, then laughing about it
there and here is
> hate.
> He hates feminism, so he took it out on any women who passed
by.
Good god man! Get a grip! If you can show me where anyone
slammed a door in her face and laughed about it, i'll agree with
you. He said he let it go like she wasn't there.
Rich
John Jones wrote:
>
> "Rich" <rpa...@attbi.someplace.comcom> wrote in message
> news:3CCC7126...@attbi.someplace.comcom...
[...]
> > > I remember Astroboy. A robot soul, right? Wasn't his
> > > Maker/mentor's name Dr Elephant?
> >
> > You have a good memory, but you're not quite right here.
> > Astroboys mentor was Dr. Elefan (correct spelling),
>
> You'll have to forgive me for that,
Sorry, can't do it. That's the way I remembered it too. And
that's the way they pronounce in in the toon as well. Don't
see anything to forgive here.
> since I haven't seen it since
> I learned to read. I just remember it becuase it (and deputy
> dawg) were my favorite cartoons
How about Quicksdraw McGraw!
> > with the schnozz like an
> > elephant, was his mentor. His creator was Dr. Boyton, who
> > created him to replace his son who was killed in an auto
> > accident. I happen to have episode 1. This web page has more
> > info.
Interestingly enough, I don't remember all the characters on
the web page.
Rich
John Jones
"WhiteDragon®" <serv...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ucp30jq...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "John Jones" <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote in message
> news:JU_y8.75148$%U4.14...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
> >
What did you do the last time someone failed to hold the door for
you? Single out their whole race/sex for hatred? You have said
in other posts that the woman had the door slammed in her face
when that is not what was claimed.
Lester Burnham
>
> By doing this you probably took a pretty decent "non feminist" traditional
> women, and hardened
> her heart just a bit toward men and what men have to endure today.
Gosh, you are assuming an awful lot here, aren't you? I don't know if she was a
pretty decent "non feminist" or not, and I was there! I could have hardened her
heart, or I might have made her think about her attitude. I suspect the former
is more likely than the latter, but I imagine what is most reasonable to assume
is that she was unchanged by the experience, even if a little pissed off. I
hardly think the incident resulted in a shift in her socio-political paradigm.
Also, in your other post, you _seem_ to agree with Hope that I was rude for not
holding the door for her. I invite either of you to support this one. Women
almost never hold a door open for me. I can't even remember the last time it
happened. Am I to infer that all almost all women are rude? Or is your point
that it is rude for me not to practice chivalry? If so, why? And if so, am I
to give up my seat to any woman who I notice does not have one. Am I to lay my
coat over the mud so women don't soil their shoes? I am really fascinated by
this one.
>
>
> Indeed you may have created another feminist.
You are assigning me an awful lot of power, aren't you?
>
>
> Congratulations, i hope the laugh was worth it.
I wasn't laughing. The clerk was. And nodding his head as well. Obviously it
struck a familiar chord with him. And since I didn't "create another feminist,"
the question of whether it was worth it seems moot. It was, however, worth it
to me to make a point. All I did in this situation was do what most everyone
else does in a very large city, namely open my own door and let others take care
of themselves. So I am to be shamed for this, based on my gender?
Please explain this one to me, WD, and Hope as well, if you like. I'd honestly
like to hear your thoughts.
Lester
Lester Burnham
>
> I doubt he would've done *anything* if she hadn't made the "gentleman"
> comment.
Exactly, GE. Had she not tried to shame me for not opening her door, I would
have said absolutely nothing to her.
Lester
John Jones
"Rich" <rpa...@attbi.someplace.comcom> wrote in message
>
>
> John Jones wrote:
> >
> > "Rich" <rpa...@attbi.someplace.comcom> wrote in message
> > news:3CCC7126...@attbi.someplace.comcom...
>
> [...]
>
> > > > I remember Astroboy. A robot soul, right? Wasn't his
> > > > Maker/mentor's name Dr Elephant?
> > >
> > > You have a good memory, but you're not quite right here.
> > > Astroboys mentor was Dr. Elefan (correct spelling),
> >
> > You'll have to forgive me for that,
>
> Sorry, can't do it. That's the way I remembered it too. And
> that's the way they pronounce in in the toon as well. Don't
> see anything to forgive here.
Excuse me all to hell. I couldn't read OR hear I guess. I
don't know why they let me in school. :(
>
> > since I haven't seen it since
> > I learned to read. I just remember it becuase it (and deputy
> > dawg) were my favorite cartoons
>
> How about Quicksdraw McGraw!
Um, Quickdraw McGraw (and that's the way they pronounced it) ;-)
>
> > > with the schnozz like an
> > > elephant, was his mentor. His creator was Dr. Boyton, who
> > > created him to replace his son who was killed in an auto
> > > accident. I happen to have episode 1. This web page has
more
> > > info.
>
> Interestingly enough, I don't remember all the characters on
> the web page.
>
I don't remember any of them but Dr Elfan, Astroboy, and Jump.
John Jones
There you go again. Nothing in the original about a door
slamming "in Anyone's face". He said he let it go like she
wasn't there.
Lester Burnham
>
> This is not truth.
> he did more then not hold the door for her.
>
> He lacked common human decency to another human being.
> His objective was to place his hate of feminism on her.
>
You know, WD, at first glance your posts seem balanced, articulate and
cogent. But, sorry to say, your ass is starting to show here. I didn't pick
her. She picked me. I didn't do anything but not open her door for her. I
don't open doors for women since most of them quit saying thank you, or in any
way acknowledging that I extended them a courtesy. Now, _that_ is rude, and
reason enough for me to change my behavior with women by not practicing
chivalry with strangers. Unless, of course, you are asserting that I am
obligated to practice chivalry, regardless of whether I am treated courteously
in return?
>
>
> And he picked on someone who did not deserve this hate.
She didn't get my hate. She got my disgust, and my reaction, for attempting
to shame me for not opening her door. She deserved it. And I don't think I
picked on her at all. I admitted in my original post that I was prepared for
this to happen and knew what I would say when it did. That is not a product
of hate, but of frustration with totally inappropriate standards that are
placed on men. I felt like Rosa Parks refusing to take the back seat on the
bus. And though you are not at all aware of it, I'm sure. Your objection to
all this does not boil down to me being, not rude or hateful. You object
because I am uppity.
I am indeed, and will remain, an uppity male.
Lester
Phil #3
>
> "Phil #3" <fa...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:aai2t6$q8h$1...@slb3.atl.mindspring.net...
> > "WhiteDragon®" <serv...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > Why did he not place this game onto someone like a real feminist
who
> > > deserved it?
> > >
> > How can you tell them apart by sight? Ears different or something?
> > Notwithstanding some feminists dress and appearance seem to scream
"dyke
> > feminist", others will ream you for holding the door when to all
> > appearances they are feminine (as opposed to feminist).
>
> Go re read his post.
> This was a clear example of practicing what he wanted to do, then
acting out
> what he wanted to do.
> Which i think would have been great on someone who deserved it.
>
> Besides, since when has 2 wrongs made a right.
>
relief in sight otherwise.
--
Phil
Phil #3
news:ucp30jq...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "John Jones" <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote in message
> news:JU_y8.75148$%U4.14...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
> >
*one* person to create a hate for the entire sex of the perp of the act.
I have been treated badly by any number of individuals yet somehow, I
kept myself from blaming their sex/race/age/nationality for the
happening.
>
> >
> > >
> > > Indeed you may have created another feminist.
> >
> > So that's where they come from - not holding doors for them. You
> > seem to think that women are easily led down the path to
> > man-hating sexism.
>
> Are you so foolish to believe 2 wrongs make a right?
> And i think no such thing about women being easily led.
> This issue is about whats right and wrong.
>
> A side benifit for feminism would be to show this women how ALL men
are
> evil.
> And by not treating her with the basic of courtesies, he has
solidified in
> her mind that HE is Rude
> and therefore ALL men could be considered Rude.
>
a group. If she is having trouble with that concept, then any other
slight, real or perceived will do.
If she is capable of determining that *all* men are to be judged by the
actions of one, what's the use in molly-coddling her hoping she doesn't
somehow make the jump to prejudice anyway?
Jet
GodEvolved wrote:
>
> "WhiteDragonŽ" <serv...@hotmail.com> wrote in
LB hates women, it's obvious from the way he treated the woman at the
store.
> >
> > From what Lester described, this woman was probably a decent "non
> > feminist" (as she said)
> > traditional woman.
>
> But as he said, most women will claim they're not feminists when it's
> inconvinient to be one.
BBB. (Bitter Boy Bullshit)
>
> > Why did he not place this game onto someone like a real feminist who
> > deserved it?
>
> And, pray-tell, how does one tell the difference at first glance? Do they
> have horns growing out of their heads? Or something?
Yeah, best to be on the safe side and be a rude asshole.
J
Lester Burnham
If you are through basking in the accolades of your feminist fans, please go
back and read my post again. Really, dude, I EXPECT feminists to misquote my
words and mischaracterize my actions, but I do have higher expectations of
integrity and honesty from a male who describes themselves as you have below.
I didn't slam, or even shut the door in anyone's face. In fact, the door
didn't shut at all. She was only a couple of steps behind me and caught it
before it closed. So please, for the record, either cut an post where I slammed
the door in someone's face, or acknowledge that you stepped over the line.
How on earth do you get from what I actually posted to saying that I "slammed a
door in someone's face just because she is a woman?"
How disappointing!
Lester
"WhiteDragonŽ" wrote:
> "Hope Munro Smith" <hop...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote in message
> news:hopems-2804021701100001@cs6625172-
> >
> > So true. One can accomplish an agenda without rudeness.
>
> Or total ruthlessness.
> Well said Hope.
> I bet you are a great buisness woman.
>
> > Of this, WD is a shining example.
>
> Thank you.
> I find you to be a very reasonable person also in the complex issues raised
> here.
> But i do not want to be anyones shinning example.
>
> And, I really do not have an agenda.
> Unless you count me wanting to stop this insane madness and hatred between
> men and women.
> I want this for my grandchildren who will have to face this mess and these
> issues in decade and a half.
>
> And since i have spare time in my life right now,i can come here and try.
> I doubt its helpful.
> Because since i have been here i have come to realize,
> the problem is really worse then i ever thought it was.
>
> Especially when men slam a door in a womans face, just because she is a
> woman.
> And women do similar things right back.
>
> Although i understand the hate that causes behavior like this, i do not
> agree with it.
>
> ~wd
Jet
Phil #3 wrote:
>
> "WhiteDragonŽ" <serv...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Translation: you cant' get any.
> Mostly, I am here to laugh at them and their antics trying to pick and
> choose where and when they want equality as well as where they want
> superiority and when they want to be treated like a lady.
>
> > From what Lester described, this woman was probably a decent "non
> feminist"
> > (as she said)
>
> There *are* no feminists when faced with the results of their own
> machinations but assuming she is a non-feminist, she's just a casualty
> of the war between the sexes.
BBB. (Bitter boy bullshit) I am a feminist 100% of the time. She's "not
just a casualty of the war between the sexes", LB just chose to be an
asshole to her.
It gives her an insight to assist her in
> making up her mind about which side she is on. Does she actually *like*
> being equal or does she prefer being treated a bit special?
She didn't like being treated rudely. Who does?
>
> > traditional woman.
> > Why did he not place this game onto someone like a real feminist who
> > deserved it?
> >
> How can you tell them apart by sight? Ears different or something?
> Notwithstanding some feminists dress and appearance seem to scream "dyke
> feminist", others will ream you for holding the door when to all
> appearances they are feminine (as opposed to feminist).
Men hold the door for me often. I always smile and say "Thank you".
J
>
> --
>
> Phil
>
> >
> > ~wd
> >
> >