"Philip Lewis"  wrote in message
news:39p7q2F62ojujU1{at}individual.net...
>
> "Aggy"  wrote in message
> news:wXDZd.178$%F3.82{at}newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> >
> >
> > "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.
>
> Sorry - I was under the mistaken impression that you were attempting a
> logical argument.
explain what it is about, "I never contradicted that particular point,
dear." that you can't follow; dear.
> Instead it seems that you are given to raising strawmen (i.e. 'male only
> armies' etc) and not bothering to address the actual issue at all.
Maybe you  should learn tell sarcasm. Sadly there is no smiley for it.
>
>
> >>
> >> >>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!
>
> Unfortunately for you this is a public forum - and your pathetic attempt
to
> imply resistance to pernicious feminism is restricted to 'male only
armies'
> is there for all to see!
>
No such attempt was made, dear, As I said, 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?
>
> You can only HOPE 'dear' - your words are already there for all to see.
In other words, "yes".
>
>
>
> >>
> >> >>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.
>
> I never said you never said she was, 'dear'.
I never said you said I  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.
>
> What vanity indeed! *lol*

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 8:57:20 PM ---