Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 9:23:45 AM   
CodeOfSilence


Posts: 235
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Nope.
It's these nuances that are escaping you and crumpets.
Not every woman dresses to attract a mate and in most circumstances, they might actually enjoy the attention that the way they are dressed is pleasing to others.
In the majority of cases, either the job description is forcing the behaviour (aka, cheer leaders, waitresses etc), or, they are dressing for themselves.


Alright, first of all. It's fucking stupid to dress "for one self". If dress means putting on anything except comfortable, chillax clothes. Anyone with half a brain and even casual interest will dress for the occassion. Now sometimes you don't have the time, sometimes all other clothes are in the washer or maybe you've just grown too old to care. But otherwise you dress with an intention. Now the person observing and requesting something will keep that in mind. You'd have to be pretty thick not to understand that someone dressing in a sexy outfit during a Cabarre Play means she's not inviting every person in the audience for a Little bit of fun. Now if you dress like that on the street I'm bloody well in my limits to assume that you're either looking actively,, very plafyull in general or working actively.

The fact that you'd rather just swoosh away and not make eye contact makes you the socially awkward one.

edit: If by dressing "for yourself" you mean "expressing oneself" then that is still dressing with the intention to send a signal, please don't be thick.

quote:


But, that little nuance is the huge difference between having a fantasy (and keeping it to yourself) and actually thinking it is Ok to behave in a manner that is disrespectful - either with leering looks or making an approach that is inappropriate.
You are making the (bad) assumption that the intention of dressing in such a manner is purely to 'advertise' the intention of picking up a mate or suitable partner.
What we are saying is that it may not (and quite likely not) be the intention.


Women AND men dress to advertise intentions. It's up to everyone else to interpret them to the best of their/our abilities.

quote:

Sure, in an intimate setting between the two of you, your comments may hold true.
But in general, they are not appropriate outside of that particular context.


No, in an intimate setting is precisely where it DOES NOT hold true as often.
On a day out even though we are both horny as hell we might dress casually precisely because we do not have to advertise it.

quote:


Women (or men for that matter) should be able to walk around naked without getting leered at or physically approached with the intent to touch.
However, such dress sense are deemed in our society to be inappropriate unless in the recognised/approved settings.




Someone Walking naked is sending a signal. It may be a signal of protest, of social liberation, of being a naturalist.
But someone in a tribe Walking around naked with the symbol of fertility recently painted on them is sending a signal "I want to be fucked".
(no, not "right now", not by "anyone" but in the future, by someone I love and want to have a family with).

Do you get the difference and that it's not Always clear, which is part of the fun and the slow, steady buildup of social interactions and Communications? Or are you too socially inept?


edit2: Bloody fucking double negatives :(

< Message edited by CodeOfSilence -- 2/4/2016 9:35:44 AM >

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 161
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 9:29:54 AM   
CodeOfSilence


Posts: 235
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

PS...
Slut means woman who has many sex partners.
or a bad hygiene issue.
My use of "sluttily" is from the millions of assumptions that revealing clothing means a chick is open for anyone. Of course its also used as a derogatory term from people , upset after being rebuffed, who cant believe someone said no to them..
flirting is NOT the damn issue.




That's fine dude. Just don't equate that with "women not being able to express themselves".
Dudes being assholes is just dudes being assholes. Rapists being fucking rapists is just rapists being rapists.

How'd you feel if someone pinched your tits in public btw? Please do answer.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 162
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 9:44:20 AM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CodeOfSilence
Do you get the difference and that it's not Always clear, which is part of the fun and the slow, steady buildup of social interactions and Communications? Or are you too socially inept?

It is perfectly clear for most people (including me); except for very few who just can't grasp the nuances (which would include yourself and crumpets).
Again, as Lucy said, your whole standpoint is from the view of flirtation and capturing a mate.
Just as crumpets is constantly pushing cheerleaders etc who are paid to portray that image and plastering it across the whole of female society.

What we are saying is that in an awful lot of situations/circumstances are NOT done from that PoV.
You are taking a very specific narrow context and extrapolating the same sentiment across the whole spectrum where it just doesn't fit; and more importantly, is considered inappropriate behaviour.

Men or women may dress provocatively - that is their choice.
But the fact that they do, does not automatically send the signal that they are 'advertising' or sending any other message than 'I like to dress like this' and everyone needs to respect that.

If you think that it is advertising with an inviting message, I suggest you go seek a shrink because you are barely one step short of being a molester. Seriously sick.

_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to CodeOfSilence)
Profile   Post #: 163
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 9:51:05 AM   
CodeOfSilence


Posts: 235
Status: offline 		Fuck, this is why I've mostly given up on discussions online, because I can't actually humiliate morons like yourself while you are able to quote things out of context and ignore paragraphs that would damage your shitty context.

What about the sentence just above?


quote:

Someone Walking naked is sending a signal. It may be a signal of protest, of social liberation, of being a naturalist.


Did you fucking miss that one?

And what's this about you hiding behind crumpet? I attacked on a wide front and equated several of your with each other. You're just going with guilt of association here bringing it up without any bloody relation, even ascribing in your own post two different views to us.
Jesus, quiet.


quote:

'I like to dress like this'


I already described why this attitude is one of self-denial, you had absolutely nothing to bring to the table but to to recycle some ad-hominem insults I used against you. Or maybe you and the rest who dress "for themselves" are just stupid.


OBS: This doesn't mean that people who are aware of the intentions that they send and dress casually are stupid.

< Message edited by CodeOfSilence -- 2/4/2016 9:54:54 AM >

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 164
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 9:58:21 AM   
UllrsIshtar


Posts: 3693
Joined: 7/28/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Men or women may dress provocatively - that is their choice.
But the fact that they do, does not automatically send the signal that they are 'advertising' or sending any other message than 'I like to dress like this' and everyone needs to respect that.

If you think that it is advertising with an inviting message, I suggest you go seek a shrink because you are barely one step short of being a molester. Seriously sick.



People have a right to not be touched and molested. They don't have a right to not be commented on.

It doesn't matter is somebody is dressing provocatively, or like a nun, or like a business professional... other people can -and will if they so please- make comments.

The rate at which other people choose to make such comments increases proportionally to the style of dress chosen. That's a simple fact caused by the reality that some modes of dress draw more attention than others do.

Yes, you have a right to dress anyway you want and not be molested. But no, you don't have a right to dress anyway you want and not be commented on.

And dressing in a way that will NECESSARILY increase the amount of comments, and then complaining about the increase in the amount of comments is idiotic. Plain and simple.

_____________________________

I can be your whore
I am the dirt you created
I am your sinner
And your whore
But let me tell you something baby
You love me for everything you hate me for

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 165
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 10:04:14 AM   
CodeOfSilence


Posts: 235
Status: offline 		It's not just about the comments or sexualization though. This guy doesn't even get it, yet ascribed to me that I'm purely focused on that.
He's simply not aware of his own projection, or already disjointed as an individual.

From a sociological point of view more and more people are becoming like him.
They have trouble associating themselves through or with others and think that they are being truly individual and special when they look only through themselves or into themselves.
What they don't realize is that they are still associating themselves with something, just not something healthy.

I mean I can see that in 100 years anthropology will be a dead science. It's insane.
There won't be anything to confront or compare except everyones confrontion with everyone or perhaps one monolithical corporate Culture that changes at the whims of those doing the marketing.


To expand on this: This means that any comment, really any generalization or association of their clothing with their persona is seen as offensive because they wish that I do not think of myself so highly to regard there being a possibility with him dressing to please, interest, disgust or tease me or what ever else it may be.

The offensive nature of my perception to him is there, even if it's non sexual and he'd agree if he'd step back for a moment and Think about it.

< Message edited by CodeOfSilence -- 2/4/2016 10:15:46 AM >

(in reply to UllrsIshtar)
Profile   Post #: 166
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 10:14:38 AM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline 		Nobody mentioned about commenting or not.
Altho to be honest, if said comment is derogatory or derisory, wouldn't it be just good manners to keep it to yourself??
Whatever someone wears, whether you like it, not like it, think it is sexy or ugly or drab, doesn't automatically invite comment any more than inviting touching or molesting.

Agreed, some mode of dress do usually invite more or less attention depending on the viewer's perspective.

The problem is people thinking they have the right to pass verbal or physical reference to someone else who hasn't said that they are open to such gross misbehaviour.

I know there is free speech. That is a fundamental premise to our free society.
The fact that a certain style of dress may tend to invite more comments doesn't necessarily imply that such comments are actually wanted.

And what's wrong with keeping one's own comments to oneself??
Just because you can comment, doesn't mean that you should.
There should be a certain level of respect that should also be observed.


_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to UllrsIshtar)
Profile   Post #: 167
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 10:18:21 AM   
CodeOfSilence


Posts: 235
Status: offline 		She SHOULD comment because she, like you is part of society. We SHOULD comment on each other and TO each other more. We should INTERACT with each other. This is the cure. Through interaction we will again establish norms and agreeable standards, without it nothing good will come.

And you should ACT and Dress accordingly. Meaning according to how you want to be treated, approached, interacted with.
This is normal, this has been the norm since the birth of humanity.



< Message edited by CodeOfSilence -- 2/4/2016 10:21:55 AM >

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 168
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 10:23:51 AM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CodeOfSilence
Fuck, this is why I've mostly given up on discussions online, because I can't actually humiliate morons like yourself while you are able to quote things out of context and ignore paragraphs that would damage your shitty context.

What about the sentence just above?


quote:

Someone Walking naked is sending a signal. It may be a signal of protest, of social liberation, of being a naturalist.


Did you fucking miss that one?

No, I didn't miss it.
The difference is, I don't attach anything to it - good, bad, or indifference.
I don't see it as anything like a 'signal' whatsoever.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CodeOfSilence
And what's this about you hiding behind crumpet? I attacked on a wide front and equated several of your with each other. You're just going with guilt of association here bringing it up without any bloody relation, even ascribing in your own post two different views to us.
Jesus, quiet.

I don't hide behind crumpet.
In fact, I don't like the way he sees stuff as sexual and sending a message.
Just like the statements you also made - sending 'signals' where there aren't any.
At least not IMHO.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CodeOfSilence
quote:

'I like to dress like this'


I already described why this attitude is one of self-denial, you had absolutely nothing to bring to the table but to to recycle some ad-hominem insults I used against you. Or maybe you and the rest who dress "for themselves" are just stupid.
OBS: This doesn't mean that people who are aware of the intentions that they send and dress casually are stupid.

You, like crumpets (albeit from a slightly different angle), are seeing signals and messages where many of us aren't seeing them.
You are ascribing such behaviour as being intentional with an aim to attract.
Intentional it may be, but not necessarily to attract.
That was my contention and echoed by Lucy.


_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to CodeOfSilence)
Profile   Post #: 169
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 10:27:27 AM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CodeOfSilence

She SHOULD comment because she, like you is part of society. We SHOULD comment on each other and TO each other more. We should INTERACT with each other. This is the cure. Through interaction we will again establish norms and agreeable standards, without it nothing good will come.

And you should ACT and Dress accordingly. Meaning according to how you want to be treated, approached, interacted with.
This is normal, this has been the norm since the birth of humanity.



I agree with this in principal.

But where do you draw the line between a casual comment (and likely to be taken in good spirits) and comments that the other person may not want??
As I said.... just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

Discretion is the better part of valour in my book.
If it isn't obvious that they want a comment, mayhap the best solution is to keep such comment in one's head.


_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to CodeOfSilence)
Profile   Post #: 170
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 10:28:07 AM   
CodeOfSilence


Posts: 235
Status: offline 		You're ignorant if you are not intending to send signals with the way you dress.
If you dress in a way that causes the attention of the Viewer to be concentrated on your fucking dick (by let's say a bulge or a circle around it) and your intention is not to signal something with this then you're not only ignorant but a moron.


But I Think you're too thick and too rooted in you individualist ways to understand my Point any better. For it has nothing to do with sex, dicks or tits, it's just the context of Crumpts OP.


______


@ Freedomdwarf Just above here.


You draw the line to the best of your abilities and how interested you are in offending someone.
I've just called you all sorts of things, you've called me all sorts of things but you're pretending a sexual comment is soooo offensive?

Bullshit.
And your quote is also interesting in this aspect. Talk about not standing behind it.

< Message edited by CodeOfSilence -- 2/4/2016 10:29:33 AM >

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 171
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 10:36:48 AM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline 		That would be your opinion.
I happen to think differently.

Much of society does tend to behave itself and observe a sense of discretion and deference to privacy toward the other person.
If you have no such sense, then it isn't me that is the moron as it's not me swimming against the tide.

But you go ahead. My opinion doesn't matter any more than yours here.


_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to CodeOfSilence)
Profile   Post #: 172
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 10:41:12 AM   
CodeOfSilence


Posts: 235
Status: offline 		Again the historical norm and genetic imprint is on my side. You've just swallowed the pill.
I've pointed out so many contradictions with your point of view. You've STILL refused to address the most basic one and that is "Why would you dress for yourself?"!

It's even more basic than "Why would you paint a picture that only you can see?" At least you can see the bloody thing.





< Message edited by CodeOfSilence -- 2/4/2016 10:47:47 AM >

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 173
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 10:50:33 AM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CodeOfSilence

Again the historical norm and genetic imprint is on my side. You've just swallowed the pill.
I've pointed out so many contradictions with your point of view. You've STILL refused to address the most basic one and that is "Why would you dress for yourself?"!

It's even more basic than "Why would you paint a picture that only you can see?" At least you can see the bloody thing.

People dress 'for themselves' to make them feel good within themselves - especially women.
It isn't necessarily aimed at other observers.

But of course you can't see that.

I don't see any 'genetic imprint'.
I don't subscribe to the view that just because I'm a male that I have any rights to comment on how females dress and that it is part of my genetic make-up to do so.
I also haven't seen any scientific study to show that any such genes exist.
It is purely an old Victorian-style attitude that men rule and women obey and they shouldn't be an individual with equal rights to do their own thing without comment.
In other words, I don't believe in misogyny or hold that style of opinion.
I haven't presented any contradictions either.


_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to CodeOfSilence)
Profile   Post #: 174
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 10:56:54 AM   
CodeOfSilence


Posts: 235
Status: offline 		You're like fucking retarded. Victorian what? Everything I've said concerns both men and women.
The genetic imprint is our historical (30.000 years) inclination towards expression: Expression of our culture, expression of our sex, of our wealth, of our social position and yes of our fucking fertility - Everything that makes us and what ever we are doing at any Point in time.

Your ignorance is astonishing. But understandable.
You've presented contradictions.


You just don't seem to be able to understand them.
Why does someone feel good about their looks?
Or let me put it in an other way, why does someone feel bad about how they look or dress?


Seriously, when you're chilling in your house, who ever the fuck you are, do you care if you're not dressed in your best clothes while watching TV? Because you would care if you dressed in them cause of "yourself"!
Fuck man Think Before you speak. Stop swallowing the stupid shit they tell you.


___________

Also wait, paus.
Do you know how complicated it was to even start a conversation with a lady in Victorian times? Shit me, as a man you'd better pay attention to the slightest movement of her hand. And GOD forbid she'd speak to you during a time when you smoked a cigar. "Holy fuck that bitch". Now you have to kill that cigar, no matter how expensive or new it is, because you wouldn't be allowed to let her inhale the smoke.

"Could do anything" . lol... Not when it comes to commenting.

< Message edited by CodeOfSilence -- 2/4/2016 11:07:33 AM >

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 175
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 11:07:14 AM   
UllrsIshtar


Posts: 3693
Joined: 7/28/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Nobody mentioned about commenting or not.



This entire thread has been about whether or not comments (or looks) are okay. Do try to keep up.

Literally nobody in this entire thread has even suggested that non-consensual touch is appropriate. Nobody.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Altho to be honest, if said comment is derogatory or derisory, wouldn't it be just good manners to keep it to yourself??



Perhaps.
But again, just because something is "good manners" doesn't mean you have a right to it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Whatever someone wears, whether you like it, not like it, think it is sexy or ugly or drab, doesn't automatically invite comment any more than



Again, it doesn't matter whether it's intended as an invitation or not. The fact is that certain modes of dress increase comment rates. Every woman in the world knows this.

In fact, the same thing applies to men as well. A man going out in certain types of unusual garb that stands out will get more comments than a man who doesn't wear clothes that stand out.
Men just are less inclined to stand out by means of the way that they dress than women are.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

inviting touching or molesting.




Again, nobody in this entire thread has even so much as suggested that dressing a certain way makes non-consensual touch okay.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

The problem is people thinking they have the right to pass verbal or physical reference to someone else who hasn't said that they are open to such gross misbehaviour.



People have the right to make verbal comments to others. Plain and simple.
You may consider the comments to be in bad taste, and wish they wouldn't comments, but that doesn't give you the right to insist that others are not allowed to do something.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

I know there is free speech. That is a fundamental premise to our free society.



This has nothing to do with free speech. Free speech relates directly and only to what the government is permitted to allow or disallow you to say.

This has to do with the fact that Western democratic societies run on the precept that people are allowed to do as they please, unless doing so is illegal. Even if what they please to do annoys, irritates, or offends other people. In these cases, the laws governing what is and isn't legal as "things that infringe on the rights of others", which is why looking, and speaking is okay, but touching is not. Touching violates a person's right to the sovereignty of their own body, which we recognize as a right. We do not recognize a right to not be offended.

You can be annoyed, irritated, or insulted when somebody else says something to you, but your annoyance, irritation, or feeling insulted does not give you the right to demand that they stop (unless in some cases, where actual damages are done, and where the exceptions are defined by law, or by the private property owner on who's property you are).

By insisting that somebody is not allowed to do as they please, when what pleases them does not infringe on your rights and is legal behavior, you are insisting that your preferences take president over their rights. By suggesting that they don't have the right to free expression, because you consider their free expression insulting, you are the one attempting to infringe on their rights, not them on yours.

You do not have the right to prohibit other people from behaving in a legal manner just because you think their behavior lacks taste. You can complain about it, but you don't have the right to make them change, any more than they have a right to make you change the way you dress.

This includes not being allowed to insist that others are not allowed to make comments, or leer at you, any more than a religious fundamentalist has the right to insist that gays aren't allowed to kiss in public, or women shouldn't be allowed to wear skirts above the knee.

For a religious fundamentalist, it's insulting, vulgar, and offensive to see gay people kissing, or women wearing revealing outfits.
Yet we as a society accept that their insult does not give them the right to demand that gays, or women refrain from these behaviors.

Why not? Because Western democratic societies run on the precept that people are allowed to do as they please, as long as the behavior is legal, and does not infringe on the rights of others.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

The fact that a certain style of dress may tend to invite more comments doesn't necessarily imply that such comments are actually wanted.



Wholly irrelevant.

We are allowed to do all sorts of things that are not wanted by others. Gays are allowed to kiss in public as well, even when there are religious fundamentalists present who consider such behavior unwanted.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

And what's wrong with keeping one's own comments to oneself??
Just because you can comment, doesn't mean that you should.
There should be a certain level of respect that should also be observed.



There's nothing wrong with keeping the comment to oneself.

But just because you think they should keep it to themselves, doesn't mean they have to.

People have a right to display a complete and utter lack of taste, class, and manners, as long as the manner in which they do so remains within the bounds of the law, which are invariably ways in which their display of an utter lack of taste, class and manners, does not infringe on the rights of others.





< Message edited by UllrsIshtar -- 2/4/2016 11:24:22 AM >

_____________________________

I can be your whore
I am the dirt you created
I am your sinner
And your whore
But let me tell you something baby
You love me for everything you hate me for

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 176
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 11:19:53 AM   
CodeOfSilence


Posts: 235
Status: offline
quote:


You do not have the right to insist that other people are not allowed to behave in a legal manner just because you think their behavior lacks taste.



He has the rigth to demand it. It would be polite for me to then stop. But I don't have to in most cases.


quote:

For a religious fundamentalist, it's insulting, vulgar, and offensive to see gay people kissing, or women wearing revealing outfits.



This is a good point. But I disagree with your extreme legalist position. Everyone commenting on everyones behavior constantly would cause chaos. Of course taking action causes not only chaos but fights and damage to property and persons.
That's why you see mormons flock to their own communities and gays establishing their own districts nowdays often joined by non-normative genderindentities.

quote:

People have a right to display a complete and utter lack of taste, class, and manners, as long as the manner in which they do so remains within the bounds of the law, which are invariably ways in which their display of an utter lack of taste, class and manners, does not infringe on the rights of others.


Well, technically, yes. But ...I'd not concede to it in person and if I have the ability to react without legal action being taken against me in a situation that's extreme but not illegal I will.




< Message edited by CodeOfSilence -- 2/4/2016 11:22:19 AM >

(in reply to UllrsIshtar)
Profile   Post #: 177
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 11:21:48 AM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline 		I disagree with virtually everything you said.

This whole thread is about how crumpet's wants to know what women are thinking and an extension to many of his other threads where he feels that certain clothing presented in certain ways are 'just for his sexual benefit' and that he doesn't understand why guys that can't help themselves to oggling/leering and touching are being slated.

What you are saying is because people have the choice to either keep comments to themselves or voice them, you advocate that people should voice them regardless just because you can.
I don't subscribe to that PoV.

@code: to start a conversation in Victorian times, you just had to speak to her.
In those days, women didn't have the power to refuse.
Just like my previous statement, old fashioned misogynystic attitudes, not modern ones.
No contradiction.

_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to UllrsIshtar)
Profile   Post #: 178
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 11:25:37 AM   
CodeOfSilence


Posts: 235
Status: offline 		Lol Freedom. So still completely unnable to answer "Why do you dress for yourself" now expanded to "Why don't you dress in your best clothes while watching TV?". Then you're truly alone! Able to focus all that attention to your own self gratification and self-admiration!


And one more bitest the dust.


And no, she had every right to refuse conversation with you. Though she couldn't refuse a dance. ;-)
Or more precisely a genetleman should Always indulge the lady if she asks a favour and if she would phrase her refusal as such he would be compelled to concede.


Here's one I should follow more closely by the way at least if I followed the Gentlemans Guide of 1875 X.X

quote:

1. Even if convinced that your opponent is utterly wrong, yield gracefully, decline further discussion, or dexterously turn the conversation, but do not obstinately defend your own opinion until you become angry…Many there are who, giving their opinion, not as an opinion but as a law, will defend their position by such phrases, as: “Well, if I were president, or governor, I would,” — and while by the warmth of their argument they prove that they are utterly unable to govern their own temper, they will endeavor to persuade you that they are perfectly competent to take charge of the government of the nation.




< Message edited by CodeOfSilence -- 2/4/2016 11:31:21 AM >

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 179
RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking - 2/4/2016 11:30:34 AM   
UllrsIshtar


Posts: 3693
Joined: 7/28/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

I disagree with virtually everything you said.



As expected.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


What you are saying is because people have the choice to either keep comments to themselves or voice them, you advocate that people should voice them regardless just because you can.



Not at all.

Nowhere have I advocated that people should voice themselves regardless.

I personally prefer it when people keep comments that I consider to be not in good taste to themselves.

However, I acknowledge that my preference doesn't superseded their rights.

You, on the other hand, pose that your preference to not be insulted supersedes other's rights to free expression.


_____________________________

I can be your whore
I am the dirt you created
I am your sinner
And your whore
But let me tell you something baby
You love me for everything you hate me for

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Someone please explain to me what women are thinking Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




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

0.125