eyeball Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 19 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Neither do you....the Islamic women would wish for free abortions. There you go, didn't take you long to see no good would come of the womenfolk getting together did it? I apparently know men better than you too. ...cue the homophobic slur in three, two, one... I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 1 minute ago, eyeball said: I apparently know men better than you too. Yes, you certainly think you do. But you only get one vote just like the "deplorables". Economics trumps Virtue.
eyeball Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 Just now, bush_cheney2004 said: Yes, you certainly think you do. But you only get one vote just like the "deplorables". Well maybe you and your homies can arrange it so me and the women don't get a vote. It's not like you adorables haven't rolled this way before when it suits. I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
OftenWrong Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 44 minutes ago, eyeball said: You don't know women very well. Put a bunch of islamophobic women and Islamic women together in the same room and they'll be talking about their babies and grandkids in no time at all. Right, because that is all women really want to talk about. 2
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 Just now, eyeball said: Well maybe you and your homies can arrange it so me and the women don't get a vote. It's not like you adorables haven't rolled this way before when it suits. But you've already done that for "aboriginals". Maybe Sharia law can help them too. Economics trumps Virtue.
eyeball Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 Just now, OftenWrong said: Right, because that is all women really want to talk about. No but it's very likely what they'll break the ice with. The rest will be easier then. All 'we'd' probably talk about, apparently, is the turncoat feminist guy who keeps encouraging them. I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
eyeball Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 1 minute ago, bush_cheney2004 said: But you've already done that for "aboriginals". Maybe Sharia law can help them too. Probably, if the number of women administering it were equal to men. Like I said, things would be a lot gentler. I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
OftenWrong Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 4 minutes ago, eyeball said: Probably, if the number of women administering it were equal to men. Like I said, things would be a lot gentler. Interesting that you get "likes" for your stereotyping. I guess as long as the stereotype works for you, it's fine.
drummindiver Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 8 hours ago, eyeball said: That's what you actually think the words I wrote mean or even remotely implied? As has been said before this sort of ridiculously illogical reply suggests the person employing it is either sadly intellectually challenged or outrageously disingenuous - which is to say, not an improvement unless one thinks being ethically challenged is an improvement. I think it's a lot worse myself. Refusing to address the focus of a topic by pretending to be stupid is simply a vandalizing of rational discourse really. That said, if people really are just ignorant there's room for improvement That's what you LITERALLY said. No need for interpretation. Not my problem if thats not what you meant. Be smarter when posting. Ad Hom as usual. Hates Canada but loves Muslim extremists. Thinks only men can be Islsmaphobic. Misandric and sexist. And wrong. Thinks women only want to talk about babies. Misogynist. Ask Omars mommy and sisters what they like talking about.
drummindiver Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 18 hours ago, eyeball said: We'd only barely granted women the right to vote ourselves before we were running around the world overthrowing democracies. Like I said, LITERALLY.
dialamah Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 8 hours ago, OftenWrong said: Interesting that you get "likes" for your stereotyping. I guess as long as the stereotype works for you, it's fine. Don't feel bad, I'm sure you say things people like sometimes too.
Guest Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 11 hours ago, OftenWrong said: Interesting that you get "likes" for your stereotyping. I guess as long as the stereotype works for you, it's fine. "Likes" can be just another way of trolling.
Goddess Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 1 minute ago, bcsapper said: "Likes" can be just another way of trolling. Sometimes I "like" a post if there is something in it that gives a different perspective, even if I don't agree with all parts of it. I don't put much stock in "likes" or pay much attention to who "likes" what. But I suppose if you have a large negative number under your profile, you should prolly re-think some of your views. "There are two different types of people in the world - those who want to know and those who want to believe." ~~ Friedrich Nietzsche ~~
OftenWrong Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 3 hours ago, dialamah said: Don't feel bad, I'm sure you say things people like sometimes too. I'm sure if I said what eyeball said here about women, I'd be called a chauvenist by someone like you.
dialamah Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 12 minutes ago, OftenWrong said: I'm sure if I said what eyeball said here about women, I'd be called a chauvenist by someone like you. Sometimes when I read/like things, I don't even know who the author is. So, bzzzt, you are wrong about me again.
Rue Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 (edited) 15 hours ago, eyeball said: You don't know women very well. Put a bunch of islamophobic women and Islamic women together in the same room and they'll be talking about their babies and grandkids in no time at all. Soon after that they'd be talking about the men Of course the thing uniting their men would be the conviction that no good could come of the women getting together no matter what they were chattering their silly heads off about. Using your reasoning, in your world a bunch of fundamentalist head to toe covered Muslim women sitting in the same room with feminist non Muslim women will soon be talking about their babies and grandkids and then men. You know because you know women. Drum was dead on. What you said was juvenile sexist shit. You don't' speak for me or any man I know. In my world women fight terrorists and don't sit around with other women laying eggs and they sure as hell don't support fundamentalist religious doctrine and your definition of them as all being domestic hens. Man I would give you less than 10 seconds before you'd be spitting your balls our your nose saying what you did to some women I know.. You have no clue what a woman will do to defend her family, friends and comrades from terrorism or for that matter when they engage in terrorism, that much is obvious. What is also obvious is you reference women like some asswipe little Prince who grew up in a sheltered world of clucking hens who doted over every word you said.. You are deluded . In the real world, when those women get together, if they do reference you its to compare you to the hemmeroids they have. Edited October 5, 2017 by Rue
eyeball Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 (edited) 7 hours ago, drummindiver said: That's what you LITERALLY said. You're maintaining that my saying this; We'd only barely granted women the right to vote ourselves before we were running around the world overthrowing democracies. Is LITERALLY the same as my saying this So, first and second world wars was us running around overthrowing democracies? I might as well be talking to two year old FFS. Ok have it your way. I'll stop assuming I'm talking to someone who's only pretending to be stupid and spell it out for you. First of all women in the US and other western democracies didn't get to vote until after the 1st WW. Clearly the period after the 1st and 2nd WW's and the present is a lot closer to and more relevant to what's at issue. My bad for assuming that should be obvious in a thread about Islam. So like I said, much the west was barely out of the twilight ages of dictatorships itself before it was starting new ones and passing judgements on the democratic aspirations of other human beings around the planet. This of course has left a legacy of terrible consequences...abject stupidity apparently being one of them. Edited October 5, 2017 by eyeball 1 I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
eyeball Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 47 minutes ago, Rue said: Using your reasoning, in your world a bunch of fundamentalist head to toe covered Muslim women sitting in the same room with feminist non Muslim women will soon be talking about their babies and grandkids and then men. You know because you know women. Drum was dead on. What you said was juvenile sexist shit. You don't' speak for me or any man I know. In my world women fight terrorists and don't sit around with other women laying eggs and they sure as hell don't support fundamentalist religious doctrine and your definition of them as all being domestic hens. Man I would give you less than 10 seconds before you'd be spitting your balls our your nose saying what you did to some women I know.. You have no clue what a woman will do to defend her family, friends and comrades from terrorism or for that matter when they engage in terrorism, that much is obvious. What is also obvious is you reference women like some asswipe little Prince who grew up in a sheltered world of clucking hens who doted over every word you said.. You are deluded . In the real world, when those women get together, if they do reference you its to compare you to the hemmeroids they have. I'm not surprised people in the world you inhabit have no sense of context or humour. No sense is probably even closer to the reality. I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
PIK Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 On 10/3/2017 at 7:18 PM, dialamah said: Well you are entitled to your opinion, right, even if I think you are wrong. Watched a lady being interviewed on BBC today, her party came in third I think in the recent elections in Germany. The interviewer asked if Muslim women should be allowed to wear a headscarf and the politician said "No, we don't want that in our schools and public places". The interviewer than asked if nuns should also be banned from wearing their coif, and the politician said no, that was ok. So, do you think that is discrimination against Muslim women, or a reasonable stand to differentiate between female oppression and a religious garment? When covering up means being subservient, the we have problem.Now where I live we have women in the head scarves and they look nice wearing then. But when I see a woman in a black burka totally covered and it is 90f outside, we have a problem. Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
drummindiver Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 25 minutes ago, eyeball said: You're maintaining that my saying this; We'd only barely granted women the right to vote ourselves before we were running around the world overthrowing democracies. Is LITERALLY the same as my saying this So, first and second world wars was us running around overthrowing democracies? I might as well be talking to two year old FFS. Ok have it your way. I'll stop assuming I'm talking to someone who's only pretending to be stupid and spell it out for you. First of all women in the US and other western democracies didn't get to vote until after the 1st WW. Clearly the period after the 1st and 2nd WW's and the present is a lot closer to and more relevant to what's at issue. My bad for assuming that should be obvious in a thread about Islam. So like I said, much the west was barely out of the twilight ages of dictatorships itself before it was starting new ones and passing judgements on the democratic aspirations of other human beings around the planet. This of course has left a legacy of terrible consequences...abject stupidity apparently being one of them. Don't be do petulant because you're wrong sweetheart. As in speech, what you write counts. And still ad hom. I thought you lefties were above that?
drummindiver Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 3 hours ago, dialamah said: Sometimes when I read/like things, I don't even know who the author is. So, bzzzt, you are wrong about me again. I call bullshit on that. If someone other than a leftbot had written it you would have lost your shit
eyeball Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 1 minute ago, drummindiver said: As in speech, what you write counts. Not if the person listening hears something completely different. I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
dialamah Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 9 minutes ago, PIK said: But when I see a woman in a black burka totally covered and it is 90f outside, we have a problem. I don"t like those either and feel uncomfortable seeing a woman dressed like that. But that is my problem, not hers. Her problem is different and varies. If its her choice to dress like that, facing the disapproval and sometimes physical hostility of the wider public. If she is coerced into wearing it through family pressure, its facing their disapproval and sometimes physical hostility if refuses. I would say her problems are bigger than mine.
Guest Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 I think sympathy for the oppressed is a virtue, not a problem.
dialamah Posted October 5, 2017 Report Posted October 5, 2017 5 minutes ago, drummindiver said: I call bullshit on that. If someone other than a leftbot had written it you would have lost your shit Why is it so common for rightists to declare they know the minds of everyone? But believe what you want, I don't care. PS: I looked halfway through this post to see who I'd quoted, wasn't sure who it was.
Recommended Posts