Does anyone else agree with feminism?

Post Reply New Topic

I looked for this post you describe here and I cannot seem to find it. Perhaps you can link it to me? I strongly suspect you can't, because you're lying



Really? I seem to see a pretty cemented definition. The only misunderstanding seems to be coming from you and your little circle jerk of fellow ignoramuses who think it is the equivalent of a white supremacist group



You might want to try getting some continence pants or an adult diaper for your problem


You *are* snarky and hostile. The feminists here are not the ones insulting 50% of the human race or engaging in utterly disgusting tactics of argumentation such as you and your ilk. I ask why nobody replies to DW and you open up on me instead of replying to her because *you have jack s**t TM*. You f*****g hypocrite

My wife and I know each other really, really, really intimately, in mind and soul, to a level that we are practically extensions of one another. That is what enables her trust in me. She's not merely obeying the Bible in trusting me as her husband; she learned over much time that I could be trusted, and that is where her level of confidence comes from. The Bible doesn't say to fully trust any guy out there with whom you share a mutual attraction and then marry him and submit to him. But she submits to me to the degree she feels comfortable, based on her intuitive understanding of me. And she likes being submissive, and a wife being submissive is good. In this we are simply following the Bible:

"Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord." (Ephesians 5:22)
"Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord." (Colossians 3:19)

All of this will be completely misunderstood by most responders in this thread.

I'm sorry that my wife and I know each other so well and get along so well together.

Last edited by Ragtime on 07 Apr 2012, 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I didn't want to argue in the first place.

I don't see the relevance of Ragtime's personal life. No offence to your husband, but I don't know why he brought it into this thread in the first place.

The reason Ragtime brouht it up was his hopes of derailing or killing the thread which is about feminism not his relationship with his wife.

I don't really care what some letters written by a religious evangelist in the Iron Age have to say about gender relations.

She has a right to do to me whatever I allow, and I have a right to do to her whatever she allows.

Any questions?

Oh crap, now I have to admit you don't hold a lot of credibility with me, since I don't even know you. (Sorry for the offense, if any taken.)

Yes what does this have to do with Feminism stop trying to kill the thread

Right back at you.

Now back to debating feminism, not religion or lifestyle choices.

I agree Puddingmouse what feminist do you admire the most I like the works of Angela Davis.

I asked if there are any questions. If there aren't, my personal life can be dropped as a subject of discussion.

Are you aware that some women submit to horrible physical treatment involving tons and tons of needless pain, causing bleeding, crying, uncontrollable drooling, all without religion whatsoever?

It's called BDSM. I doubt you'd judge those people as harshly as us evil Christians, who evilly follow the New Testament. Some women like to submit, and my wife is not very far on that scale considering what's out there for what both parties consider not religion, but pure godless fun.

Hint there is a white box with "Google Custom Search" on the top of the page. I wouldn't lie about such things, as they could easily be proven to be lies. If I was that bad of a liar I'd be you.



It kind of seems like every feminist in here have their own definition. Valentine alone has used about 3 or 4 definitions right now.

It kind of is the equivalent to a white supremacist group, "It's cool to be a man as long as you agree with feminism" as Valentine's position is when you summarize it, as she did in fact call every man who is not in favor of feminism a de
facto misogynist.



I would, but "continence" pants isn't so much what you mean, since the definition is:

1. self-restraint or abstinence, especially in regard to sexual activity; temperance; moderation.
2. Physiology . the ability to voluntarily control urinary and fecal discharge.

I assume you mean "incontinence" the prefix "in" used to signify a lack of continence which is the ability to hold in fecal matter and urin. In the case of the first definition. Then again, it's only about the 800th time your side in this discussion show a staggering incompetence when it comes to the definitions of words.



I linked the bloody image in the post you quoted. I hardly see arguing against feminism as insulting 50% of the human race, unless all women are feminists with the exact same view on the ideology and the method for executing that ideology.

Furthermore, Valentine repeatedly called every man who disagrees with her version of feminism a de facto sexist. I opened up on you because you appeared to be deserving of a patented TM lashing. I grew up being bullied, I have no problem taking on such domination tactics as used in this thread, I have my whole life.

I'd say you were generalizing if you say that all women by definition are feminists, seems strangely like you're seeing them all as one. Not all women are feminists and not all feminists are women. How about seeing women as individuals, seems very mean to view them all as one, kind of like you're robbing them off their individuality and that's just sexist tbh.

CLICK THIS LINK ---> http://i44.tinypic.com/2d1tuf4.jpg <--- CLICK THIS LINK

It is hard to argue against something that you cannot read. I don't not need glasses and if I click the zoom button I still have to squent to read it. I can't make sense of the graphs either because of that.

Iexplore and Firefox : CTRL + to zoom.

Horray! lets make the words fuzzy. I already tried that earlier. I mean I could read it, but it would take forever compared to how long I normally can and hurt my eyes/headache.

There aren't any feminist writers I admire, really. I take ideas from all kinds of writers. First, Second and Third Wave. From Mary Wollstonecraft to Naomi Wolf. I mostly identify with second-wave feminsim, although I disagree with a lot of what Dworkin, McKinnon, et al. It's just that the framwork of rad fem makes sense to me.

Gloria Steinem is cool though, apart from her transphobia. That's the main problem I have with her generation of feminists, though I do think the third-wave has also lost its way. That's why I take the best of both generations.