Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

naughtynick81 -> Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 5:30:03 PM)

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/antilads_mags_and_anti_people/13955#.Uh_mez9cVEw

Now let's see the people criticising these feminists and citing violence against men and male objectification in media outlets to downplay their complaints and indicate they are whiny and pathetic.

Ya know, treat these feminists the same as how I am treated in the other thread.

Can't wait to laugh at the double standards.



Politesub53 -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 5:33:24 PM)

Nick, you`re a one trick pony.

In ranting about everything, you lose any sympathy for anything.



Moonhead -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 5:37:44 PM)

You're equating objectifying people with shooting them, then?



naughtynick81 -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 5:40:50 PM)

quote:

You're equating objectifying people with shooting them, then?


Firstly, what's worse? So shouldn't the worse problem be more validated to complain about than the lesser problem? In my books, it's worse to shoot someone's genitals than it is to objectify.

Secondly, objectifying is not their only complaint towards lad mags.

quote:

protesters talk about the ‘harm’ caused by these magazines. ‘There is a growing body of research that shows a link between sexual images, patriarchal attitudes and violence against women





Apocalypso -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 5:42:31 PM)

I'm outraged by the fact they make claims about what lad's mags say and yet can't name any of the lad's mags.

Also, I don't like it when they make grandiose "I'm done" statements and then start threads on the same thing. It makes them look like they're either stupid or dishonest.



Moonhead -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 5:43:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: naughtynick81
In my books, it's worse to shoot someone's genitals than it is to objectify.

So why were you equating the two?



tazzygirl -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 5:45:33 PM)

Didnt Maxim recently drop in numbers? Seems to me the internet is affecting the lad mags.



naughtynick81 -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 5:53:21 PM)

quote:

So why were you equating the two?


I never did. I am equating if one gender is allowed to complain, that means the other is also. It's not my fault that you hold a heavy favouritism towards women.

quote:

Also, I don't like it when they make grandiose "I'm done" statements and then start threads on the same thing. It makes them look like they're either stupid or dishonest.


"I'm done" in a thread with people who keep skirting around the crux of the matter.

It's not being stupid or dishonest to stop responding to people who keep making diversions around the actual point of the topic. I created this thread to see the difference of the attitudes of the posters here with this one compared to the other situation in the other thread.

What I define as stupidity and dishonesty is when people have one standard for feminists with this matter and another standard for a male complaining about the other matter.






Moonhead -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 5:54:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Didnt Maxim recently drop in numbers? Seems to me the internet is affecting the lad mags.

Either that or the fact that Maxim is a PC version of Loaded, which means it's always been at a bit of a disadvantage. Trying to look "classy" when the competition is plunging lairily downmarket isn't going to do you any favours, is it?
It's a bit like Windows 8: trying to do two things at once and being crap at both of them.
(Free porn online is probably going to hurt the sales of a magazine that's just there for lads who are too wussy to buy proper smut magazines, if we're honest.)



MsMJAY -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 5:55:05 PM)

I was going to say "well shoot, its just a magazine," but instead of bitching about it, these women organized, started a movement, raised funds, actively involved themselves in creating change and obtained legal counsel to defend their apparent "rights."

By comparison....you posted a rant about it on a BDSM social networking site.

I can't understand why you are not being taken as seriously as they are. [8|]



Moonhead -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 5:56:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: naughtynick81
"I'm done" in a thread with people who keep skirting around the crux of the matter.

Well maybe you shouldn't have spent a whole thread doing that yourself, then?



naughtynick81 -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 6:03:05 PM)

quote:

but instead of bitching about it, these women organized, started a movement, raised funds, actively involved themselves in creating change and obtained legal counsel to defend their apparent "rights."


Ummm isn't that exactly BITCHING?

I thought the biggest stink you make about a petty issue, the worse it makes one look. The more whiny it makes one look. The more pathetic it makes one look.

quote:

By comparison....you posted a rant about it on a BDSM social networking site.

I can't understand why you are not being taken as seriously as they are.


So any rant about any other issue in the world on this forum. Such as rants about the Zimmerman case, gun laws, Obama, Republicans, etc etc etc. We see these types of topics repeatedly all the time in forums.

So if they just rant about their opinions about these issues on a forum and aren't actually doing anything to change it, does the same standard apply to them? Or is there only an isolated standard when its a man complaining about male issues?

Can you see why I don;t take such diversion tactics seriously when the same standard doesn't apply for people complaining about anything else in the world?




Apocalypso -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 6:06:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: naughtynick81
So if they just rant about their opinions about these issues on a forum and aren't actually doing anything to change it, does the same standard apply to them? Or is there only an isolated standard when its a man complaining about male issues?

As I've repeatedly pointed out to you, it's not about you being a man. It's about the fact that very few people like you, as an individual. That's not a double standard.



Moonhead -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 6:07:45 PM)

Speaking of diversionary tactics and double standards, have you managed to think of an all female band as ugly as Napalm Death who had anything resembling a career yet?



naughtynick81 -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 6:09:18 PM)

quote:

As I've repeatedly pointed out to you, it's not about you being a man. It's about the fact that very few people like you, as an individual. That's not a double standard.


Look up the meaning of double standard. It is a double standard when you have one standard for one person or group and another standard for any other person or group. That equals 2 standards, not one.



Apocalypso -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 6:14:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: naughtynick81
Look up the meaning of double standard. It is a double standard when you have one standard for one person or group and another standard for any other person or group. That equals 2 standards, not one.

No. Because a woman who came across like you did online would be treated the same way.

If a woman came on here and constantly whined about how the evil menz were holding here down she'd be mocked. Especially if she made every thread about that. Especially if she lied about her sources.



naughtynick81 -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 6:17:09 PM)

quote:

If a woman came on here and constantly whined about how the evil menz were holding here down she'd be mocked.


Where do I actually make the claim that evil women are holding me down?

Seems like someone here is lying, it's definitely not me.



kalikshama -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 6:17:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

I was going to say "well shoot, its just a magazine," but instead of bitching about it, these women organized, started a movement, raised funds, actively involved themselves in creating change and obtained legal counsel to defend their apparent "rights."

By comparison....you posted a rant about it on a BDSM social networking site.

I can't understand why you are not being taken as seriously as they are. [8|]


[sm=applause.gif][sm=champ.gif][sm=applause.gif]



naughtynick81 -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 6:19:37 PM)

Apocalypso, are you friends with any feminists?



Apocalypso -> RE: Anti-lads’ mags – and anti-people (8/29/2013 6:20:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: naughtynick81
Where do I actually make the claim that evil women are holding me down?


Every thread is about the mean feminists Nick. Not just here. On Fetlife as well. And, I assume, everywhere else you post. It's obvious that you're obsessed with this issue. And it's easier then recognising that the one constant in the hostile response you get everywhere is you.


quote:

Seems like someone here is lying, it's definitely not me.

Check the other thread. It has now been pointed out that you couldn't have seen the video in question on television a few days ago, because it hadn't been released.

You are a proven liar now. As such, I feel no obligation to take anything you say as factual, unless you provide citations.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875