"Philip Lewis"  wrote in message
news:39o2ogF5tu720U1{at}individual.net...
>
> "Aggy"  wrote in message
> news:AlqZd.22549$3A6.22428{at}newsfe1-gui.ntli.net...
> > Philip Lewis wrote:
> >> "Aggy"  wrote in message
> >> news:Gd4Zd.916$5M4.95{at}newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
> >>> "Philip Lewis" 
wrote in message
> >>> news:39jvusF5v5rvaU1{at}individual.net...
> >>>>
> >>>> "Aggy"  wrote in message
> >>>> news:Br3Zd.797$qf7.293{at}newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> >>>>> Philip Lewis wrote:
> >>>>>> Yes and it is thanks to the international
nature of this group
> >>>>>> that I quickly learned that the UK shared a
similiar plight to the
> >>>>>> US,Canada,Australia and New Zealand to
mention but a few. It also
> >>>>>> became quickly apparent that feminism IS an
international SCAM and
> >>>>>> it's networking capabilities were well
demonstrated with the 1995
> >>>>>> Beijing Conference for Wimmin. No coincidence
then that time after
> >>>>>> time we see the SAME feminist policies in ONE
western nation being
> >>>>>> quicky 'exported' to the rest with the same
LIES or misinformation
> >>>>>> and propaganda being used as 'justification'.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Phil
> >>>>>
> >>>>> LOL. does this mean all the wars over the world
will end as these
> >>>>> so called
> >>>>> "male only" armies will reunite in
their hatred of feminism?
> >>>>
> >>>> You are forgetting one very important thing here i.e.
feminism 
> >>>> women. No I'm not, dear.
> >>
> >> Yes you are
> > No I'm not, dear! There are feminist men two and women who aren't
> > feminist!
>
> Well done - by your own admission you have just conceded my point!
>
I never contradicted that particular point, dear.
>
> >>because you are clearly trying to represent the
> >> resistance to pernicious feminism as 'male only' thing.
> > No I'm not, dear!
>
> I did not circumscribe this discussion to 'male only armies' that 'will
> reunite in their hatred of feminism' - in fact I did not mention ANY form
of
> army of whatever sex.
I never said you did, dear
> YOU did that and are now trying to relinquish responsibility for your own
> words!
No I'm not, dear. I am aware what I said but how you interpret it is down to
you! Are you planning on turning this into a "who said what to who"
discussion, dear?
>
> >>In fact
> >> nothing could be further from the truth!
> > I agree, dear
> >> Many women have already woken up to the fact that for example their
> >> chances and opportunities in the workplace are being seriously
> >> undermined by victimist 'poor me' mainstream feminism whose activists
> >> have laden so many legislative, fiscal and other red tape factors
> >> onto business that instead of reducing so called 'discrimination'
> >> against women they are only succeeding in making bosses increasingly
> >> averse to employing any women of child bearing age.
> > True, dear. People of both sexes sometimes make excessive fuss or fuss
> > about
> > discrimination that isn't there and I'm not just talking about sexism,
> > dear.
>
> The woman boss that wrote the article I reffered to below was not at all
> concerned about people of both sexes just 'bellyaching' about this or
that.
> She was concerned about enforcable obligations that the hiring of women
> would bring upon her business.
I never said she was, dear.

>Do try to understand CONTEXT 'dear'.

You first, dear.

>
> >>In fact a WOMAN
> >> boss wrote an article in the Daily Mail a few weeks where she openly
> >> admitted that she was now loath to employ women because she perceived
> >> the actual costs to her business was simply too high.
> > That's up to her, dear.
> >> Time to wake up and smell the coffee Aggy - the free lunch is over!
> > I don't drink coffee and I haven't had a free lunch so how can it be
over,
> > dear?
>
> Vanity has prevented you once more from getting the point. (cue that Carly
> Simon song...)

Wrong again, dear. If you fail to understand my response to your point as it
appears on several points of this post then that is your own affair, dear.

Aggy




--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/15/05 12:57:07 PM ---