Log in

View Full Version : where is prositution legal??



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13]

princessjas
09-11-2009, 09:19 PM
Me too, me too. See if you can shame me. :yawn:

I was kidding sorta...but why is thinking Elvia is hot as hell...shameful? I'm pretty sure most guys woudn't be ashamed to admit she was hot as fuck...so why should I feel differently?

As for your other shit...You've unknowinginly done enough to ruin my life fyvm. I'll ignore you whenever I feel like it. :finger:

Earl_the_Pearl
09-11-2009, 09:30 PM
I'll ignore you whenever I feel like it. :finger:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v17/earlcamembert/flasher1.gif

xdamage
09-11-2009, 10:46 PM
The point is majority is not always right. Example: Nazi Germany, Fascism in Italy, etc.

But the majority of men have been telling women they are not suited to being judges and leaders for a long time, and until fairly recently we didn't even let women vote in the USA, because OMFG if women vote the whole system might fall apart? Only fairly recently in history has the majority thinking been challenged to such a great degree.

Looks, there is blatant sexism, and trust me, I've gotten into hot water for calling it. Then there is more subtle sexism. Hopper's statement was not explicitly hateful in the sense of "all women should die" but it also was heavily laced with thinking similar to "women aren't capable of voting; they will vote emotionally; if they vote the country will fail". For all fear that might happen, did it? No. The countries failings are not because women are participating in politics, or the law.

Elvia
09-11-2009, 11:48 PM
don't encourage me PJ. I feel like such a douche for feeding the troll. Why did I feed the troll?

Hopper
09-12-2009, 12:10 AM
They'll never get it...If they are in fact different people... :lens: I thought I caught a whiff of sock earlier. :shhh:

A smart person would create more than one sock-puppet, if the illusion of support were the aim, and I would have created dancers, not just customers. I now wish I had done that instead of trying to use reason. Imagine, my own merry band of dancers. Gad, I'm evil.

Hopper
09-12-2009, 12:39 AM
This is the sexist sentiment in question. That's a far cry from just saying "women and men are different." It's a whole different level to say that someone is unequipped to be allowed to hold a certain job because of their sex.

Well it could still be one logical conclusion of that.

It was probably unwise for me to say that, at least so directly, under the circumstances. I would also qualify those comments in hindsight, given a chance. But the immediate reaction from most others was to howl at me for being a sexist instead of criticising my comments reasonably.

Here is an incident I had with a woman today. I had been to this shop to buy some fuses and both times been given (by male staff) the wrong ones, even though I took the original in for visual ID. (I didn't look at them because they were in cardboard packets).


ME: "Hello, I want to buy a replacement for this fuse. I got the wrong ones the last two times I came here."

LADY: (Looks at fuse.) "A one-amp fast-blowing fuse."

ME: "No, it's a slow-blowing fuse."

LADY: (Tetchily) "No it's a fast-blowing fuse. Wait, no it is a slow-blow.

ME: "I was given the wrong ones the last two times I was here. They don't have the same filament."

LADY: "They don't make slow-blow with that type of filament anymore. Now the slow-blow filaments look the same as fast-blow filaments."

ME: "Then can you tell me what the difference is, if they look the same?"

LADY: (Tetchily again) "I don't know, I don't make them."

ME: "I know; but you sell them."
And so on. This lady got annoyed with me just for correcting her, and then got annoyed just because I asked her for more information. Note that I am not saying she is incompetent. She actually knew about the product, and it was the male staff who previously gave me the wrong fuse.

I have problems with male staff at shops too, but usually a male would not turn a simple identification task and a query into a personal issue. Female staff often have reacted that way in my experience, enough that I am now always ready for it. However, many female staff are professional and accommodating. I don't generalise.


Also, no one labeled you a sexual predator, as those who have gone over the link have already told you. And you say I'm the one twisting things?

So I just twisted this?


Princessjass:

...

BTW - I am reporting your posts and asking that you be removed from this board. We DO NOT need a sexual predator on a board made for women.

...

After a point though, your attacks (and a few others) became ridiculous and aggravating to the point where I gave up and resigned myself to the fact that you are indeed scum (as can be seen by your conviction that fucking 16-yr olds is appropriate). I truly hope you are in jail soon.

...
http://forum.stripperweb.com/showthread.php?t=132690&highlight=pedophile&page=12

Hopper
09-12-2009, 12:52 AM
^^^No one believes that. Except for maybe hopper.

of course, you both have antiquated ideas about women, so I'm sure you two bond over that.

Sorry, but it's hard to keep up to date with what is politically correct; which raises the question of which time they were right. Change isn't necessarily improvement. Judging by the symptoms, society as a whole is not advancing.

Hopper
09-12-2009, 12:55 AM
...

why, did you actually want to explain how holding "antiquated views" about anything is good? How it makes you an individual? Keep in mind that "antiquated" already implies that the views are no longer relevant.

Yeah, but it's just your word, not an actual argument. Just like the word "sexist".

Hopper
09-12-2009, 12:57 AM
Rut-Roh Shaggy! Hopper, meet your petard. Let the hoisting begin! ;D

Sure, it's a capital offense to say that.

Thought police!

Hopper
09-12-2009, 05:05 AM
But the majority of men have been telling women they are not suited to being judges and leaders for a long time, and until fairly recently we didn't even let women vote in the USA, because OMFG if women vote the whole system might fall apart? Only fairly recently in history has the majority thinking been challenged to such a great degree.

Looks, there is blatant sexism, and trust me, I've gotten into hot water for calling it. Then there is more subtle sexism. Hopper's statement was not explicitly hateful in the sense of "all women should die" but it also was heavily laced with thinking similar to "women aren't capable of voting; they will vote emotionally; if they vote the country will fail". For all fear that might happen, did it? No. The countries failings are not because women are participating in politics, or the law.

Suffrage was never a real issue. In a truly free society, the only valid function of the law is to collectively enforce justice, and justice is merely the protection of individuals from criminals. That is, law is prooperly the organised enforcement of the same things an individual has a right to enforce on his own: his own preotection from theft, injury, murder, etc.

If only males were allowed to vote, it would be sufficient to ensure such a legal system, since most males want protection from the law. Women would benefit from this system of law regardless of whether they vote. Males constitiute a large enough number of voters from different sections of society that their vote alone would preserve a just legal system and keep politicians honest (through the threat of a good round of sackings).

Suffrage or the enfranchisement of groups (e.g. women) is only of interest to such a group when the government is allowed to make laws outside the proper bounds of justice and make laws which favour certain groups, by taking from some groups and giving to others. This sets up a competition among groups in society for government favouritism.

So ironically, in a free society, not every group needs the right to vote in order to benefit the same as those who do. Here is an explanation in Frederic Bastiat's book "The Law" (pdf - read from page 9):

http://mises.org/books/thelaw.pdf

This book was written in 1850, which shows how antiquated some of you are.

WiseGuy_TX
09-12-2009, 05:25 AM
So if someone thinks I am an asshole, and someone else (other than Cyril) reading the same comments thinks I am not, then I am an asshole and at the same time not an asshole?

Like I said, perhaps the person who said I am an asshole is just using my comments, twisting them, as an excuse to call me an asshole, which is what assholes do.

If you are right that assholes are in the eye of the beholder, then it is something out of my control, which means I am not responsible, which means I am not actually an asshole - it's all in the other person's head....thats right. Same as the mods here when they make their "you've gone too far asshole" pointing/banning determinations.


Nope you are wrong....she is right but you disagree. Your ego is your ignorance.


It is not worth an intelligent man's time to be in the majority....nor the insane.


Once again you missed the point....then once again you failed to comminicate your thoughts.


You are attacking me...most disagree with you but bragging about being attacked so much discredits your opinion. Play nice Cyril.


Cyril, it doesn't really matter. You wear this motto all over this site. that you're different, that you have a unique perspective, that your ignorance is somehow beneficial to you and to all of us as a whole. I'm trying to show you, in a broader context, that that logic has never held up....agree, so true. Cyril worries that he cant manipulate or control peoples minds/opinions here, despite his futile efforts.


...Your reply was off the track....as was yours again.


You are wrong....i'm actually liking Cyril's standard reply's. I'm going to start counting the various forms of "you" in his reply's.


A smart person would create more than one sock-puppet, if the illusion of support were the aim, and I would have created dancers, not just customers. I now wish I had done that instead of trying to use reason. Imagine, my own merry band of dancers. Gad, I'm evil....they would be the only dancers applying at Dream Girls. Hmmm, i kinda like the idea of hoppers sock girls being pimped out at virtual Dream Girls.:D

vmurphy252
09-12-2009, 08:08 AM
Suffrage was never a real issue. In a truly free society, the only valid function of the law is to collectively enforce justice, and justice is merely the protection of individuals from criminals. That is, law is prooperly the organised enforcement of the same things an individual has a right to enforce on his own: his own preotection from theft, injury, murder, etc.

If only males were allowed to vote, it would be sufficient to ensure such a legal system, since most males want protection from the law. Women would benefit from this system of law regardless of whether they vote. Males constitiute a large enough number of voters from different sections of society that their vote alone would preserve a just legal system and keep politicians honest (through the threat of a good round of sackings).

Suffrage or the enfranchisement of groups (e.g. women) is only of interest to such a group when the government is allowed to make laws outside the proper bounds of justice and make laws which favour certain groups, by taking from some groups and giving to others. This sets up a competition among groups in society for government favouritism.

So ironically, in a free society, not every group needs the right to vote in order to benefit the same as those who do. Here is an explanation in Frederic Bastiat's book "The Law" (pdf - read from page 9):



This book was written in 1850, which shows how antiquated some of you are.
No words. We have a different starting postulate...

princessjas
09-12-2009, 09:59 AM
Well it could still be one logical conclusion of that.

It was probably unwise for me to say that, at least so directly, under the circumstances. I would also qualify those comments in hindsight, given a chance. But the immediate reaction from most others was to howl at me for being a sexist instead of criticising my comments reasonably.

Here is an incident I had with a woman today. I had been to this shop to buy some fuses and both times been given (by male staff) the wrong ones, even though I took the original in for visual ID. (I didn't look at them because they were in cardboard packets).


ME: "Hello, I want to buy a replacement for this fuse. I got the wrong ones the last two times I came here."

LADY: (Looks at fuse.) "A one-amp fast-blowing fuse."

ME: "No, it's a slow-blowing fuse."

LADY: (Tetchily) "No it's a fast-blowing fuse. Wait, no it is a slow-blow.

ME: "I was given the wrong ones the last two times I was here. They don't have the same filament."

LADY: "They don't make slow-blow with that type of filament anymore. Now the slow-blow filaments look the same as fast-blow filaments."

ME: "Then can you tell me what the difference is, if they look the same?"

LADY: (Tetchily again) "I don't know, I don't make them."

ME: "I know; but you sell them."
And so on. This lady got annoyed with me just for correcting her, and then got annoyed just because I asked her for more information. Note that I am not saying she is incompetent. She actually knew about the product, and it was the male staff who previously gave me the wrong fuse.

I have problems with male staff at shops too, but usually a male would not turn a simple identification task and a query into a personal issue. Female staff often have reacted that way in my experience, enough that I am now always ready for it. However, many female staff are professional and accommodating. I don't generalise.



So I just twisted this?


Princessjass:

...

BTW - I am reporting your posts and asking that you be removed from this board. We DO NOT need a sexual predator on a board made for women.

...

After a point though, your attacks (and a few others) became ridiculous and aggravating to the point where I gave up and resigned myself to the fact that you are indeed scum (as can be seen by your conviction that fucking 16-yr olds is appropriate). I truly hope you are in jail soon.

...
http://forum.stripperweb.com/showthread.php?t=132690&highlight=pedophile&page=12

Considering you attitude toward women it's no wonder the woman was irk'ed. You were probably condescending as hell. Also, why do you keep bringing up the same posts of mine over and over again. All you're doing is making yourself look like a pissy little boy.

xdamage
09-12-2009, 10:16 AM
So ironically, in a free society, not every group needs the right to vote in order to benefit the same as those who do. Here is an explanation in Frederic Bastiat's book "The Law" (pdf - read from page 9):

http://mises.org/books/thelaw.pdf

This book was written in 1850, which shows how antiquated some of you are.

This is fine, and a very good magic trick... look over there!

Se look if that really was relevant then we could simply decide that every century we will switch the voting group; even centuries the males vote, odd centuries the females, and since only a partial group needs to vote for the whole neither sex should have any qualms with that?

But really of course that is not what it is about so your linked article was a magic trick to take our minds off the real issue.

The reason women weren't allowed to vote is it really was about men who didn't want women voting because they were sure they are better at deciding what is right - i.e., the same presumption, that males are capable of voting for all, women not; males are capable of being leaders, women not; males are capable of enforcing/writing laws, women not.

My point was having broken past that assumption, allowing them to vote, those men who believed that were proven to be wrong. And you've also not been able to identify objective evidence that shows statistically that women are poorer judges or leaders when we pushed the matter.

Therefore it could very well be what many women reasonably believe it to be, an oppression of their half of the sex by males who are physically stronger, but not really better suited (or worse) to guide our societies laws, government, etc. And if they are right, it really is no more complex then just human nature. People abuse power. Physical strength is power. Men may well just be abusing it and it is no more complex then that.

p.s. That is unless you still believe the stronger has a right to control the physically weaker, in which case all I can say to that is again, human nature. We shift our PoV as it best suits our interests and if you were born female, if another country invaded ours, you're attitude about the strongest having a right to control the weaker would also be discarded as that would be a better PoV for yourself in the moment.