stanfieldsarah{at}yahoo.com wrote:
> >Andy:
> > Then, those men will argue and decide. Women need not apply.
>
> Actually I have already defined men and you were completely powerless
> to stop me.
>
>
> > Actually, its very consistant. Both ways. We men may discuss
> > women, and share our views of them, but women will define women,
> > and men will define men.
>
> No, see you are trying to change the meaning of define.
>
> > > But since we are being arbitrary then for soc.men it appears that
> > > two groups define what a man is. Competitors and suitors.
> >
> > Nope.
>
> Now you are arguing against my definition but you still haven't
> prevented me from making it have you?
>
> > > I would say that they would be defined by competitors because
> > > competitors would only have respect for what they would consider
"a
> > > man" and suitors because suitors would only choose a man they
> thought
> > > desirable.
> >
> > The term " mate " is NOT a synonym for " man ".
>
> No one said it was.
>
> > Please retake your English course, and, this time... *pass* it.
>
> Try following the logic of the argument, as I said I was Arbitrarily
> making a definition, you are now trying to change that definition,
but
> you are still unable to prevent me from making it.
>
>
> > This is a Usenet newsgroup. So, you're wrong... again.
>
> Actually this being a newsgroup has nothing to do with what I said.
>
>
> > Perfect score, I'd say: AbZero.
>
> absolute zero is -459 the same as your IQ.


lmao



--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 4/3/05 1:00:36 PM ---