Adultery in Afghanistan
Michael Snyder
Our good friends over in the censored newsgroup SOC.FEMINISM
are fond of moaning about how women in Afghanistan are executed
for adultery. This claim turns out to be exactly like their claim that
a woman is beaten every 15 seconds (omitting to mention that a
man is beaten by his wife every 15 seconds as well). And in fact
it is true that Afghan women are executed for adultery -- just like
Afghan men.
Amnesty international article on the execution of adulterous pair:
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news/awards/print.html
Ten men and four women punished for adultery:
http://www.ccamata.com/april/apr0114.htm
Man executed, woman flogged for adultery:
http://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/default.asp?PageId=217
Ten men and two women lashed for adultery:
http://rawa.org/hang-w.htm
Unmarried couple given 100 lashes each for having sex:
http://rawa.org/lashing3.htm
Man and woman stoned to death for adultery:
http://rawa.org/5days.htm
Men _and_ women shall be stoned to death for adultery:
http://rawa.org/8emarch.htm
Woman and man given 100 lashes on suspicion of adultery:
http://rawa.org/reports.html
Male taxi driver given 100 lashes for adultery:
http://rawa.org/handcut4.htm
It's worth mentioning that while searching for the above articles,
I found numerous others that mentioned only women being
punished for adultery (and other crimes). Since these nine
articles clearly establish that men are punished too, it proves
that all of those other articles that mention only women are biased.
I also found repeated again and again the claim that Afghan
women who were raped might be punished for adultery, but
I did not find a single citation for that actually happening.
AFAICT it is a pure fantasy.
As well, I found numerous statements like "The punishment for
a woman who commits adultery is stoning", conspicuously
failing to mention that the punishment for a man is exactly
the same.
Parg2000
Mike, YOU still haven't answered my question, dear. IF you had to live under
Fanny Talibani existence, would you rather be a man or woman, there?
Greg
Only cross-gender violence matters to them. To a feminist, a man
victimized by another man had it coming. So unless the leaders of the
Taliban are women, they don't care what the Taliban does to men,
because they see it as a male monolith collapsing on itself. Of
course, they probably wouldn't care about treatment of men even if the
Taliban had women, because they just don't care about men, period.
But they'll justify their conspicuous disregard for "males" by saying,
"Well the people doing it to them are all males. Nyahh nyaah nyaah."
And then they chide us for "linear thinking." Pfft! At least our
minds are expandable enough to think of men as individuals and to
distinguish between the man being beaten and the man doing the
beating. "They all look the same to me" would be their refrain, if
they were honest.
Its too bad I can't post this to soc.feminism without some
limp-wristed softie saying, "Pssth. This is just too insthensitive.
This would our tender feelingsth."
Isn't the moderation of soc.feminism analogous to the controls that
feminism tries to put on society to save women having to compete on a
level field with men?
T. R. Ellis
Carol Ann, dribble tit, you still haven't answered. If you had the will and
the choice to stop one of the following:
1) molesting your children
2) making false accusations of rape against your ex-husband,
what would it be?
T. R. Ellis
Stephen Morgan
Behind every female head of state is a violent man.
> But they'll justify their conspicuous disregard for "males" by saying,
> "Well the people doing it to them are all males. Nyahh nyaah nyaah."
Can't expect women to do the dirty work.
> And then they chide us for "linear thinking."
"logic".
> Pfft! At least our
> minds are expandable enough to think of men as individuals and to
> distinguish between the man being beaten and the man doing the
> beating. "They all look the same to me" would be their refrain, if
> they were honest.
>
> Its too bad I can't post this to soc.feminism without some
> limp-wristed softie saying, "Pssth. This is just too insthensitive.
> This would our tender feelingsth."
>
> Isn't the moderation of soc.feminism analogous to the controls that
> feminism tries to put on society to save women having to compete on a
> level field with men?
Yes.
--
Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example of the believers,
in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity.
-- 1 Timothy 4:12
Michael Snyder
T. R. Ellis wrote in message ...
She's lying again -- I did answer her question, the first time she asked it.
I said there is not enough difference between the fate of men and women
in Afghanistan to make a clear preference. Men are oppressed just as
badly as women, or as near as makes no difference. MORE men are
executed, MORE men are mutilated, MORE men are flogged, MORE
men are imprisoned. I feel this easily makes up for having to wear
a burka...
T. R. Ellis
>T. R. Ellis wrote:
>>Carol Ann WOrstall/Hemingway wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Mike, YOU still haven't answered my question, dear. IF you had to live under
>>>Fanny Talibani existence, would you rather be a man or woman, there?
>>
>>
>>Carol Ann, dribble tit, you still haven't answered. If you had the will and
>>the choice to stop one of the following:
>>1) molesting your children
>>2) making false accusations of rape against your ex-husband,
>>
>>what would it be?
>
>She's lying again --
Oh GOD no! Tell me it ain't true!
>I did answer her question, the first time she asked it.
But you didn't give the answer she wanted. You meanie!
>I said there is not enough difference between the fate of men and women
>in Afghanistan to make a clear preference. Men are oppressed just as
>badly as women, or as near as makes no difference. MORE men are
>executed, MORE men are mutilated, MORE men are flogged, MORE
>men are imprisoned. I feel this easily makes up for having to wear
>a burka...
Are you kidding? Men in Afghanistan have lots of options: to be executed OR
mutilated OR flogged OR imprisoned. And they're the "oppressors", the
entire lot of them.
Women clearly have it worse. Don't argue. A FEMINIST said so!
Hey! This "feminism" sthick is easy, eh? Not very satisfying, though.
T. R. Ellis
Parg2000
>From: T. R. Ellis tre...@spamx.mega.co.za
>Date: 10/5/01 12:55 AM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <rkpqrt0gloj45oi48...@4ax.com>
{Parg} How is my question like "when did you stop killing your wife"?
>
>
>
>T. R. Ellis
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
T. R. Ellis
>T. R. Ellis wrote:
>>
>>><cut>
>>>
>>>Mike, YOU still haven't answered my question, dear. IF you had to
>live>under
>>>Fanny Talibani existence, would you rather be a man or woman, there?
>>
>>
>>Carol Ann, dribble tit, you still haven't answered. If you had the will and
>>the choice to stop one of the following:
>>1) molesting your children
>>2) making false accusations of rape against your ex-husband,
>>
>>what would it be?
>
>{Parg} How is my question like "when did you stop killing your wife"?
So you still can't answer the question. This is a worry. What are you
hiding?
T. R. Ellis
Parg2000
>
>She's lying again -- I did answer her question, the first time she asked it.
>I said there is not enough difference between the fate of men and women
>in Afghanistan to make a clear preference.
{Parg} Ah, but the hypo I provided forced you to choose. If you don't want to
answer, I don't blame you Mike. Of course, at one point in your argument,
didn't you say that men had it ALMOST as bad?
<G>
Men are oppressed just as>badly as women, or as near as makes no difference.
MORE men are>executed, MORE men are mutilated, MORE men are flogged, MORE
>men are imprisoned. I feel this easily makes up for having to wear
>a burka...
>
{Parg} Women are subject to all those punishments AS WELL AS being denied
total human rights.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Parg2000
<cut>
Only cross-gender violence matters to them. To a feminist, a man victimized
by another man had it coming.
{Parg} I once taught a class where two children were constantly fighting.
They were cousins. The teachers would break them up and they were frequently
suspended for days at a time. The school insisted on counseling as well. One
day, the fight got out of hand and another child was injured by their fighting.
They were expelled. You see, there IS a difference in punishments when two
fighting people injure a third party. I thought the punishment fit the crime.
T. R. Ellis
><cut>
>
>>
>>She's lying again -- I did answer her question, the first time she asked it.
>>I said there is not enough difference between the fate of men and women
>>in Afghanistan to make a clear preference.
>{Parg} Ah, but the hypo I provided forced you to choose. If you don't want to
>answer, I don't blame you Mike. Of course, at one point in your argument,
>didn't you say that men had it ALMOST as bad?
Did you read the rest of his sentence, little lady? If so, why did you
conveniently forget it?
><G>
>
>Men are oppressed just as>badly as women, or as near as makes no difference.
>MORE men are>executed, MORE men are mutilated, MORE men are flogged, MORE
>>men are imprisoned. I feel this easily makes up for having to wear
>>a burka...
>>
>{Parg} Women are subject to all those punishments AS WELL AS being denied
>total human rights.
'subject to'? Are you saying that as many or more women than men ARE
ACTUALLY executed, mutilated, flogged and imprisoned?
It's OK. I'll let you lie, if you really need to.
T. R. Ellis
Michael Snyder
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
See the Best of Marg Petersen Page at
http://members.telocity.com/~snyderboy/best-of/marg
-----------------------------------------------------------------
>Carol Ann Worstall/Hemingway wrote:
>
>><cut>
>>
>>>
>>>She's lying again -- I did answer her question, the first time she asked it.
>>>I said there is not enough difference between the fate of men and women
>>>in Afghanistan to make a clear preference.
>>{Parg} Ah, but the hypo I provided forced you to choose.
You can't force me to do anything, Lefty. But isn't it
interesting that you want to? You don't think men should
be allowed to force women to do ANYTHING, yet you claim
the right for yourself to force ME to choose...
>> If you don't want to
>>answer,
You have my answer. There isn't enough difference in their
lot to make either one preferable.
>>Of course, at one point in your argument,
>>didn't you say that men had it ALMOST as bad?
Liar. Quote me in the entire statement, in context.
>
>Did you read the rest of his sentence, little lady? If so, why did you
>conveniently forget it?
>
>><G>
>>
>>Men are oppressed just as>badly as women, or as near as makes no difference.
>>MORE men are>executed, MORE men are mutilated, MORE men are flogged, MORE
>>>men are imprisoned. I feel this easily makes up for having to wear
>>>a burka...
Heh. I don't see the words "almost as bad" in there,
Carol/Lefty/Pargy-poo. Did you make them up?
Did you put words in my mouth? Did you LIE????
Gee what a surprise -- a lie from a feminist...
>>>
>>{Parg} Women are subject to all those punishments AS WELL AS being denied
>>total human rights.
Just as MEN are denied total human rights,
you incredible git...
>
>'subject to'? Are you saying that as many or more women than men ARE
>ACTUALLY executed, mutilated, flogged and imprisoned?
>
>It's OK. I'll let you lie, if you really need to.
It's all she lives for, T.R.
Sad, but true.
Parg2000
>>><cut>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>She's lying again -- I did answer her question, the first time she asked
>it.>>>>I said there is not enough difference between the fate of men and women
>>>>in Afghanistan to make a clear preference.
>>>{Parg} Ah, but the hypo I provided forced you to choose.
>
>You can't force me to do anything, Lefty.
{Parg} Indeed, but that doesn't alter the fact that my hypo FORCES a choice.
You failed to choose BECAUSE you know the answer. <G>
But isn't it>interesting that you want to? You don't think men should>be
allowed to force women to do ANYTHING, yet you claim
>the right for yourself to force ME to choose...
>
{Parg} The hypo is a forced choice dear. If I had to live in Afghanistan, I'd
surely prefer being male to female. How about you?
>>> If you don't want to
>>>answer,
>
>You have my answer.
{Parg} I have NO answer. You failed to choose.
There isn't enough difference in their
>lot to make either one preferable.
{Parg} Then you might as well answer since there is so little difference
between the two.
<G>
>
>>>Of course, at one point in your argument,
>>>didn't you say that men had it ALMOST as bad?
>
>Liar. Quote me in the entire statement, in context.
>
{Parg} I asked the question, dear. Don't you have an answer to that either?
<G>
>
>>
>>Did you read the rest of his sentence, little lady? If so, why did you
>>conveniently forget it?
{Parg} Forget what? I asked you if you didn't say that. Are you unable to
tell the difference between a statement and a question?
>>
>>><G>
>>>
>>>Men are oppressed just as>badly as women, or as near as makes no
>difference.>>MORE men are>executed, MORE men are mutilated, MORE men are
flogged, MORE
>>>>men are imprisoned. I feel this easily makes up for having to wear
>>>>a burka...
>
>Heh. I don't see the words "almost as bad" in there,>Carol/Lefty/Pargy-poo.
Did you make them up?
{Parg} Are you attempting to answer a question?
>Did you put words in my mouth? Did you LIE????>Gee what a surprise -- a lie
from a feminist...
>
>{Parg} Do you know the difference between a statement and a question and is
that why you utterly failed to answer mine?
<G>
>>>>
>>>{Parg} Women are subject to all those punishments AS WELL AS being denied
>>>total human rights.
>
>Just as MEN are denied total human rights,
>you incredible git...
{Parg} Not so, dear. Men have a voice and guns. In fact, it is the guns that
give them the voice. In the meantime, "If you HAD TO CHOOSE, between being
male and female in Taliban run Afghanistan, which would you select?
>
>
>>
T. R. Ellis
>
>>>><cut>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>She's lying again -- I did answer her question, the first time she asked
>>it.>>>>I said there is not enough difference between the fate of men and women
>>>>>in Afghanistan to make a clear preference.
>>>>{Parg} Ah, but the hypo I provided forced you to choose.
>>
>>You can't force me to do anything, Lefty.
>
>{Parg} Indeed, but that doesn't alter the fact that my hypo FORCES a choice.
>You failed to choose BECAUSE you know the answer. <G>
You hypocrisy forces nothing more than your bluff, Carol Ann. <C>
>
>> But isn't it>interesting that you want to? You don't think men should
>>be allowed to force women to do ANYTHING, yet you claim
>>the right for yourself to force ME to choose...
>>
>{Parg} The hypo is a forced choice dear.
Your hypocrisy is your own choice, honeywagon. No one forced it on
you. You adopted it entirely on your own.
Your scenario forces nothing. There four possible answers. Man.
Woman. Either. Neither.
I choose neither, because men and women are tormented quite thoroughly
in that country. If you want to choose the "women" answer, then do
it.
You can force NO ONE else to make the choice you wish they would.
Feminism hasn't taught you that, has it? No surprise.
> If I had to live in Afghanistan, I'd
>surely prefer being male to female. How about you?
I'll answer again. NEITHER.
That you choose "male" is nothing more than a rather clear indication
of your sick fantasies about the superiourity of men. Try to grow up,
Carol Ann.
>
>>>> If you don't want to
>>>>answer,
>>
>>You have my answer.
>
>{Parg} I have NO answer. You failed to choose.
You have the answer that you didn't like. That is a problem for NO
ONE but you.
>
> There isn't enough difference in their
>>lot to make either one preferable.
>
>{Parg} Then you might as well answer since there is so little difference
>between the two.
><G>
Neither. <C>
>>>>Of course, at one point in your argument,
>>>>didn't you say that men had it ALMOST as bad?
>>
>>Liar. Quote me in the entire statement, in context.
>>
>{Parg} I asked the question, dear. Don't you have an answer to that either?
><G>
I asked you a question, honeywagon. Are you afraid to answer? I'll
remind you.
If you had the will an the choice to stop one of the following:
1) molesting your children
2) making false accusations of rape against your ex-husband,
which would you choose?
Why won't you answer this simple scenario? Something bothering you?
>>
>>>
>>>Did you read the rest of his sentence, little lady? If so, why did you
>>>conveniently forget it?
>
>{Parg} Forget what? I asked you if you didn't say that. Are you unable to
>tell the difference between a statement and a question?
You didn't ask me any such thing, dumbass. Learn to read.
>>>>
>>>>Men are oppressed just as>badly as women, or as near as makes no
>>>>difference. MORE men are executed, MORE men are mutilated, MORE men are
>>>>flogged, MORE men are imprisoned. I feel this easily makes up for having to wear
>>>>a burka...
>>
>>Heh. I don't see the words "almost as bad" in there, Carol/Lefty/Pargy-poo.
>>Did you make them up?
>
>{Parg} Are you attempting to answer a question?
Are you continuing to avoid a question?
>
>
>>Did you put words in my mouth? Did you LIE????>Gee what a surprise -- a lie
>>from a feminist...
>>
>>{Parg} Do you know the difference between a statement and a question and is
>>that why you utterly failed to answer mine?
><G>
Do you know that it's abhorent, not to mention unlawful, to molest
children and falsely accuse someone of rape, Carol Ann? No? Is that
why you're avoiding my question?
>
>>>>>
>>>>{Parg} Women are subject to all those punishments AS WELL AS being denied
>>>>total human rights.
>>
>>Just as MEN are denied total human rights,
>>you incredible git...
>
>{Parg} Not so, dear. Men have a voice and guns.
Uhhh, tell that to the men who have been executed, dismembered,
imprisoned or who are fleeing, unarmed, with their families, Carol
Ann, my sloshing little honeywagon.
>In fact, it is the guns that give them the voice.
What voice? A death rasp? A scream of pain and anguish?
>In the meantime, "If you HAD TO CHOOSE, between being
>male and female in Taliban run Afghanistan, which would you select?
Neither. Both sexes are treated VERY badly in Afghanistan, and
neither has an advantage, in spite of your sexist fantasy.
If you don't like that as an answer, little lady, you are invited to
go straight to Afghanistan as whatever sex you choose and find a
better one.
I won't object.
T. R. Ellis
Sky King
tre...@mega.xspamx.co.za says...
> Carol Ann Worstall/Hemingway wrote:
>
> >
> >>>><cut>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>She's lying again -- I did answer her question, the first time she asked
> >>it.>>>>I said there is not enough difference between the fate of men and women
> >>>>>in Afghanistan to make a clear preference.
> >>>>{Parg} Ah, but the hypo I provided forced you to choose.
> >>
> >>You can't force me to do anything, Lefty.
> >
> >{Parg} Indeed, but that doesn't alter the fact that my hypo FORCES a choice.
> >You failed to choose BECAUSE you know the answer. <G>
>
would be more capable of getting themselves out of the situation.
Apparently women there are not as capable. Pity. sky
> You hypocrisy forces nothing more than your bluff, Carol Ann. <C>
>
> >
> >> But isn't it>interesting that you want to? You don't think men should
> >>be allowed to force women to do ANYTHING, yet you claim
> >>the right for yourself to force ME to choose...
> >>
> >{Parg} The hypo is a forced choice dear.
>
Yep and I chose and told you why. chuckle
sky
> Your hypocrisy is your own choice, honeywagon. No one forced it on
> you. You adopted it entirely on your own.
>
> Your scenario forces nothing. There four possible answers. Man.
> Woman. Either. Neither.
>
> I choose neither, because men and women are tormented quite thoroughly
> in that country. If you want to choose the "women" answer, then do
> it.
>
> You can force NO ONE else to make the choice you wish they would.
>
> Feminism hasn't taught you that, has it? No surprise.
>
> > If I had to live in Afghanistan, I'd
> >surely prefer being male to female. How about you?
>
Yep because they are more capable. sky
Well since women can do everything a man can do that is not a good
argument. sky
Society
>
> [In Afghanistan] Men are oppressed just as badly as women,
> or as near as makes no difference. MORE men are executed,
> MORE men are mutilated, MORE men are flogged, MORE
> men are imprisoned. I feel this easily makes up for
> having to wear a burka...
And more. Soon we'll have US Boys in Body Bags for Burkas.
--
It's their war.
Let them fight it.
Michael Snyder
here's the original article again...
Greg
Hrmmm. Now why would you gravitate toward a position dealing
primarily with children? Are you incapable of dealing with adults?
Particularly adult men?
Parg, your example illustrates the problem. Why did they make no
effort to find out who was the agressor and who the defender, and to
punish the aggressor? Perhaps one of these boys was being picked on
and defending himself. Perhaps he just wanted the fighting to stop,
and his pleas were ignored because his attacker was also a boy. "Oh,
its just two boys fighting." Can you imagine how helpless a kid would
feel in that situation? If the kid is a boy, do you even care?
Parg2000
>Date: 10/7/01 8:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <ac57efe0.01100...@posting.google.com>
>
>parg...@cs.com (Parg2000) wrote in message
>news:<20011005105344...@mb-fs.news.cs.com>...
>> >
>> <cut>
>>
>> Only cross-gender violence matters to them. To a feminist, a man
victimized
>> by another man had it coming.
>>
>> {Parg} I once taught a class where two children were constantly fighting.
They were cousins. The teachers would break them up and they were>frequently
>> suspended for days at a time. The school insisted on counseling as
well.>One
>> day, the fight got out of hand and another child was injured by their
fighting.
>> They were expelled. You see, there IS a difference in punishments when two
>> fighting people injure a third party. I thought the punishment fit
the>crime.
>
>Hrmmm. Now why would you gravitate toward a position dealing primarily with
children?
{Parg} There was no need to do otherwise.
This was a very good example where two individuals were causing a harm one to
another and third INNOCENT BYSTANDER was injured.
Are you incapable of dealing with adults?
>Particularly adult men?
{Parg} While children do deserve our most ardent protections, are you
suggesting that innocent bystander adults do not? Shame on you!
>
>Parg, your example illustrates the problem. Why did they make no effort to
find out who was the agressor and who the defender, and to
>punish the aggressor?
{Parg} In school fights, there is seldom one aggressor; in fact most physical
fights are disagreements where the parties haven't the skills to handle the
situation in other ways.
Therefore, the actual point of aggression isn't terribly effective UNLESS there
is some history of aggression, or some clear point when aggression began. In
the case of the two kids mentioned above, the aggression was ongoing.
Perhaps one of these boys was being picked on and defending himself. Perhaps
he just wanted the fighting to stop, and his pleas were ignored because his
attacker was also a boy. "Oh, its just two boys fighting." Can you imagine
how helpless a kid would
>feel in that situation? If the kid is a boy, do you even care?
>
{Parg} What? All of the parties I mentioned above were GIRLS. I guess you
tend to see things in terms of male-only! Not surprising.
>
>
>
>
>
Greg
Oh bullshit. Like any feminist, you think you can complicate the
issue enough to mask your pathetic lack of justification for your
position. Then you'll call me a "linear thinker" for seeing through
your facade. Anyone with common sense knows that there are schoolyard
bullies and overbearing students who pick on other children. With a
straight face, you'll tell is this isn't so. Then you launch into
some bloated diatribe to justify punishing aggressive and defensive
children equally, just as you justify seeing oppressed men and
opressive men as one lump, allowing you to disregard the oppressed
men.
> in fact most physical
> fights are disagreements where the parties haven't the skills to handle the
> situation in other ways.
> Therefore, the actual point of aggression isn't terribly effective UNLESS there
> is some history of aggression, or some clear point when aggression began. In
> the case of the two kids mentioned above, the aggression was ongoing.
>
> Perhaps one of these boys was being picked on and defending himself. Perhaps
> he just wanted the fighting to stop, and his pleas were ignored because his
> attacker was also a boy. "Oh, its just two boys fighting." Can you imagine
> how helpless a kid would
> >feel in that situation? If the kid is a boy, do you even care?
> >
> {Parg} What? All of the parties I mentioned above were GIRLS. I guess you
> tend to see things in terms of male-only! Not surprising.
Now I wonder why Parg would want to completely discard a valid
question based on a technicality? I assumed they were boys, they were
actually girls, and Parg uses this as an exuse to dodge the question
entirely, although she can certainy find time to shame me. Could it
be she's completely incapable of answering the question? Is her
knee-jerk shaming learned or innate behavior?
Parg2000
{Parg} Whether or not there are "schoolyard" bullies is not at issue. In most
school situations, kids who are involved in fighting BOTH are repremanded
because it would become a matter of one said this and the other, that. A
school fight generally involves two kids who can't work out their differences
in other way.
And, generally BOTH are punished.
With a>straight face, you'll tell is this isn't so.
{Parg} First, you cannot tell if my face is "straight" because you can't see
it. I happen to be smiling. <G> Secondly I never told you there were no
"schoolyard bullies"; that was fathered by your own invention.
Then you launch into>some bloated diatribe to justify punishing aggressive
and defensive
>children equally, just as you justify seeing oppressed men and
>opressive men as one lump, allowing you to disregard the oppressed
>men.
>
{Parg} Nonsense! Clearly, I told you that an innocent bystander will tend to
be treated better than a person engaging in violence. That's just the way it
is. > In fact most physical
>> fights are disagreements where the parties haven't the skills to handle the
situation in other ways. Therefore, the actual point of aggression isn't
terribly effective UNLESS
>there> is some history of aggression, or some clear point when aggression
began.>In
>> the case of the two kids mentioned above, the aggression was ongoing.
>>
>> Perhaps one of these boys was being picked on and defending
himself.>Perhaps>> he just wanted the fighting to stop, and his pleas were
ignored because his
>> attacker was also a boy. "Oh, its just two boys fighting." Can you
>imagine
>> how helpless a kid would
>> >feel in that situation? If the kid is a boy, do you even care?
>> >
>> {Parg} What? All of the parties I mentioned above were GIRLS. I guess
>you> tend to see things in terms of male-only! Not surprising.
>
>Now I wonder why Parg would want to completely discard a valid question based
on a technicality?
{Parg} What IS your point? People who regularly engage in violence reap what
they sew. These kids were regulars. The innocent third party was not
expelled.
I assumed they were boys, they were
>actually girls, and Parg uses this as an exuse to dodge the question entirely,
although she can certainy find time to shame me.
{Parg} There is no issue dodged dear; those who regularly engage in violent
behavior face greater blame than those who do not. That was clear in this
situation.
Could it>be she's completely incapable of answering the question?
{Parg} I have answered it, obviously not to your taste.
Is her>knee-jerk shaming learned or innate behavior?
>
{Parg} When did you stop beating your wife?
<G>
>
>
>
>
>
Greg
It would be, if you were coherent enought to remember your previous,
vacuous claim that "in school fights, there is seldom one aggressor."
But that's classic Parg. Make a claim, get debunked, then claim that
the one who debunked you is arguing the wrong issue, despite you
having raised the issue.
most
> school situations, kids who are involved in fighting BOTH are repremanded
> because it would become a matter of one said this and the other, that. A
> school fight generally involves two kids who can't work out their differences
> in other way.
> And, generally BOTH are punished.
>
> With a>straight face, you'll tell is this isn't so.
>
> {Parg} First, you cannot tell if my face is "straight" because you can't see
> it. I happen to be smiling. <G> Secondly I never told you there were no
> "schoolyard bullies"; that was fathered by your own invention.
Parg, must you make it necessary for people to hand hold you just to
argue with you? Here is your claim: "In school fights, there is
seldom one aggressor." The common presence of schoolyard bullies, or
children who are aggressive toward other children, negates your claim.
It isn't always right to punish both of the kids involved in a
schoolyard fight as if both are equally culpable. I didn't "father"
anything. I generously offered to argue against your own words. Why
can't you handle that?
> Then you launch into>some bloated diatribe to justify punishing aggressive
> and defensive
> >children equally, just as you justify seeing oppressed men and
> >opressive men as one lump, allowing you to disregard the oppressed
> >men.
> >
> {Parg} Nonsense! Clearly, I told you that an innocent bystander will tend to
> be treated better than a person engaging in violence. That's just the way it
> is.
Why should an innocent bystander be treated differently than one who
is attacked and defends himself? And you damsure don't care much
about the men in Afghanistan who are hurt, tortured, and killed, even
though they're innocent bystanders. This is why you can't stand the
mention of them, even though they're victimized in far greater numbers
than the women in Afghanistan. When someone brings them up, they get
the same old "Yeah, but they're attackers are men too!"
One must engage in violence to defend oneself. When a woman defends
herself from a violent man, you are easily able to distinguish between
aggressive violence and defensive violence. Yet here you claim that
_anyone_ engaging in violence is blameworthy. Hrmm, I wonder why
you'd make such a claim.
Michael Snyder
Greg wrote in message ...
How the hell did we get from adultery to school fights?
Talk about diverting the discussion!
Michael Snyder
Greg wrote in message ...
Considering that the thread is about adultery, I would say
that whoever RAISED the issue of school fights was
arguing the wrong issue, changing the subject, and
diverting the discussion.
Parg2000
>Date: 10/8/01 8:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <p1uw7.1463$aq1.1...@newsrump.sjc.telocity.net>
{Parg} I answered you, but apparently you didn't like my answer.
Make a claim, get debunked, then claim that
the one who debunked you is arguing the wrong issue, despite you
>>having raised the issue.
{Parg} I raised the issue of two bullies fighting and bringing in a third
party who was NOT fighting. You brought the issue of blame as between the
two fighting parties. I suggested that both were at blame. You didn't LIKE
that.
>
>Considering that the thread is about adultery, I would say>that whoever RAISED
the issue of school fights was arguing the wrong issue, changing the subject,
and
>diverting the discussion.
>
>{Parg} Well, subject lines do expand, and you were comenting on the
expansion, just like me, dear.
>
>
>
>
>
>
Ray Fischer
>Mike, YOU still haven't answered my question, dear. IF you had to live under
>Fanny Talibani existence, would you rather be a man or woman, there?
You haven't answered my question.
Would you rather be an oppressed woman or a dead man?
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
rfis...@sonic.net into you -- Nietzsche
Parg2000
>Date: 10/9/01 5:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <FxMw7.3750$no1....@typhoon.sonic.net>
>
>Parg2000 <parg...@cs.com> wrote:
>>Mike, YOU still haven't answered my question, dear. IF you had to live
>under
>>Fanny Talibani existence, would you rather be a man or woman, there?
>
>You haven't answered my question.
>
> Would you rather be an oppressed woman or a dead man?
{Parg} I've answered your question. Given that women in Afghanistan live with
all the same threats the men fear, plus oppression; I'd rather be the one
who's is less oppressed.
Asked and answered...again.
Greg
<snip>
>{Parg} I raised the issue of two bullies fighting and bringing in a
third
>party who was NOT fighting. You brought the issue of blame as
between the
>two fighting parties. I suggested that both were at blame. You
didn't LIKE
>that.
You didn't say bullies. You said children. Can you absolutely not be
consistent? Must you always try to flee from your rediculous claims
by changing your arguments afterward?
I didn't LIKE that because you raised this issue in response to my
talking about male victims of violence in Afganistan. I pointed out
that only cross-gender violence matters to the feminist. Feminists
can't be bothered to acknowledge the existence of male victims if the
perpetrators were also male, however innocent those male victims may
be. In response to this statement, you raised the issue of two
children fighting and claimed they were equally guilty, because they
were both fighting. In drawing this comparison, in response to my
statement, you implicitly suggested that the victims of male-on-male
violence are as blameworthy as their attackers. You'll deny this,
but anyone can go back through the thread and see it. See now why I
didn't LIKE that? See now why I called you on it and pointed out your
blatant misandry once again?
In responding to you, when I know I shouldn't, I have inadvertently
irritated one of the other posters here. It's considered bad form to
respond to you, because its generally known that you are a troll and
not to be taken seriously. How does that make you feel? How do you
like knowing that you are so clearly hateful, incompetent, and just
plain stupid that responding to you draws the ire of the other
posters? Isn't it humiliating to you that part of the soc.men group
etiquette is to ignore Parg? Of course it isn't, because nothing can
possibly humiliate someone with so little self-esteem as yourself.
Your "life's work" is clearly to flame soc.men, and you can't even do
THAT right.
Your a disgrace, Parg. I won't clutter this group by giving you any
more attention.