Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Gabriel

Quote from: "Dr Evil"
Yeah, I haven't been keeping up to date.

Regardless, my main point is that rape is not tramatic.

What?  Where is the evidence for this claim?  If we had a couple of guys hold you down and rape you against your will don't you think that would be a traumatic experience?

First off, there is no reason to get personal.

Second, anal rape is completely different than vaginal rape.

Third, if a person commonly practiced having objects stuck up their ass, than being anally raped would not be that tramatic an experience for them.
Yeah, I haven't been keeping up to date.

Regardless, my main point is that rape is not tramatic.

Ok, so these women are afraid of rape because rape is so so tramatic. So to prevent rape, they are willing to stick weapons in their vaginas, little knives, some spring loaded knife with a barb.

Ok so this makes a whole lot of sense. Lets examine this.

Rape: A man forcibly sticking his penis, made of flesh, into the vagina of a woman at most a few dozen times.

So to prevent this terrible experience, they will stick sping loaded knives up there. Yeah, that makes a whole lot of sense.

Walking around "loaded" with a pressure triggered, spring loaded barbed knife in your vagina would seem to be much more tramatic than a penis in there for 5 minutes.
Main / Gender based pricing.
Mar 15, 2005, 10:21 PM
Dry cleaning services and clothes in general cost more because

Cost is only partially relative in pricing. Organizations will charge the most they can get. It just so happens women are willing to pay more for clothes than men are. So they do pay more (duh). Why, b/c on average, they value clothes more than men (and hairstyling).

Men value other things, like performance cars, computers, sports.... And most of that stuff is purchased by men. But clothing is something men have to buy so their income is divided, keeping the costs on both lower.

Men value performance cars b/c they perform - - their fast and handle well, so you can do...more interesting driving with them. Men value driving in that manner more than women and so they do so. This causes more accidents and tickets (partially) caused by/given to men, which raises all men's insurance. So men do pay more for the things they value as well.
Mar 13, 2005, 09:42 PM
This whole nature matters and biological differences do exist is tiresome.

It makes me want to grab the nearest feminist, start tapping against her skull with my knuckes and say

"Hello Mcfly - hello, anyone in there?"
Mar 13, 2005, 03:29 PM

First off. Duh - of course nature matters.


The differences continue as children grow.

Girls hear better...

Teen-age boys have much more trouble discussing their feelings.

Get the message.
Main / Women in leadership positions:
Mar 13, 2005, 02:01 PM
Quote from: "The Biscuit Queen"
My mother is also in management. Her last position she hired a staff of 10 or so women. At one point she had to hire another person, and she picked a woman over a man to keep the office running smoothly. She said they were equally qualified, but the man would not have fit in as well. That bothered me at the time, and bothers me even more now. I imagine what she did could have been illegal. It certainly would have been had the sexes been reversed.

This exact situation happened to me about 2 years ago. I was interviewing for an analyst position at a mid-sized oil company. The woman even told me that "You are very qualified for this position, my only reservation is that the rest of the staff is all females and I don't think you'd fit in b/c females can be catty."

So much for women's supposed communication and relationship superiority over men. At the time I was pissed. Today I would sue.
Main / Women in leadership positions:
Mar 11, 2005, 07:03 PM
Six Democratic state lawmakers on Thursday called for University of Colorado head football coach Gary Barnett to follow the school president's move and resign.

"I'm concerned that everyone will be allowed to breathe a sigh of relief, using Elizabeth Hoffman as a scapegoat," said a letter written by Rep. Cheri Jahn, D-Wheat Ridge.
"If we are going to 'clean house,' then let us clean the entire house!" Jahn wrote.

Five other Democratic representatives signed a statement calling for the Board of Regents to ask for Barnett's resignation. It was sent Thursday to Jerry Rutledge, chairman of the board.

Those who signed it were Betty Boyd, of Lakewood; Judy Solano, of Brighton; Morgan Carroll, of Aurora; Rosemary Marshall, of Denver; and Angie Paccione, of Fort Collins.

Obviously, they are dissapoint by Betty Hoffman's stunning lack of leadership, strength and courage in front of a national audience. So they are going after a male, Gary Barnett.

Women protect their own.

It wasn't the football deal that caused her to resign, it was the communist, America hater - Ward Churchill Scandal.

Main / Women in leadership positions:
Mar 09, 2005, 07:43 PM
As some may know, Elizebeth Hoffman, former president of the University of Colorado in the midst of two scandals at the university - Ward Churchhill and the accuse for money, football sex scandal.

She is a laughing example of a leader. A true leader would have stayed with the university to guide it through its troubled times, not abondoned your post when the heat starts to get turned up.

I shouldn't be surprised they hired wuss, she was probably hired b/c she is a woman and it is soooo pc to hire a woman these days. To show off how fair your are - and colleges are liberal and pc is liberal dogma, so it adds up.

With the disaster of that HP CEO, I'll use these two as examples the next time I hear of some liberal woman complaining that there are no females in the top jobs.

The university has enough to deal with, with the scandals - adding finding a president to the list is not what it needs.
Main / Blast From the past
Feb 27, 2005, 03:12 PM
Quote from: "Stallywood"
This article is exactly how I feel about living in this country.

Is there any place better?
Main / Why We Must Demand the “Male Pill”
Feb 23, 2005, 05:23 PM

Trying to convince women to give men reproductive choice, is like trying to convince a slave owner to give their slaves the choice to be a slave or not.

Sorry, not going to happen.

Judge: Divorce cases skewed toward women


One of New York's top judges started tongues wagging after suggesting divorce leaves men with the short end of the stick when it's time to divvy up the dough.

In a speech last week, Court of Appeals Judge Robert Smith suggested courts aren't always gender-neutral - and the marriage contract is often skewed in favor of the woman, according to the New York Law Journal.

In divorce cases involving working women and stay-at-home husbands, Smith said he suspects men still don't get their fair share.

"I read a case where the wife was a dental hygienist and the husband said, 'That's marital property.' The court said, 'You're right, it is marital property. You are getting 7%,'" the Law Journal quoted Smith saying Thursday in a speech to the Family Law Section of the New York State Bar Association.

A spokesman for the Court of Appeals said Smith had no additional comments about the controversial speech.

"It's not something he wants to comment on further," spokesman Gary Spencer said.

Claims of a pro-female tilt ignore the harsh financial realities of divorce, said Marcia Pappas, head of the New York State chapter of the National Organization for Women.

"Judge Smith is out of touch with real families," Pappas said. "How he thinks the system favors women is really surprising to me. I'm not sure what he's basing his personal opinions on."

But prominent New York divorce lawyer Eleanor Alter, whose clients have included Christie Brinkley and Mia Farrow, hailed Smith for adding some spice to the "discussion and disagreement" over matrimonial law.

"It's great that he said it," Alter said. "If we get to the point where we can only say what's politically correct, then we're in pretty bad shape."

Originally published on January 31, 2005

Judge Smith bio


Hon. Robert S. Smith
Robert S. Smith, Associate Judge of the Court of Appeals, was born in New York, New York in August 1944, and grew up in Massachusetts and Connecticut. He graduated from Stanford University (B.A. 1965, with great distinction) and Columbia Law School (LL.B. 1968, magna cum laude), where he was editor-in-chief of the Law Review. From 1968 to 2003 he practiced law in New York City with the firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, taking a one-year leave of absence in 1980-81 to serve as Visiting Professor from Practice at Columbia Law School. He was a Lecturer in Law at Columbia Law School from 1981 until 1990.

On June 1, 2003, he became an individual practitioner and Special Counsel to the firm of Kornstein Veisz Wexler & Pollard. On November 4, 2003 he was appointed by Governor George E. Pataki to the Court of Appeals. The appointment was confirmed by the State Senate on January 12, 2004. He and his wife, Dian G. Smith, live in New York City. They have three children and one grandchild.

Heard this on Rush Limbaugh's station, but Curtis and Kuby was on. I woke up to this story.Link
Kuby repeats myths that women have no money, men do, and the person who has the money controls the divorce. Which is, of course, bs.

A guy called up and said his judge was disbarred because his wife was having cake with his wife (meant judge - it was early and I hadn't had my coffee).
Main / Re: Okay, so I can't leave it alone
Jan 25, 2005, 04:53 AM
Like the others said, great post. This one is going in my archives.

Quote from: "Gonzokid"

Wendy, you can't argue that you need to be taken as an individual and responsible for yourself, then shift the blame.

It has been my experience that a woman will always try to shift the responsibility. Why? Because no one holds them responsible. No one calls them on it. In other words, because they can.

A quick example, the last girl I dated pursued me for three months, slowly and subtly.  Eventually I caved and we went out.  After a few weeks of dating , she tried to say that it was I who pursued her and we won't be here.

Huh? I said.  What are you talking about. I wasn't the one calling you twice a week, receiving a cold short conversation, and a quick good bye... I wasn't the one who was buying you stuff and bringing you cookies.

Then when I wanted to do other things than be with her, she started saying things like - "don't make me beg." "You made me love you." "You are making me hate you."

Whoa, slow down. I can't make you do squat. Even if there was a gun against your head you still have a choice - granted not a good one. If you beg, you choice to beg.

I stopped her at the gate on that one, but it helped me to realize just how persistent they will be in shifting blame.

As far as Wendy Mac goes. I found that the closer I got to real time with her, the more like a typical western skank she became. She sounds great in articles, less so in BB posts,  and in PMs and e-mails is downright vicious.
Main / dojo of the mind
Jan 24, 2005, 07:28 PM
dojo of the mind

That is what this place has become in many ways. I will thus explain a few of my observations.

These next example must be thought of in argumentation form, not literally physical fighting.

I see the natural way men fight is through a contest of strength. Two men pick up clubs and try to smack the other one down, but many times end up holding the clubs with both hands forcing it against their opponents stick, he doing the same - trying to knock the other one down by force and strength. Both men pushing their sticks against one another and the stronger one wins.

Men are stronger, linear and logically. This is one of men's greatest strengths, their linear logic. This fighting among men has produced much of the technology in the world. But as any martial artist will tell you, your greatest strength can become your biggest weakness.

Women don't fight this way. Why should they? They would lose 99% of the time. Would you enter a match you knew you were going to lose and get beaten badly? I didn't think so. Women are not that stupid. They learn early that men are stronger. They see adult men much bigger than adult women and see their future. So they use other techniques. Think passive aggressive. You come after them with your club / clue by four they are not going to go directly against you, no that would be stupid. They want to win. So when you come up swinging at them, they hold their stick like a bo and swing like they are going to meet you, but step out of the way, deflect your shot to the ground while swinging their stick to around to smack you in the head.

Patience and timing. They have it, they were forced to develop it. They can't win in direct contest of strength so they became martial arts experts. You run at them, they dodge you and push you to the ground.

I was a fencing champion in high school so I see much of this in terms of fencing.

Beginner fencers, and I was no different, would often get into this contest of strength - pushing their blades against each other in this battle of brute strength. Often their blades would be forced to the ground by one person or the other. But soon enough they learn that if one is pushing real hard, if they push back a little or not at all, instead moving their blade under and out of the way they can score a point. And the learning progresses.

I made my biggest leap in skill when an old Hungarian instructor taught me to always keep my point on target. When you parry the other fencers blade - force isn't your friend because you move your blade off target too at best and at worse if you miss, you are left wide open. Instead, he taught me to parry so that my blade guided the other fencers blade off target with a small wrist movement leaving the fencer open to be struck with an extension of my arm instead of full attack (lunge).

In arguments, I see lots of anger. Guys trying to clue bat their opponents and often get tossed around by these little martial arts girls - and all girls are martial artists with their minds. The only weapon guys know is the clue bat, only one way of swinging it, and only in certain circumstances. Pretty predictable if you ask me.  So it is no wonder they get their butts kicked. They are patience, they wait and dodge you now, beat you down with small taps, not hay makers.

Anger. Yeah I know a lot about that, I could tell stories of the things I have broken when I was pissed. I can even tell you where it comes from. Anger comes from not having your expectations met. You have made estimates about the world and how it operates and when it does not operate according to those estimates - bam, you get pissed. The more estimates that end up wrong, the more pissed you get.

The solution, lower your expectations. Lower your assumptions. You are trying to get somewhere using a map of Chicago, when you are in Miami. Maybe it is time to buy a new map. The right map. If you were making the right estimates, had the correct assumptions and the correct expectations - you wouldn't be pissed. You would deal with the world as it is, not how you want it to be, or how you thought it was going to be, or hoped it would be. Why waste our time chasing after the snake that bite you because with every step we drive the poison further into us. A smarter move is to sit down to suck the poison out, or driving to a hospital.

The world it is how it is. We must learn new techniques to deal with it. Our old techniques have left many men angry, paying child support / alimony, in jail, or dead from suicide. Their clue bats failed. Anger doesn't work. Brute strength does not work when you are fighting a martial arts master, both physically and mentally. We must put the clue bats down and realize that there is no clue bat, only then will we learn how to use it properly.

I never said it would be easy. I never said it would be quick, I can actually promise you that will not be either. But the goal will make you more powerful than you can possible imagine.

Stinnett's mother, Becky Harper, said she wants the accused baby-snatcher to die for her crimes.

"I hope she gets the death penalty," Harper declared. "I don't want to have to pay for her to be in jail."

Harper also blasted Montgomery's "clueless" husband.

She said he bears some responsibility for failing to stop his spouse's manic hunt for a child. People close to the family reportedly said they warned him she may do something awful.

"He had to have been pretty clueless not to have known about this," Harper said. "It sounds like he just didn't want to hear anything about this."

Even Montgomery's mother failed to mount much of a defense of her daughter yesterday.

"I did not have any sense she could murder someone," said Judy Shaughnessy. "I thought she could maybe steal or buy a child -- but not kill to get one."

Ok, so the husband should know, but her mother shouldn't. Double Standard?

Let's see - when a man controls his wife, it is "abuse". When he doesn't and she kills one or 5 people, it's his fault.