But it is a legitimate point.
Advertisement
by United Marxist Nations » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:21 pm
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
by Cannot think of a name » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:21 pm
United Marxist Nations wrote:No one is going to reply to what I said?
by Des-Bal » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:22 pm
United Marxist Nations wrote:But it is a legitimate point.
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos
by United Marxist Nations » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:24 pm
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
by Des-Bal » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:24 pm
Cannot think of a name wrote:What, do you want woman kind to respond to some anecdotal shit that happened to you in a club?
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos
by Nadkor » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:26 pm
Des-Bal wrote:Nadkor wrote:
I was highlighting the problem with making wide, sweeping, and unqualified statements such as "it's not a crime to look at someone".
I'm sorry if you're not capable of comprehending that.
You were either sharpshooting my use of informal phrases, confused by the concept of non-denotative phrases, or just practicing your typing regardless it's adding nothing to the discourse.
by United Marxist Nations » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:27 pm
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
by Cannot think of a name » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:28 pm
by Des-Bal » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:28 pm
Nadkor wrote:Yes, how silly of me. You obviously know what I was doing better than I do.
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos
by Agymnum » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:28 pm
Des-Bal wrote:Cannot think of a name wrote:What, do you want woman kind to respond to some anecdotal shit that happened to you in a club?
He wanted a response to the phenomonae of glitter sprinkled breasts. If a woman takes a special effort to cover her breasts in glitter what purpose does that serve except for drawing attention.
by Nadkor » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:29 pm
United Marxist Nations wrote:No one is going to reply to what I said?
by Nadkor » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:30 pm
by Des-Bal » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:30 pm
Cannot think of a name wrote:You wouldn't consider holding up a single woman in a night club and her reactions to be, in itself, a bit of a 'strawman' (in the popular miss us of the concept) about the idea of objectification, that somehow all women must be in lockstep agreement with what is and what is not appropriate? That somehow this unverifiable stranger and her reported actions somehow undermine the larger societal issue as a bit reductive and an attempt to shift the argument? And not, perhaps, indicative of the larger problem of thinking that this is in fact a 'us vs. them' kind of thing, that thinking recognizing a societal norm is the same as saying 'men suck' and therefore finding some women who, by your estimation, send mixed signals therefore invalidates the entire notion of objectification?
You sure about that backpat you're giving yourself?
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos
by Sardine World » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:31 pm
Agymnum wrote:Des-Bal wrote:
He wanted a response to the phenomonae of glitter sprinkled breasts. If a woman takes a special effort to cover her breasts in glitter what purpose does that serve except for drawing attention.
*Drools over glittery breasts*
"B-boobies!"
On-topic, I don't mind that women insist on dressing skimpily. I just mind when they bitch out at men staring, as if they dressed skimpily so people wouldn't stare at them. I get that rape is bad and all, but it ain't rape if all the man is doing is making chauvinist comments and staring. Both parties are at fault (the man for being a chauvinist asshole and the woman for her choice in dress) but realistically the clothing is changeable. The chauvinistic attitude you're not going to find easy to change.
by Des-Bal » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:33 pm
Nadkor wrote:
Oh, I'm ever so sorry.
I didn't realise that you required that we adhere studiously to the precise topic at hand at all times.
Nadkor wrote:
If a woman sprinkles glitter on her breasts it's entirely possible that she wishes for one or more specific or non-specific people to look at it. It does not necessarily mean that she wishes for you to look at it.
This has been If You'd Read The Thread You'd Have Got An Answer 101 with me, Professor Nadkor.
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos
by Cannot think of a name » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:34 pm
United Marxist Nations wrote:Also, isn't womankind one word? I don't know, someone find out!
Des-Bal wrote:Cannot think of a name wrote:What, do you want woman kind to respond to some anecdotal shit that happened to you in a club?
He wanted a response to the phenomonae of glitter sprinkled breasts. If a woman takes a special effort to cover her breasts in glitter what purpose does that serve except for drawing attention.
by The Zeonic States » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:35 pm
by Des-Bal » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:36 pm
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos
by Ifreann » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:36 pm
by United Marxist Nations » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:42 pm
Cannot think of a name wrote:United Marxist Nations wrote:Yes! Also, it was not a club, it was a public park.
Well, there's your problem.
I know you're thinking that men in general are being asked to answer for the actions of 'some men', but that's your own defensive thinking. You're not. Unless you are learing and whistling at women and then making excuses for that. But then, I'm not asked to make excuses for you even if I have a penis. You are taking personally a societal argument and then trying to personalize the argument for everyone. It's a very popular thing to do, but it is neither constructive nor as insightful as you'd like it to be.United Marxist Nations wrote:Also, isn't womankind one word? I don't know, someone find out!
Dude, you're lucky this shit is legible.Des-Bal wrote:
He wanted a response to the phenomonae of glitter sprinkled breasts. If a woman takes a special effort to cover her breasts in glitter what purpose does that serve except for drawing attention.
So? Talk to chicks with glitter on their breasts.
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
by Cannot think of a name » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:43 pm
Des-Bal wrote:Cannot think of a name wrote:You wouldn't consider holding up a single woman in a night club and her reactions to be, in itself, a bit of a 'strawman' (in the popular miss us of the concept) about the idea of objectification, that somehow all women must be in lockstep agreement with what is and what is not appropriate? That somehow this unverifiable stranger and her reported actions somehow undermine the larger societal issue as a bit reductive and an attempt to shift the argument? And not, perhaps, indicative of the larger problem of thinking that this is in fact a 'us vs. them' kind of thing, that thinking recognizing a societal norm is the same as saying 'men suck' and therefore finding some women who, by your estimation, send mixed signals therefore invalidates the entire notion of objectification?
You sure about that backpat you're giving yourself?
Nobody is asking about that specific incident.
Des-Bal wrote: Body glitter is a product that is sold in stores, if a woman sprinkles her body with glitter what is she doing other than drawing attention to her body? Is it justifiable then to look at this woman's body when she has clearly made a special effort to entice people to do exactly that?
by Cannot think of a name » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:44 pm
United Marxist Nations wrote:On the legibility of my typing: I don't know about that, I guess I had a sudden urge to use punctuation at inappropriate times.
by United Marxist Nations » Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:44 pm
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Singaporen Empire
Advertisement