Nothing personal, just addressing the contents of your posts. If you didn't hijack the thread, you were not responding like a feminist and your emotional outburst was not misandrist, all you have to do is explain your position. I explained mine. I say you were doing all three things and I explained why I think so. Fairly relevant for the Internet. If meeting arguments with responses isn't what you're here for, what then? Strokes and attention? Referring to stamping your high heeled boots isn't an appropriate reply. Its a girly reply, sufficient to excite some younger posters but hardly up to an intelligent standard. If you want to be the board "girl", I suppose that's your choice.
Teasing. If you can't take a joke you shouldn't have joined, girly.
..... Referring to stamping your high heeled boots isn't an appropriate reply. Its a girly reply...... If you can't take a joke .....
You're far to kind, lol.
Oh come on, he's hilarious. He plays the part well. Especially how he can talk about the fact that he's a man all he wants, but if a woman posts, she's just trying to bully him with her soft bits. lol.
You are obviously an insecure little man. You need to feel superior to women so you rant on about how men are the superior gender but is exposes you as weak and insecure of your role.
Men are not superior neither are women, we are equal yet different.
Oh come on, he's hilarious. He plays the part well. Especially how he can talk about the fact that he's a man all he wants, but if a woman posts, she's just trying to bully him with her soft bits. lol.
Oh come on, he's hilarious. He plays the part well. Especially how he can talk about the fact that he's a man all he wants, but if a woman posts, she's just trying to bully him with her soft bits. lol.
Oh that would be awesome."Soft bits?" LOL. Next you'll be posting pics.
Oh if only that were permanently true.Bye bye. I'm outta here.
"Soft bits?" LOL. Next you'll be posting pics. Bye bye. I'm outta here.
Oh that would be awesome.
But I have to ask, what were you babbling about puritans the other day?
Are we counting days?Oh if only that were permanently true.
only in our dreams, to both statements.
Oh wait, I already have pics. ;-)
Gah! That's the last time I get blackout drunk at gerry's house.
Gah! That's the last time I get blackout drunk at gerry's house.
"Soft bits?" LOL. Next you'll be posting pics. Bye bye. I'm outta here.
Oh come on, he's hilarious. He plays the part well. Especially how he can talk about the fact that he's a man all he wants, but if a woman posts, she's just trying to bully him with her soft bits. lol.
....The law currently is exactly as you describe, that women who press charges without evidence do not see their cases prosecuted. You can't complain that the law is unfair AND say that what you were arguing is that it should do exactly what it currently does.
You know we can actually see you still sitting in the thread, right?
I was concentrating on something else and missed the most important part of this post.
Your statement makes zero sense. Your position is illogical. There are two separate issues here.
- A woman who wants a man charged but who has no evidence that he did anything wrong should not be able to have him charged. Doing so would be grossly unfair as well as being unconstitutional. It goes against every gain made by the common person since Magna Carta.
- Second, for men to complain that it is unfair for women and men to face a different onus is both fair and logical. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. The Charter states in section 15:
Underlining added. The word "sex" here means gender. It is just that simple.15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
Wrong. I left at the time and went offline. You sure are getting desperate, Soft bits (your term).