Letters to the Editor
-
To: Stackey
you fucking moron. I never say all, f*ckwad, as that is an incorrect hyperbole. I say some or most, never all. Now fucking pull your head from your fat woman's ass before you open you open your piehole and spew bile. You are just the kind of fuck who would make a false accusation or thinks the duke hookers are honest, decent women who were sexually assaulted when all the empirical evidence, data and their own statements prove otherwise, utterly and completely. Yes, jackass, rape is a horrible crime but some women cry wolf about rape, about sexual harassment (look at todays Salon front page) and other issues and they harm everyone when they do. Jesus, grow the fuck up, you histrionic bitch.
-
LeCastor,
I am sure you have good intentions, albeit misguided. This all boils down to the fact that there is no such as equality, in relationships or life. It is a wonderful concept but does not exist. It has been attempted and is a failure.
-
Ben Dover, Calm Down
Every time you spew a rant like you did at Stackey, out of nowhere, with so much misogyny, you just confirm everyone's suspicions about you a little more: that you're a lonely, sad, angry jaded pathetic man. We'd give you a lot more pity if you weren't such an asshole. If you want people to not think you're a weirdo, lonely computer guy, don't write things like these profanity-laden, misogyny-laden random rants at people. Anyone who's been around the internet long enough won't be bothered by your insults, but it does make you look worse every time.
-
No wonder you're pissed...
...you've given up. Sensory perception is the crucial test of all reality and that's the whole ballgame.
Really?
Again, pick up some Bateson and Karl Popper and some John Eccles. Your head is up your ass.
Of COURSE where you're looking is a dead-end street...it said, "DEAD END," before you turned to go down it. Turn around and come back out. Start over. You get to do that no matter what anyone with "issues" says about you.
-
-- looking for Mr Goodbar
Try arguing politics on extreme right wing blogs if you happen to be "liberal", not only will you get death threats you'll also get banned pretty quickly too.
-
But really, ben
Maybe you think equality is an illusion, but most people don't have relationships that have components like "she is not allowed to do X." I'm in a relationship right now, and sure, he has a better vocabulary than me, and can sing better, and is more mature in some ways, but i'm more mature in other ways, i am better at math and LSAT questions, i earn more money. Neither one of us has rules for the other like "you are not allowed to do X." That's what you do to pets and children, not your significant other. We respect each other, and it really doesn't sound like you respect your girlfriend. And i don't know how someone can allow herself to be treated this way -- maybe she's a needy hanger-on, maybe she has little self-respect and allows herself to be treated this way, maybe you've worked some sort of symbiosis out. I don't know, you're not providing any details (maybe because she's not real). But it doesn't sound like any relationship i've ever had, or any relationship any of my friends, male or female, have ever had. Maybe you think this is the only way for relationships to be, but i don't think it is.
-
Bever
All he said was that she was not allowed to dig through his wine celler.
-
Lecastor,
your version of respect mean that a man kisses your ass.
-
Entering the fray
"No name given," Bend Over said a lot more than that. Let's take a look at that post, shall we?
She knows how I feel....Whether man or women, you work with or for me, I treat you as a man. We treat each other very well, but she is not my equal in our relationship, relationships are NEVER based upon equality, contrary to what some people vomit up about them. I have other responsibilities that take precedent [sic] over her....She also knows that anything that interferes with my career I remove including her, if necessary....There are things she would want me to do, but I refuse them as they are wholly unacceptable and uncharacteristic of me: I don't go shopping with her, she is not allowed to select bottles from my wine cellar, I don't visit her family in Texas (what a shithole uncivilized place!), I don't watch shitty chick TV, I don't tell her where to go or what to do (provided it does not interfere wiht [sic] my schedule and work, as these come first), etc.
The person he is seeing, real or not, is second place. If she's imaginary it's almost worse, because he imagines this is a good situation. If it's real, she's not secure, she thinks too little of herself to dump someone who prizes his wine collection above a human being.
His schedule comes first and they are not equal. While I agree with the premise that at any given moment there is inequality in any given relationship, there should be a give and take in that. It goes both ways. When it doesn't, that's when it's time to leave.
The most revealing comment is the line, "Whether man or women, you work with or for me, I treat you as a man." First, she "works" with or for him, she's not a companion or friend. Second, "I treat you as a man." Not a human being, a man. He says this as if it's a good thing, as if treating her like a woman would be worse in some way and he is paying women a compliment by treating them like men. It's this kind of backwards thinking that perpetuates these problems. The idea that there's a way to treat women and a way to treat men (excluding courting and sexual behavior, of course) is a huge part of the problem.
LeCastor is dead on in her evaluation of this person, who stereotypes his world by gender, region, and who's has control of a given situation. Kant's suggestion that the most important person in the world is the one in front of you is not an opinion he shares. I hope this woman, if she exists, takes control of her own life and dumps him.