Hyerdahl wrote:
> Deborah Terreson wrote:
> > In article  ,
> > "Hyerdahl"  wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >> >> >
> > >The point of the scissors was to cut off rapist'd dongs.  The
> > > only way that could be stretched to "all men" is
either if that
> group
> > > said > it did or if you are interpreting that way, meaning that
YOU
> think
> > > all> men> are rapists.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The U.N.H Campus Lesbians do.
> > >
> > > Prove it, "Deb".
> >
> > Ooop. Here comes the quotation marks around my name again...
>
> That's right;  I'd need proof of your sex/gender as well, if you want
> those marks off, dear.
>
> >
> > Are you going to start to call me a man?
>
> You know I think you are a man.

Just out of curiousity, why is it that the only women you accuse of
being men here are the ones the disagree with you?  Are you so
convinced that women as a group are so monolithic in thought that you
can't conceive of one being opposed to your positions?

>  If you can't prove it, might as well
> get off the subject, just like the subject of this post,eh?  Looks
like
> you girl pretenders can't prove anything, right?
> > >
> > > Nice try Parg, in trying to wiggle out
> > >> of> turning the ideology they have on it's head and making it
what
>  > the>> > men in>> this NG think.
> > >> >
> > > Unless they have PROOF that this was the intention of the group,
by
> > > something the group has said, it is all about the bitter boys
here
> and
> > > their interpretation.
> > >
> > And if in this case, the general drift of the men out here might be
> correct
> > about this? What then?
>
> So now you've gone from saying that you KNOW what the group intended
to
> scouting out the "general drift" of what the men here think, we KNOW
> you've lost the debate dear.  No proof is still no proof whether it's
> about your sex/gender or about your point.  You have none.

I'm passing familiar with Deb's area, and I can attest to her overall
accuracy regarding the climate there.


>
> > >Again, I saw zero, zip about those women making the statement that
> > all>> men are rapists.
> > >>
> > >> Come on Parg, you can do better than that.
> > >
> > > I don't need to DO "better" since you're the one
with no proof.
> These
> > > feminists were clearly speaking of rapists.
> >
> > So why did they want the 'man' to leave?
>
> There were OTHER MEN there, idiot.  The one man they asked to leave
was
> a reporter on a right wing rag.

Because they were afraid of what?  A challenge to their ideology?  That
someone would not whole-heartedly approve of their nonsense?  If
they're so unsure of their actions that they're only comfortable
preaching to the choir, it might be time for them to assess their
legitimacy.


> > >>
> > >> > The bitter boys here seem to be inferring that all
> > >> > men are rapists because the scissors were aimed at
rapists and
> NOT
> > > at> the fathers, brothers or lovers of these feminists.
> > >>
> > >> Got news for you: These women have few men who love them.
> > >
> > > So say you?  Hon, from a man pretending to be a woman I'd need
some
> > > proof and not just your say-so.
> >
> > WHOOP! There it is! *Yawn* Oh dear. I seem to be getting under your
> skin,
> > aren't I?
> > >
> No, without proof there is nothing to put under my skin.  All you
have
> is smoke and mirrors, and I've just uncovered both of them.

I don't see how.  She's familiar with the area, you're not.  In
addition, you're the one selectively editing the post, not her.


And I know you don't need me defending you, Deb, I just like throwing
my .02 in.   :)



--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 4/4/05 1:01:02 PM ---