Login    Register
User Information
Username:
Password:
We are a free and open
community, all are welcome.
Click here to Register
Sponsored
Who is online

In total there are 55 users online :: 4 registered, 0 hidden and 51 guests


Most users ever online was 218 on Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:58 pm

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Exabot [Bot], Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] based on users active over the past 5 minutes

The Team
Administrators
Global Moderators
global_moderators.png CS

"Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

All non-spudgun related discussion goes here such as projects, theories, serious questions, etc. All "off-topic" posts (aka useless posting, determined by moderators) will be removed.
Sponsored 
  • Author
    Message

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: ramses » Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:28 pm

POLAND_SPUD wrote:
I have no doubt :)

His restraint is truly admirable, and I'm glad the response is overwhelmingly in this guy's favour.
It's just so annoying that many cases of supposed police brutality towards a woman turns out to be caused by her either kicking or grabbing their nuts or attacking them physically in other way. They're just so sure they can get away with it that they do it. Even if they get beaten afterwards they still win in the end as they press charges against police officers as soon as the media cover it.

Pretty much any girl can attack you for no apparent reason, get away with it and you're forked because the assumption will be that you must have attacked her or something

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/14/technology/google-adds-to-its-menagerie-of-robots.html

OMG it has begun :!:

Where's BTB when you need Terminator music in the background??



I beg to differ. It seems in the US, it is the POLICE who "attack you for no apparent reason, get away with it and you're forked because the assumption will be that you must have attacked [them] or something"

http://benswann.com/cops-spray-womans-v ... ug-arrest/

This person faced disciplinary action at work, still has their job, and is only facing a civil suit. As from my point of view, any LEO (or government employee for that matter) I meet now has a significantly higher burden before I will be convinced they are not a sack of crap.
  • 0

POLAND_SPUD wrote:even if there was no link I'd know it's a bot because of female name :D
User avatar
ramses
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1679
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 6:50 pm
Reputation: 3

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: Ragnarok » Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:02 pm

jamsknickersnevergig wrote:Christmas is a feminist conspiracy.

So does that mean it's time to burn down society again? :?

:tongue3:
  • 0

Does that thing kinda look like a big cat to you?
User avatar
Ragnarok
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5339
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 8:23 am
Location: The UK
Reputation: 8

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: POLAND_SPUD » Tue Dec 17, 2013 4:19 pm


I beg to differ. It seems in the US, it is the POLICE who "attack you for no apparent reason, get away with it and you're forked because the assumption will be that you must have attacked [them] or something"

http://benswann.com/cops-spray-womans-v ... ug-arrest/
Ohh come on... You're trying to tell me that more women get abused than men ??

EDIT
LOL dude they weren't men... both of the officers were women

http://www.ibtimes.com/marlene-tapia-ne ... llo-county
Argument FAIL :D
  • 0

Children are the future

unless we stop them now
User avatar
POLAND_SPUD
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:43 pm
Country: Israel (il)
Reputation: 10

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Tue Dec 17, 2013 7:19 pm

Ragnarok wrote:
jamsknickersnevergig wrote:Christmas is a feminist conspiracy.

So does that mean it's time to burn down society again? :?


Ha! I never said it was a feminist conspiracy. If anything, it is the capitalist patriarchy exploiting women's inherent materialism, dragging their menfolk along with them :D

LOL dude they weren't men... both of the officers were women


Damn.
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: ramses » Wed Dec 18, 2013 1:52 am

POLAND_SPUD wrote:

I beg to differ. It seems in the US, it is the POLICE who "attack you for no apparent reason, get away with it and you're forked because the assumption will be that you must have attacked [them] or something"

http://benswann.com/cops-spray-womans-v ... ug-arrest/
Ohh come on... You're trying to tell me that more women get abused than men ??

EDIT
LOL dude they weren't men... both of the officers were women

http://www.ibtimes.com/marlene-tapia-ne ... llo-county
Argument FAIL :D


Not sure what you're insinuating. Are you saying it is acceptable for a LEO to mace the genitals of a detainee who is not resisting, but only as long as they are both female?
  • 0

POLAND_SPUD wrote:even if there was no link I'd know it's a bot because of female name :D
User avatar
ramses
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1679
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 6:50 pm
Reputation: 3

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Dec 18, 2013 9:02 am

ramses wrote:Not sure what you're insinuating. Are you saying it is acceptable for a LEO to mace the genitals of a detainee who is not resisting, but only as long as they are both female?


I think POLAND's point was that in the case of a male/femalte altercation, it is normally the man who is assumed to be at fault. Since your example was woman vs woman, it does not address the point he was trying to make.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E2%80%9CW ... %9D_effect

edit: we do this for fun, in Syria spudding is dead serious:

Image
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: Ragnarok » Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:32 am

I didn't get the idea it was meant to; I saw it more of a segue than an argument.

Sort of "If you think that's bad... this is worse".

vegknackmerrinessjig wrote:If anything, it is the capitalist patriarchy

Ah, so it's the men's fault. Let's burn down society anyway! :bounce:

I think POLAND's point was that in the case of a male/female altercation, it is normally the man who is assumed to be at fault.

It's not exactly true to "innocent until proven guilty" rules, but that's an ideal that's not true in practice. (Law enforcement is generally allowed to take certain measures when they have suspicion or likelihood of a crime).

Certainly there are cases of men suffering domestic violence but, depending on the study, it's considered about two to three times more likely for women to suffer it (with a similar breakdown on actual deaths), and women are considerably more likely to actually report or seek help for cases. (If men reported it more often, rather than worrying about their emasculation, the assumption would be weakened).

Now, I can't (and won't) say for certain what the underlying reasons why women are more likely to suffer violence are. It could be men having opinions of "being in charge" or even ownership of their partner. It could just be that men are generally more violent.
Likely, it's a hybrid (no, not that sort) that depends on the case.

Certainly, it's a case where the law favours women over men. But it does have underlying reasons in actual cases, which can be related to what men think about women (and, in this case, not in the positive "Women are wonderful" way).
  • 0

Does that thing kinda look like a big cat to you?
User avatar
Ragnarok
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5339
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 8:23 am
Location: The UK
Reputation: 8

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: velocity3x » Wed Dec 18, 2013 11:31 am

Ragnarok wrote:Now, I can't (and won't) say for certain what the underlying reasons why women are more likely to suffer violence are.


Just a guess but...Perhaps it's because some of them act like invincible, violent, bigmouth A.. holes because they know the law will protect them. I could be wrong.
  • 0

User avatar
velocity3x
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 827
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 3:09 pm
Location: Yuma, Arizona
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 7

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: Ragnarok » Wed Dec 18, 2013 12:36 pm

I draw the line at a suggestion that's a valid excuse for domestic violence.

Any person saying anything like "I wouldn't do this if you weren't such a bad wife/girlfriend" (or equally, "husband/boyfriend") - even if they ARE a bad partner - to justify brutality is a coward hiding behind a defence flimsier than wet cardboard.

A bad partner is a reason to move on, not a reason to get violent.
  • 0

Does that thing kinda look like a big cat to you?
User avatar
Ragnarok
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5339
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 8:23 am
Location: The UK
Reputation: 8

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Dec 18, 2013 12:48 pm

Ragnarok wrote:I draw the line at a suggestion that's a valid excuse for domestic violence.


It's not an excuse.

Bill Burr makes the point though.



Look, I understand hitting a woman is a bad thing, okay.

How come you can’t f***in’ ask questions? I just don’t understand.

Like if I get bit by a rattlesnake, wouldn’t you guys have some questions, all right?

"How did it happen? Did you not see it? Were you f***in’ with it?

How did a snake get so mad, it almost killed you?"


A woman's right to provoke should not be protected. There should be consequences for their actions.

How's this for a bit of femminist humour: http://thelandofmonsterscomics.tumblr.c ... 1118985514
  • 3

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: velocity3x » Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:48 pm

Ragnarok wrote:I draw the line at a suggestion that's a valid excuse for domestic violence.

It's not an "valid excuse" for violence against women, but it is a valid observation as to why some women are on the receiving ending end of violence. I think it's common for most young boys to perceive all women as possessing the virtue and character of Mary Poppins. When they mature into men and gain some experience in life, they find that some women, behind close doors, like to verbally and physically attack men. Mary Poppins they are not. :lol:
  • 0

User avatar
velocity3x
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 827
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 3:09 pm
Location: Yuma, Arizona
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 7

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: Ragnarok » Wed Dec 18, 2013 4:42 pm

jerkinvermineggcasks wrote:A woman's right to provoke should not be protected.

People do have a right to be arseholes - it's called free speech, and there's any number of people who seek to exploit it.
Being an annoying jerk is no crime, and even if were it so, it would not be within the powers of the slighted individual to decide the sentencing.

velocity3x wrote:it is a valid observation as to why some women are on the receiving ending end of violence.

If a woman is an arsehole, that's her choice. If I hit her, that's my choice. You can't remove that responsibility from this.

But whatever the reason or "reason", it does not invalidate the statistics. It is more often men beating up women than the other way around. The law does sometimes have to make some assumptions if it's going to protect people.

~~~~~

Can I also say, I think you guys mistake my use of the word "feminism" for "women have the sun shining out of their arse".

Believing in equality doesn't mean I have to like all my equals.
  • 0

Does that thing kinda look like a big cat to you?
User avatar
Ragnarok
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5339
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 8:23 am
Location: The UK
Reputation: 8

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: POLAND_SPUD » Wed Dec 18, 2013 5:25 pm

People do have a right to be arseholes - it's called free speech, and there's any number of people who seek to exploit it.
Being an annoying jerk is no crime, and even if were it so, it would not be within the powers of the slighted individual to decide the sentencing.
Sure... though somehow wimin are allowed to smack a guy who's an arsehole and get away with it. If you fight back or merely stop her from beating you - you're fckt. You're supposed to stand her and let her beat you up. On the other hand, if a guy smacks a bitchy girl who walks all over him he's labelled as an aggressive maniac

Bill Burr makes the point though.
Awesome. This one is even better...


When they mature into men and gain some experience in life, they find that some women, behind close doors, like to verbally and physically attack men. Mary Poppins they are not.
Probably the best one sentence advice you can give anyone on women...
  • 0

Children are the future

unless we stop them now
User avatar
POLAND_SPUD
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:43 pm
Country: Israel (il)
Reputation: 10

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: MrCrowley » Wed Dec 18, 2013 6:56 pm

Ragnarok wrote:Can I also say, I think you guys mistake my use of the word "feminism" for "women have the sun shining out of their arse".

Believing in equality doesn't mean I have to like all my equals.

I would suggest discontinuing discussion of this topic, it's waste of time with these guys :wink:

There are many pages of this thread devoted to this topic, it would pop up every few weeks and then die out after a couple of days. I've spent way too long trying to demonstrate that one doesn't have to choose between radical feminism and misogyny and that a middle ground does exist.
  • 0

User avatar
MrCrowley
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 10207
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:42 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Country: New Zealand (nz)
Reputation: 4

Re: "Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Dec 18, 2013 8:21 pm

MrCrowley wrote:I've spent way too long trying to demonstrate that one doesn't have to choose between radical feminism and misogyny and that a middle ground does exist.


It might exist for you, I haven't found it myself :)

People do have a right to be arseholes - it's called free speech, and there's any number of people who seek to exploit it.
Being an annoying jerk is no crime, and even if were it so, it would not be within the powers of the slighted individual to decide the sentencing.


Yes, but.

As a man, know that if I am too much of an arsehole, I will suffer consequences. Aware of this, I will tend to be less of an arsehole.

If a woman knows that she can be a b;tch and suffer no consequences, then she has no reason to moderate her behavior.

It's the same with children. Who is likely to behave better, a child allowed to do whatever it likes or a child that faces the threat of discipline?

If a woman is an arsehole, that's her choice. If I hit her, that's my choice. You can't remove that responsibility from this.


Yes, but. Nobody here is saying that hitting a woman is justified. Bruises on a woman's face can be seen, scars in a man's head are not as apparent. Louis CK has a good piece on the different levels which men and women operate:



Women are non-violent, but they will sh;t inside of your heart
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

PreviousNext

Return to Non-Spudgun Related Discussion

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Exabot [Bot], Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]

Reputation System ©'