For the record this is lil'richie's last posting
Radical Conservative
>
> Rich <pay...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > > Rich excreted the following "words" to my friend Sehlat:
> >
> > So right off you are being a bitch, fine.
>
> So.... if I were to accept your calling others "idiot" in my own newsgroup,
You may have started the newsgroup, but it ain't yours.
> I would then be what, courteous and respectful? LOL!
No, since that is the way you address others, you are a hypocrite.
> > > Hey, Rich. I'm about as anti-feminist as a woman can be.
> >
> > So you say.
>
> Yes, I do say, Rich. Are who the HELL are you to define me?
Where did I define you? You are as disconnected from reality as kbrauer.
> > I take issue all the
> > > way back to Wollstonecraft and her tendency to release women from personal
> > > responsibility.
> >
> > You have not taken issue anywhere I have seen.
>
> Then open your eyes, visit Rightgrrl and read my work. Better yet, I'll save
> you the time by providing an excerpt:
>
> From "I am Victim, Hear Me Roar"
> http://www.rightgrrl.com/steph/victim.html
>
> "American women have been continually instructed to view the feminist
> movement as a proactive one — an ideologically sound group fighting for
> positive change, committed to the pursuit of equity, successfully challenging
> discrimination. Traveling backwards on the feminist timeline, faces of
> movement revisionists and progenitors appear: Paula Kamen, Susan Faludi,
> Gloria Steinem, Simone de Beauvoir, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, all the way back
> to Mary Wollstonecraft, who thus absolved her fellow downtrodden woman:
> '...how can a being be generous who has nothing of its own? or virtuous who
> is not free?'
>
> "These words, written in 1792 under the well-known title, 'The Vindication of
> the Rights of Woman,' are meant to underscore the fact that until women are
> treated as equals, society will suffer from their troublesome, though
> justified, behavior. Yet the question arises: is this the most proactive
> approach to the problem of gender discrimination?
>
> "Feminist ideology, though noble in its early quest for equality, seems to
> perpetually abandon the ideal of personal responsibility. In 'The Second
> Sex,' Simone de Beauvoir summed up the feminist attitude regarding female
> culpability in 1949: 'A free individual blames only himself for his failures,
> he assumes responsibility for them; but everything happens to women through
> the agency of others, and therefore these others are responsible for her
> woes.'
Funny, the last paragraph seems to describe attitudes of the women here
WRT pregnancy to a tee.
> -------
>
> >
> > > But I'm damn tempted to burn my bra after reading your bile.
> >
> > Do the words "true colors" mean anything to you?
>
> I guess you're accusing me of being a latent feminist, exposed to the light by
> the deft & clever nature of your posts? LOLing again.
Where have I referred to myself in any way?
> > It remains a fact that sehlat has lied about what I have said. That you defend
> > lies rather shows where you really stand. And that ain't on the side of truth,
> > but on the side of women, which is exactly where NOW has always stood.
>
> Oh, good grief. Sehlat has not lied,
Sehlat *has* lied, repeatedly about what I have said.
> and my defense of her is NOT, I repeat
> N-O-T because she's female. I don't give a crap if Sehlat possesses a penis
> or a vagina. I defend others based on the merits (or lack thereof) of their
> arguments.
What merits do you see in her lies about what I have said stephanie?
Or do you defend them by denying them?
> For you to suggest otherwise is a much more extreme insult than
> your silly tendency of name-calling.
And if I find sehlat's constant lies insulting? I find your defense of
her
lies equally insulting, no matter what you may otherwise believe. You
may
not get it, but no matter what is on those web-pages, sehlat's lies
remain
an issue, as does your defense of said lies.
> If you're going to make baseless
> assertions about my personal motivations, you'd damn well better back them
> up, buddy.
Like you girls do here? I have not seen any of you provide any basis for
the stuff you claim. And I don't *do* double standards, either play as
you
expect me to play, or disabuse yourself of the notion that I must dance
to the tune you play.
> In other words -- prove it. Prove that I defend Sehlat out of some
> nonsensical female loyalty. And prove it now.
Let's see, what is the name of your site and this newsgroup? Oh yes,
right,
what is that, grrls. Not right persons, not right gerbils, but grrls,
seems
that we have some sexist bias right off. And you call yourself
-feminists-.
Feminism of course is about women, not equality. Seems that everything
you
do and say is about women, no? The text you posted above is about women
by
women, which is typical feminism, feminism ain't about boys or men.
Seems a bit late to deny that you have a bias and an agenda Stephanie.
Rich
now try to delete THIS! PUNK.....
--
trillions and trillions of Liberal theories destroyed daily
PRESIDENT_CLINTON.PERV CORRUPT:
DO YOU WANT TO REMOVE PRESIDENT_CLINTON.PERV (Y/N)? YES!
PRESIDENT_CLINTON.PERV SENT TO US.GOV.FEDERAL PRISON.SYS
Electronic mail sent to this account are automatically retreived by a
FAX machine, under the definition of Title 47 USC Sec.227 (a)(2)(B).
Therefore, unsolicited commercial electronic mail sent to this address
is in violation of Title 47 USC Sec. 227.
Rich
<>
> > In other words -- prove it. Prove that I defend Sehlat out of some
> > nonsensical female loyalty. And prove it now.
>
> Let's see, what is the name of your site and this newsgroup? Oh yes, right,
> what is that, grrls. Not right persons, not right gerbils, but grrls, seems
> that we have some sexist bias right off. And you call yourself -feminists-.
> Feminism of course is about women, not equality. Seems that everything you
> do and say is about women, no? The text you posted above is about women by
> women, which is typical feminism, feminism ain't about boys or men.
>
> Seems a bit late to deny that you have a bias and an agenda Stephanie.
>
> Rich
>
> now try to delete THIS! PUNK.....
Why are you posting my text RC?
Too stupid to think of anything yourself to post?
Rich
seh...@my-dejanews.com
rad_...@vote4gop.org wrote:
Wait, this can't be Rad! Oh... I see now... good going.
I heard Rich went on a deletefest while I was off for the weekend.
> stephani...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> You may have started the newsgroup, but it ain't yours.
It's more hers than Rich's.
> Where did I define you? You are as disconnected from reality as kbrauer.
Now he's denying defining Steph as a feminist. Whoa!
> > "Feminist ideology, though noble in its early quest for equality, seems to
> > perpetually abandon the ideal of personal responsibility. In 'The Second
> > Sex,' Simone de Beauvoir summed up the feminist attitude regarding female
> > culpability in 1949: 'A free individual blames only himself for his
failures,
> > he assumes responsibility for them; but everything happens to women through
> > the agency of others, and therefore these others are responsible for her
> > woes.'
>
> Funny, the last paragraph seems to describe attitudes of the women here
> WRT pregnancy to a tee.
It's a quote, not Stephanie's words. Maybe reading the rest of what she said
might help... wait, your poor oppressed fingers can't click to see.
> > > It remains a fact that sehlat has lied about what I have said. That you
defend
> > > lies rather shows where you really stand. And that ain't on the side of
truth,
> > > but on the side of women, which is exactly where NOW has always stood.
> >
> > Oh, good grief. Sehlat has not lied,
>
> Sehlat *has* lied, repeatedly about what I have said.
but he can't prove it. I, on the other hand... just posted his beliefs about
me and a rebuttal. He has lied repeatedly about me. Have I lied? don't think
so.
> What merits do you see in her lies about what I have said stephanie?
> Or do you defend them by denying them?
She defends them because she knows I did not lie while he has.
> And if I find sehlat's constant lies insulting?
Read "the truth". Rich is confused.
> I find your defense of her lies equally insulting, no matter what you may
otherwise believe.
Read "the truth" in place of my so-called "lies". :)
> You may not get it, but no matter what is on those web-pages, sehlat's lies
> remain an issue, as does your defense of said lies.
What lies? Can't come up with any. They would have been called down ages ago.
The truth hurts, doesn't it?
> Like you girls do here? I have not seen any of you provide any basis for
> the stuff you claim. And I don't *do* double standards, either play as
> you expect me to play, or disabuse yourself of the notion that I must dance
> to the tune you play.
Oh, you don't do double standards. You do not require men to practice
responsible sexuality at all, placing all of the responsibility on the woman.
You say you want the truth, but when you get it, you automatically twist it
into something we don't believe. Your own beliefs about pregnancy reinforce
the double standards against fathers in child custody cases. Get real.
> Let's see, what is the name of your site and this newsgroup? Oh yes,
> right,
> what is that, grrls. Not right persons, not right gerbils, but grrls,
> seems
> that we have some sexist bias right off. And you call yourself
> -feminists-.
Oh, so there is no room for women-only sites. Do you also support integration
of the Citadel? Guess what? I don't! If there is no room for Rightgrrl, there
is no room for Rightguyz. Shoot yourself in the foot. BTW. not all Rightgrrls
are feminist, in spite of your crying in your beer to the contrary.
> Feminism of course is about women, not equality. Seems that everything
> you
> do and say is about women, no? The text you posted above is about women
> by
> women, which is typical feminism, feminism ain't about boys or men.
This guy reminds me of the guy who got offended at the "Equal Rights for
Unborn Women" banner. Our issues don't affect men? Abortion kills little boys
and little girls alike. We have male supporters and contributors. I get
comments about my articles from men, and they're GOOD comments!
This guy needs help.
> Seems a bit late to deny that you have a bias and an agenda Stephanie.
If she has one, it's only against you. Seeing that she has a husband and son,
she can't be anti-male.
> now try to delete THIS! PUNK.....
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
There's Rad :)
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
seh...@my-dejanews.com
We wish it had been Rich's last post!
In article <365881A1...@earthlink.net.remov.me>,
payner@, earthlink.net.remov.me wrote:
> Radical Conservative wrote:
> Why are you posting my text RC?
>
> Too stupid to think of anything yourself to post?
Not at all. He knew about your little deletefest and reposted
your stuff so you couldn't get away with hiding your junk.
Thank God he doesn't agree with yuor hateful drivel.
Radical Conservative
> payner@, earthlink.net.remov.me wrote:
> > Radical Conservative wrote:
>
> Why are you posting my text RC?
> > Too stupid to think of anything yourself to post?
> Not at all. He knew about your little deletefest and reposted
> your stuff so you couldn't get away with hiding your junk.
> Thank God he doesn't agree with yuor hateful drivel.
Thank you Sehlat i'm glad you realized what i'm doing ¦-]
seh...@my-dejanews.com
rad_...@vote4gop.org wrote:
> seh...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > We wish it had been Rich's last post!
> yeah no joke!
> uhhhhh lil'richie i dont think i'm the stupid one here
> Thank you Sehlat i'm glad you realized what i'm doing ¦-]
Really. Now I wish I had realized sooner that Rich was going to be so
relentlessly hostile. I would have been saving posts and I could have
caught and quoted every stinking false accusation and word twist and...
who am I kidding? If I caught every time Rich misrepresented a Rightgrrl
or a supporter, I'd be well on my way to something the size of War and
Peace already. Sorry, I have better ways to clutter my disk space...
like joke files and graphics.
Rich
seh...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> In article <3659B9...@vote4gop.org>,
> rad_...@vote4gop.org wrote:
> > seh...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> > >
> > > We wish it had been Rich's last post!
>
> > yeah no joke!
>
> > uhhhhh lil'richie i dont think i'm the stupid one here
>
> > Thank you Sehlat i'm glad you realized what i'm doing ¦-]
>
> Really. Now I wish I had realized sooner that Rich was going to be so
> relentlessly hostile.
You are relentlessly hostile, what is your problem hypocrite?
> I would have been saving posts and I could have
> caught and quoted every stinking false accusation and word twist and...
> who am I kidding?
Instead of just lying outright about what I have said as you do now.
Go to deja news.
> If I caught every time Rich misrepresented a Rightgrrl
> or a supporter, I'd be well on my way to something the size of War and
> Peace already.
If we caught every time you did, we would have something the size of
the Library of Congress.
> Sorry, I have better ways to clutter my disk space...
> like joke files and graphics.
And you just don't *do* evidence or ever back what you post.
Rich
Rich
seh...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> We wish it had been Rich's last post!
>
> In article <365881A1...@earthlink.net.remov.me>,
> payner@, earthlink.net.remov.me wrote:
> > Radical Conservative wrote:
>
> > Why are you posting my text RC?
> >
> > Too stupid to think of anything yourself to post?
>
> Not at all. He knew about your little deletefest and reposted
Another lie. Not only have I deleted nothing, I cannot delete posts
from earthlink. You are as blindingly stupid as RC is racist and
sexist.
> your stuff so you couldn't get away with hiding your junk.
I posted it, if someone is deleting posts it ain't me.
> Thank God he doesn't agree with yuor hateful drivel.
Check out his web-site for his hateful drivel. He is quite
anti-American for starters.
Rich
Rich
seh...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> In article <365854...@vote4gop.org>,
> rad_...@vote4gop.org wrote:
>
> Wait, this can't be Rad! Oh... I see now... good going.
> I heard Rich went on a deletefest while I was off for the weekend.
This may be the way cowards like you operate sehlat, but the
claim is a blatant falsehood, one of many.
> > stephani...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > You may have started the newsgroup, but it ain't yours.
>
> It's more hers than Rich's.
It's not hers at all.
Rich
Radical Conservative
> Another lie. Not only have I deleted nothing, I cannot delete posts
> from earthlink. You are as blindingly stupid as RC is racist and
> sexist.
>
> > your stuff so you couldn't get away with hiding your junk.
>
> I posted it, if someone is deleting posts it ain't me.
>
> > Thank God he doesn't agree with yuor hateful drivel.
>
> Check out his web-site for his hateful drivel. He is quite
> anti-American for starters.
>
> Rich
oh so i'm a sexist racist now?!?
soooo Richie where is your proof of this???? hmmmmmmm???
Rich
Radical Conservative wrote:
>
> Rich wrote:
>
> > Another lie. Not only have I deleted nothing, I cannot delete posts
> > from earthlink. You are as blindingly stupid as RC is racist and
> > sexist.
> >
> > > your stuff so you couldn't get away with hiding your junk.
> >
> > I posted it, if someone is deleting posts it ain't me.
> >
> > > Thank God he doesn't agree with yuor hateful drivel.
> >
> > Check out his web-site for his hateful drivel. He is quite
> > anti-American for starters.
> >
> > Rich
> oh so i'm a sexist racist now?!?
> soooo Richie where is your proof of this???? hmmmmmmm???
You want to deal in proof? Fine.
Prove that I have deleted anything.
You remain a vile liar with the intelligence of a 5-year-old, and
I may be doing a disservice to Americas youth here.
Rich
Rich
Radical Conservative wrote:
>
> seh...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > We wish it had been Rich's last post!
> yeah no joke!
> > In article <365881A1...@earthlink.net.remov.me>,
> > payner@, earthlink.net.remov.me wrote:
> > > Radical Conservative wrote:
> >
> > Why are you posting my text RC? for the reasons sehlat states here
> > > Too stupid to think of anything yourself to post?
> uhhhhh lil'richie i dont think i'm the stupid one here
What a shocker this is. And you are indeed far too stupid to
post anything relevant, or by now you would have.
> > Not at all. He knew about your little deletefest and reposted
> > your stuff so you couldn't get away with hiding your junk.
> > Thank God he doesn't agree with yuor hateful drivel.
>
> Thank you Sehlat i'm glad you realized what i'm doing ｦ-]
Liars of a feather do indeed flock together.
Rich
Rich
seh...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> In article <365854...@vote4gop.org>,
> rad_...@vote4gop.org wrote:
>
> Wait, this can't be Rad! Oh... I see now... good going.
> I heard Rich went on a deletefest while I was off for the weekend.
This is one clear lie by sehlat, one that she is not even competent
to make, as if she is competent at anything but lies.
Can anyone here post a cancel message? I see every message I post
appear, twice counting RC's reposts. Wonder if Stephanie has noticed
the duplication and wondered if something was amiss? Naaa, doubt
it.
> > stephani...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > You may have started the newsgroup, but it ain't yours.
>
> It's more hers than Rich's.
It's not hers at all. A liar and an idiot, what a combination.
> > Where did I define you? You are as disconnected from reality as kbrauer.
>
> Now he's denying defining Steph as a feminist. Whoa!
Though she did that all by her little self, as do all the rightgrrls.
And
that in no way follows from the text above stupid. I compared two
idiots,
feminism has nothing to do with it.
> > > "Feminist ideology, though noble in its early quest for equality, seems to
> > > perpetually abandon the ideal of personal responsibility. In 'The Second
> > > Sex,' Simone de Beauvoir summed up the feminist attitude regarding female
> > > culpability in 1949: 'A free individual blames only himself for his failures,
> > > he assumes responsibility for them; but everything happens to women through
> > > the agency of others, and therefore these others are responsible for her
> > > woes.'
> >
> > Funny, the last paragraph seems to describe attitudes of the women here
> > WRT pregnancy to a tee.
>
> It's a quote, not Stephanie's words.
And it seems to describe the attitudes of the rightgrrls WRT pregnancy,
read
slowly and for meaning, if you can do that.
> Maybe reading the rest of what she said
> might help... wait, your poor oppressed fingers can't click to see.
Off to fantasyland again.
> > > > It remains a fact that sehlat has lied about what I have said. That you
> defend
> > > > lies rather shows where you really stand. And that ain't on the side of
> truth,
> > > > but on the side of women, which is exactly where NOW has always stood.
> > >
> > > Oh, good grief. Sehlat has not lied,
> >
> > Sehlat *has* lied, repeatedly about what I have said.
>
> but he can't prove it.
Done so several times, it seems your friends support your lies.
> I, on the other hand... just posted his beliefs about
> me and a rebuttal.
You posted more lies, I'll get to that tonight.
> He has lied repeatedly about me.
Fine, name one.
> Have I lied? don't think so.
You have done so proudly and repeatedly.
> > You may not get it, but no matter what is on those web-pages, sehlat's lies
> > remain an issue, as does your defense of said lies.
>
> What lies? Can't come up with any.
You have made repeated lies about what I have said, you start this post
with a lie about a "deletefest", that'll do for starters.
> They would have been called down ages ago.
I have called you down. And I have no idea how often you lie, but you
lie
about me near every post.
> The truth hurts, doesn't it?
The truth has never met you, nor would it recognize you.
> > Like you girls do here? I have not seen any of you provide any basis for
> > the stuff you claim. And I don't *do* double standards, either play as
> > you expect me to play, or disabuse yourself of the notion that I must dance
> > to the tune you play.
>
> Oh, you don't do double standards. You do not require men to practice
> responsible sexuality at all,
The issue being discussed shit-for-brains is MILITARY women and their
responsibility to stay for duty, no man has a duty here, she is
responsible
all by her little self, and you lie here as well. Oh, I used the R word
that none of the women here understand again. Forget it.
> placing all of the responsibility on the woman.
In the case of military women, that is where the responsibility rests.
> You say you want the truth, but when you get it, you automatically twist it
> into something we don't believe.
You delete the military from the conversation and generalize a specific
topic and accuse *me* of twisting things? You lie like Clinton sehlat.
> Your own beliefs about pregnancy reinforce
> the double standards against fathers in child custody cases. Get real.
And this is unconnected to anything at all.
> > Let's see, what is the name of your site and this newsgroup? Oh yes,
> > right, what is that, grrls. Not right persons, not right gerbils, but
> > grrls, seems that we have some sexist bias right off. And you call yourself
> > -feminists-.
>
> Oh, so there is no room for women-only sites.
Again you lie like a feminist. This was a specific response to a
specific
claim by Stephanie that there was no pro-female bias and none of the
lying horseshit you post has anything to do with the subject under
discussion. But Stephanie pulled the same horseshit, so it should come
as no surprise.
> > Feminism of course is about women, not equality. Seems that everything
> > you do and say is about women, no? The text you posted above is about
> > women by women, which is typical feminism, feminism ain't about boys or
> > men.
>
> This guy reminds me of the guy who got offended at the "Equal Rights for
> Unborn Women" banner. Our issues don't affect men?
All feminist issues *affect* men, and feminists want them to have the
largest negative affect as possible.
> Abortion kills little boys
> and little girls alike. We have male supporters and contributors. I get
> comments about my articles from men, and they're GOOD comments!
Perhaps you have not lied about them near every email?
> This guy needs help.
You need help, reading, and you need help with your lying.
> > Seems a bit late to deny that you have a bias and an agenda Stephanie.
>
> If she has one, it's only against you.
Like yours?
> Seeing that she has a husband and son,
> she can't be anti-male.
That has not stopped most feminists.
> > now try to delete THIS! PUNK.....
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> There's Rad :)
More lying horseshit.
Rich
Rich
seh...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> We wish it had been Rich's last post!
>
> In article <365881A1...@earthlink.net.remov.me>,
> payner@, earthlink.net.remov.me wrote:
> > Radical Conservative wrote:
>
> > Why are you posting my text RC?
> >
> > Too stupid to think of anything yourself to post?
>
> Not at all. He knew about your little deletefest and reposted
I don't mind that that idiot is re-posting my posts as long as
he does not modify them, if he does I will have a talk with his
ISP. As for this deletefest fantasy, care to post a cancel message
by myself? Oh yes, you deal in sexist hate fantasies, not reality.
> your stuff so you couldn't get away with hiding your junk.
Why would I try to hide what I intend to post? You are as stupid
as RC.
> Thank God he doesn't agree with yuor hateful drivel.
He shares your penchant for lies and distortion.
Rich
Radical Conservative
>
> seh...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > We wish it had been Rich's last post!
> >
> > In article <365881A1...@earthlink.net.remov.me>,
> > payner@, earthlink.net.remov.me wrote:
> > > Radical Conservative wrote:
> >
> > > Why are you posting my text RC?
> > >
> > > Too stupid to think of anything yourself to post?
> >
> > Not at all. He knew about your little deletefest and reposted
>
> I don't mind that that idiot is re-posting my posts as long as
> he does not modify them, if he does I will have a talk with his
> ISP. As for this deletefest fantasy, care to post a cancel message
> by myself? Oh yes, you deal in sexist hate fantasies, not reality.
Lan
> and little girls alike. We have male supporters and contributors. I get
> comments about my articles from men, and they're GOOD comments!
And whats that got to do with anything? I could say you rememinded me of
my kitchen curtain but its not going to prove anything.
> > Seems a bit late to deny that you have a bias and an agenda Stephanie.
> If she has one, it's only against you. Seeing that she has a husband and son,
> she can't be anti-male.
no, there are quite plenty enough anti males with husbands and sons (well
i cant say my mother didnt expect stereotypical male things out of me,
which I was totally against, and there are a few more tougher issues i
dont want to get into yet which she supported), and anti males with
boyfriends and brothers and I dont know what else. But if you want to deny
that its up to you.
seh...@my-dejanews.com
as...@zxcv.net (Lan) wrote:
> And whats that got to do with anything? I could say you rememinded me of
> my kitchen curtain but its not going to prove anything.
It's proof that not all men are as anti-fem as Rich.
And if your kitchen curtains are either pink or metallic purple,
then yes, I would remind you of your kitchen curtain. The apr regulars will
understand that right away.
> no, there are quite plenty enough anti males with husbands and sons (well
> i cant say my mother didnt expect stereotypical male things out of me,
> which I was totally against, and there are a few more tougher issues i
> dont want to get into yet which she supported), and anti males with
> boyfriends and brothers and I dont know what else. But if you want to deny
> that its up to you.
Are you sure these so-called "anti-male" women with husbands, sons,
brothers, etc. weren't just ticked at CERTAIN men? Like... oh... an abusive
husband, a disobedient son, or some insulting character on usenet?
I don't care what you call me. After all, you anti-fems already have me
painted as some man-hating Amazon (riiiiiight). But you DO NOT insult
Stephanie. She loves her husband and son, and I've never heard of anti-male
woman who loved even one man (or boy) while carrying on thatk ind of junk.