quote:

ORIGINAL: taziesubguy
.. Btw how did you change to a submissive being a women hate club member and how did you take those defeats of bobby riggs and after that again at the hand of girls in school.. you must be devastated..

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lockit

No hardbody... I didn't fall for anything.  The man was a part of extended family.  He was genuinely a pig.  Sure he was a hustler... but he was also a pig.

quote:

ORIGINAL: YoursMistress

Being a member of the "HeMan Women Haters Club" at the time (I was 12-13), I guess I never realized how hateful and damaging the rhetoric was, Miss Lockit.  Some things have changed a great deal since then.  Some people haven't.  I'm sorry that I wasn't a little more aware and sensitive. 

yours

quote:

ORIGINAL: hardbodysub

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lockit

No hardbody... I didn't fall for anything.  The man was a part of extended family.  He was genuinely a pig.  Sure he was a hustler... but he was also a pig.

You mean your extended family?

quote:

ORIGINAL: taziesubguy

Lol.. but i would have love to hear your story  as that was the subject of the thread.. did you again lose to girls in badminton, as you love the sport and at what time you started enjoying it like me or at what instance you started accept female supremacy..

quote:

ORIGINAL: hardbodysub

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lockit

I wanted bobby to lose simply becasue he was an ass towards women... to the day he died he continued to not see the lesson he should have learned that day so long ago... that had some of us girls beeming.  I didn't know as a girl all he was about... but later learned he was a rough talking, women degrading man who never changed.  He was a rich, sad and angry man who wanted the world, especially women, under his thumb and wasn't past putting his money out there to obtain it.  Which later made me even happier he lost that day.  Too bad it didn't shut the fucker up though.

You fell for it, completely. He wanted you to feel that way so he could make money off the hype. He was a supreme hustler. Everything I've ever heard from people who really knew him personally contradict your opinion completely.

Billie Jean King beating Bobby Riggs shouldn't have been victory for women at all. She was one of the best women players in the prime of her career, and he was an old has-been who never could have one a single game against any professional male player. It was Riggs who hyped it up, and created the interest in a match that, for practical purposes, didn't prove anything.
And people always forget that, prior to losing to King, Riggs thoroughly demolished Margaret Court, the #1-ranked woman tennis professional. That's the match that should be remembered.

quote:

ORIGINAL: YoursMistress

quote:

ORIGINAL: taziesubguy

Lol.. but i would have love to hear your story  as that was the subject of the thread.. did you again lose to girls in badminton, as you love the sport and at what time you started enjoying it like me or at what instance you started accept female supremacy..

Yikes, I missed the part where you asked the judge if it was OK to treat the witness as hostile.  Objection?!  May I ask for a recess?

quote:

ORIGINAL: hardbodysub

Guess I'll have to take your word for it, then.

Still, I doubt that he could have been as big a pig privately as the public pig persona that he hyped to get all the women riled up, and thereby help him achieve fame and fortune.

quote:

i still don't understand why do men cant swallow a simple defeat of an aging tennis champ against a fitter woman..has anyone recently read about how serena had defeated roddick in school days to which roddick has openly admited to and wants a re match too.to which serena has refused to.

quote:

ORIGINAL: hardbodysub
And the Serena/Roddick thing? Ridiculous. A 12-year old girl beats an 11-year old toothpick of a boy, and that's supposed to mean something now? If you want to prove something, have them play each other on equal terms, when they're both in their prime.

quote:

ORIGINAL: YoursMistress

 

quote:

ORIGINAL: hardbodysub
And the Serena/Roddick thing? Ridiculous. A 12-year old girl beats an 11-year old toothpick of a boy, and that's supposed to mean something now? If you want to prove something, have them play each other on equal terms, when they're both in their prime.

Oh dear god have we learned nothing in 35 years?

quote:

ORIGINAL: hardbodysub

quote:

i still don't understand why do men cant swallow a simple defeat of an aging tennis champ against a fitter woman..has anyone recently read about how serena had defeated roddick in school days to which roddick has openly admited to and wants a re match too.to which serena has refused to.

This is a complete misconception. There's nothing hard to swallow about King beating Riggs. She should have beaten him. She did. What's amazing is that such a big deal is made of it. The fact that such a completely over-the-hill man had a 1-and-1 record against the two top women in tennis is logically not any huge victory for women.

And the Serena/Roddick thing? Ridiculous. A 12-year old girl beats an 11-year old toothpick of a boy, and that's supposed to mean something now? If you want to prove something, have them play each other on equal terms, when they're both in their prime.

quote:

ORIGINAL: taziesubguy
Lol.. but i would have love to hear your story  as that was the subject of the thread.. did you again lose to girls in badminton, as you love the sport and at what time you started enjoying it like me or at what instance you started accept female supremacy..

quote:

please, what more equal terms you want.. it was a clear case of a gal beating a guy similar age

quote:

ORIGINAL: hardbodysub

quote:

please, what more equal terms you want.. it was a clear case of a gal beating a guy similar age

You appear unclear on the concept. The point is that childhood matches don't mean a thing, whether you're talking about male vs male, female vs female, or male vs female. Players develop at different ages and different rates. Playing each other in their prime would prove who is better.

If you continue to insist that the inter-gender childhood match is important somehow, then you must acknowledge that there is often a HUGE difference in between a 12-year old and an 11-year old, especially since girls often develop at an earlier age than boys. There's no correlation at all between a matchup back then vs now. Boys and girls play against each other all the time, and girls win a lot of them. It's just no big deal.

Williams jokingly prods Roddick about the match, even facetiously imply that she has "indirect wins" over players that Roddick has beaten, including Sampras. She refuses to play him now, because they both know he'd blow her away. They both know that the whole thing is a joke. Too bad others don't get it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: taziesubguy

Do you agree that girls can beat guys in reality shows like survivor where they have won more then guys in and in physical contests and in Apperntice which relates more to mental aspect.