"pamela" (pamela{at}msnnot.news) displays her utter inability to debate/
discuss to *topic*, havinmg only unsupported ad hominums to spew:
> "Bill in Co."  wrote in message
> news:gk44e.2845$EE2.1980{at}newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>> Nearl J Icarus wrote:
>>> In article ,
>>> rcblinnNoSpam{at}bellsouth.net says...
>>>
>>>> Those who feel the need to generalize and denigrate women tend to
>>>> be guys who have no idea how to relate to people in
general.  They're
>>>
>>> They also need to tear somebody else down so they can make themselves
>>> feel
>>> better. It's a whole lot easier than going through the bother of trying
>>> to
>>> elevate themselves.
>>
>> I think it's even beyond that.    They're incapable of it.

No proof offered ? Claim fails.

> Unfortunately for the world these guys have  turned their inability to
> function into the world into a hatred of women.

So, refusing to follow the Feminists claims of exclusive victimhood is
a " hatred of women " ?

Thanks for displaying *your* hatred of men.

> Not hard to figure out.

Indeed: ibid.

> They had a woman, they punished her because the rest of the world didn't
> value them the way they thought they ought to be valued, and eventually
> she escaped.

No proof offered ? Claim fails.

> That enraged them and in their inability to think rationally,



> they turned all women (except those in third world countries, of course),
> into that woman.

No proof offered ? Claim fails.

> Even this stupid discussion they are having about women not caring about
> violence against other people is so far out of reality it would be
> stunning,

Well, were that true, you could *show proof of many Feminist advocate
groups that DO care about violence against anyone-else-but-women.

But, since you CAN'T show such proof, all you can do is stamp your
widdle feetsies and bitch, whine and moan about men not letting women
have all the attention. Typical misandrous Feminist chauvinist sow.

> except that these guys are sociopaths.



The actual " sociopaths " are the ignorant and misandrous fools who
demand that we NOT talk about any victims of violence who are not women.

> Imagine that they actually bring up racism, violence against
> children and others, as if they actually care about these things?

Imagine that *you* showed any sign of caring about those issues, or about
victims of violence who are NOT women....

Naw, victims of Feminist Brain Rot cannot manage such a feat of empathy.
All they can do, is spew projected hate, as you so well show.

> Imagine if they couldn't fume and vent and spew here?

Too bad... for you that Free Speech applies to... everyone. Deal with it,
toots.

> They'd probably be out shooting people.



As Daphne Patai points out, when the *woman* who wrote the first book
on domestic violence, and who opened the first women's shelter in London,
UK, started, in 1981, to report that *as many men were the victims of
violent women, as women were victims of violent men*, she got...
*death threats from Feminists.

So, the PROOF is that it is the *Feminists* who'd be likely to be
" shooting people ". See " Heterophobia ", Patai, end
note 7-40, pages
243-244.

THnaks for showing all and sundry that, when offered a choice of
facts or your emotional comfort in hating men who DARE speak out
aginst the sexism that IS Feminism, you go against the *facts*,
and *for the hate*.

Flush !

Andre
--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
                                    The Man Prayer, Red Green.


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 4/4/05 1:01:03 PM ---