Posts by Es99


log in
41) Message boards : Politics : Against ALL women - Infanticide, Slavery, Rape, Trafficking... (#2) (Message 1652933)
Posted 14 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor
Haven't changed much then. Still a long ways to go for both sexes. Still come across women that go out of their way to prove to themselves that they are still attractive enough.

Then there are those who really go overboard & have a nickname that describes them completely. As this is a kid friendly forum, let's just call them "Teases".

Then there are the "maneaters" - don't care as long as they get the man they're interested in - Married/engaged? So what? is their attitude.

All those stereotypes seems to herald from a premise that men are entitled to women's sexuality.
42) Message boards : Politics : Political CONvEnience of Madame Yoga (Message 1652919)
Posted 14 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor
More email Shenanigans
43) Message boards : Politics : Against ALL women - Infanticide, Slavery, Rape, Trafficking... (#2) (Message 1652918)
Posted 14 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor

It matters what you do when you want change.

Its not us that needs to change.

Sorry to disagree, but both men & women need to change as both sexes are just as bad as each other.

Women have changed. Now men need to catch up so we don't have threads like this one.
44) Message boards : Politics : Racist? [yes you are] (Message 1652917)
Posted 14 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor
The Political Roots of Racial Tracking in American Criminal Justice

Yep

That doesn't sound like a book you'd like.
45) Message boards : Cafe SETI : Raccoon Update XX I - All are welcome in the Critter Cafe (Message 1652892)
Posted 14 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor
Curious people look everywhere, Chris.

Of course I didn't spend the "whole trip" looking in ditches, but alligators are not hard to spot if you know what you are looking for. I even saw a couple of big ones in ditches at the Kennedy Space Center, and of course I saw other amazing things there.

I have seen Miami, the Florida Keys (pre-Katrina) and Orlando. I was told that there are parts of the Florida Keys where one can see alligators on one side of an island and crocodiles on the other, but sadly I never saw any crocodiles.

I did not see any raccoons in Florida, but I'm pretty sure that they were there...

I am pretty sure that if there was a risk of something running out of a ditch and eating me, I'd keep a pretty close eye on the ditches.
46) Message boards : Politics : Against ALL women - Infanticide, Slavery, Rape, Trafficking... (#2) (Message 1652889)
Posted 14 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor
You are missing out on the fundamental difference between men and women. The power balance. Which is what the article is about. I don't know if you've been reading this thread, but there is an endless litany of horrific acts committed against women simply because they are women. Those women may well hate men..but in the end, they don't have the power. The women are not the ones listed in this thread committing these violent acts.

Well obviously they are not listed here because this thread is specifically about horrifying acts against women.

I think you will have a much easier filling a thread with horrific gender based acts against women than you would filling a thread with horrific gender based acts against men.


I disagree. Yes, there is a power difference, but that power difference is at its most minimal on the individual level. Everyone can grab a knife, bat or gun and use it against another person.

Having been in violent situations I can assure you, its not quite so simple as that. If it were so easy for women to defend themselves using weapons, then why do so many end up in hospital? My point is that a woman weilding a weapon is still not sufficient to even the odds.

If a women wants to, she can just as easily go on a shooting spree as a guy. And on the individual level its even possible that the women holds more power over the man than the other way around. Domestic violence perpetrated by women is a real thing. So lets not pretend that women are incapable of violence against men, because that is just not true.

??? I have no idea what point you are tying to make here. Can women go on shooting sprees? Sure, yet most shooting sprees are not done by women. So its a fantastical example that doesn't make sense.

Also you need to take into account that a women who does act in a violent way is punished more severely than a man that does so, because that power imbalance is reinforced at every level of society. Remember the example of the abused women who fired a warning shot to scare off her abusive ex? She ended up with a 20 year jail sentence. Another example of the power imbalance.


It matters what Feminists do. They are much like the civil rights movement, an attack on the status quo, they seek to dismantle century old power structures and those that now profit from those power structures will seek to keep Feminists down.

Why do you speak about feminists as if they are some sort of 'group' outside the norm? Aren't you a feminist? Do you know what a feminist is?

And if you go around 'ironically' hating men, you are literally handing those in power tools to keep Feminists out.

The fact that you don't identify as a feminist and see feminists as something 'other' says a lot about status-quo and power imbalance.

Again, because of misogyny, it doesn't matter what we do as women. (remember, misogyny is not a hatred of feminists. It is a hatred of women) Most women do not hate men, yet most women have at some point been harassed and mistreated by men. It has absolutely nothing to do with the way we feel about men. If it did, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

If Feminists want to actually create a society where men and women are treated as equals, they will need to be beyond reproach.

Yeah, that's bull sh*t and ridiculous. Sexism is all about holding people to different and ridiculous standards, we don't combat sexism with more sexism. The blame does not lie with women.

They must not give anyone at the top any easy excuse to marginalize or ignore Feminists.

You are not a feminist then?

Sure, they will try so either way, but why the hell would we make it easier for them?

Making it easier is supporting the status quo by pretending that everything is cool and that men are great and there is nothing wrong with the way they behave.


It matters what you do when you want change.

Its not us that needs to change.
47) Message boards : Politics : Racist? [yes you are] (Message 1652697)
Posted 15 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor

Your misrepresentation never stops.

NOTE: These In-laws are White.

This has NOTHING to do with Ferguson. As you know: YOUR accusation was regarding their initial reaction with one of my daughters marrying a Black Man. They are the parents of my wife.

Why do you continue to deny Your Reply regarding this?

You know what, Clyde. I have no fecking idea what you are talking about. If you wanted to mystify me with the inner workings of you mind, you succeeded.
48) Message boards : Politics : Against ALL women - Infanticide, Slavery, Rape, Trafficking... (#2) (Message 1652592)
Posted 15 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor
There is the thought and then there is the deed. Women's love of men or women's hatred of men is immaterial to what is happening. Women's feelings about what happens to them is immaterial because they do not wield the power that can enable to act on those feelings in the same way a man can. That is the point of the article.


Playing DA a little bit here (and I admit I have not read the article yet)... what if women did have the power to act upon those feelings? Would hating men still be OK? If yes, why? If no, then why is it OK for them to hate men without power? Either way it looks like hate begets hate and is no solution to the problem.

The article doesn't endorse hating anyone. It just points out that there is no threat from misandry the way there is a threat from misogyny. So it doesn't make a difference.
49) Message boards : Politics : Against ALL women - Infanticide, Slavery, Rape, Trafficking... (#2) (Message 1652585)
Posted 15 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor
I knew one of you would get offended.

Strongly disagreeing with something is not the same as being 'offended' by it. I think its shortsighted and the reasoning behind the authors argument is flawed or demonstrably wrong.

In what sense?



That argument only makes sense if you assume that people men only results in hurt feeling for the men and nothing else. But that argument is just nonsense. Hatred isn't some static emotion that remains constant over time. Hatred can increase in intensity. And if you hate something enough, it can result in physical attacks. And it doesn't matter whether you are a man or a woman, both can be just as deadly if all they feel is hate.

You are missing out on the fundamental difference between men and women. The power balance. Which is what the article is about. I don't know if you've been reading this thread, but there is an endless litany of horrific acts committed against women simply because they are women. Those women may well hate men..but in the end, they don't have the power. The women are not the ones listed in this thread committing these violent acts.

There is the thought and then there is the deed. Women's love of men or women's hatred of men is immaterial to what is happening. Women's feelings about what happens to them is immaterial because they do not wield the power that can enable to act on those feelings in the same way a man can. That is the point of the article.


Also, funny those 'ironic' misandrists but is that really going to get more guys on the side of Feminism (and yeah, you need guys as allies or feminists if you want change)? Or does that just makes things easier for MRA's and people who are on the fence to decide that Feminists really do just hate men.

lol..I think you missed the point of the article.

If misogyny is so embedded in society, why does it matter what women do? Men will hurt us either way.

In the end, men need to start policing themselves and other men. Or should all the women who've been victimised (as shown again and again in this thread) cry "please like us, please don't hurt us"? Because that is clearly really effective.

When you don't have power it doesn't matter what you do. The end result is the same.

That is the point of the article.
50) Message boards : Politics : Political CONvEnience of Madame Yoga (Message 1652563)
Posted 15 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor
Another question and no constructive ideas from you, I'm sure your mind is better than that, why don't you show us. Your trolling does not flatter you


Betreger (and many others here),

Perhaps, if Clyde's asking questions like he does bothers you, you might not be familiar with The Socratic Method.

I think a lot of people here are familiar with the Socratic method. That is not what Clyde is doing.

...

It starts with asking certain questions. But very seldom does it progress further, since almost no one here engages with him.

Those of us that try pretty soon discover that we're not in Kansas anymore and have to then put up with a stream of name calling from him. I have been called a vile Nazi by him too many times to count.

Vile is such a favourite word of his that I am beginning to wonder if he knows what it means.

I was under the impression that this 'Politics' sub-forum's purpose was the constructive exchange of ideas and viewpoints.

The key word there is 'constructive'. Clyde has admitted that this is not his purpose here.

It seems that a number of posters (and sadly, it seems, more than one moderator) here would rather answer Clyde's questions with ad hominem. While none of us are immune from the occasional delve into ad hominem, many take it to extreme here against Clyde.

I am wondering if you aware of Clydes many postings over this forum and if you are aware that some of us are getting fed up with trying to engage with him, only to end up being insulted every time we challenge his opinion.

Now, I don't agree with Clyde on everything, but when I do disagree with him on something important I try to logically refute his position, not engage in assassinating his character.

Good for you. I am sure however that once he's called you a vile Nazi or some other similar epithet enough times, you will also lose your patience.

Furthermore, I was under the impression that use of the term 'troll' had been ruled as offensively abusive, therefore rule violating. Please, everyone, can we all stop using it?

I totally agree that troll is an insult. Shall we then just point out that Clyde is displaying trolling behaviour and leave it there?

Furthermore, moderators here who join in the abuse, or even just publicly approve of it, might need to reconsider being a moderator and resign their position. Moderators need to remain impartial and above the fray, so to speak.

I have a couple of options here. I can allow the group to point out to Clyde that he is acting in a trollish manner in the hope that he will take it on board. Or I can start removing posts and locking threads. I would prefer that the issue was settled with a more long term solution.

What will we have around here? A respectful exchange of viewpoints with well-reasoned logical support of said viewpoints? Or a mutual admiration society guilty of abuse of those that don't agree with their version of 'the conventional wisdom'?

Indeed. I think that is the very point the people here are trying to make.
51) Message boards : Politics : Against ALL women - Infanticide, Slavery, Rape, Trafficking... (#2) (Message 1652554)
Posted 15 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor
Feminists don't hate men. But it wouldn't matter if we did

Sorry, but that article is idiotic.

It wouldn't matter if feminists hate men? Because at best that supposedly only hurts our feelings? While if men hate women they end up killing women? I'm sorry but that is just beyond ridiculous. A women is just as capable of knifing a guy or picking up a gun and shooting a guy as the other way around. Women are not somehow incapable of violence against other people.

And even if it just hurts our feelings, how is that a good thing? Let me put this way, how is it a good thing to hurt the feelings of roughly 50% of the worlds population? How is that gonna convince them that Feminism is something worth fighting for? And sure, you insult a few jerks, but by brushing with broad strokes you also insult all the non jerks. For what reason? Because they were born as men thats enough reason to insult them?

And in the end, fighting hate with hate does not work. If you let hate be the thing that guides Feminism and women emancipation it will not lead to a better world for humanity.

So yeah, it most certainly matters if feminists would actually hate men.

I knew one of you would get offended.

Of course being offended isn't the same as being physically hurt.

So based on my experience living as an actual woman and dealing with the stuff that actual women have to deal with, I'd say the article is spot on and I'd take being offended any day over the sh*t I've had to deal with over the years.

Yeah. Being offended is a walk in the park. If your biggest concern is hurt feelings, then lucky you.
52) Message boards : Politics : Against ALL women - Infanticide, Slavery, Rape, Trafficking... (#2) (Message 1652537)
Posted 15 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor
Feminists don't hate men. But it wouldn't matter if we did
53) Message boards : Politics : Political CONvEnience of Madame Yoga (Message 1652534)
Posted 15 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor
I AGREE


I do agree. When one such as yourself reduces every discussion you're in to quick comebacks and broad, sweeping generalizations about every single person in this forum, then top it off with stating that these discussions are unimportant to you, and by proxy stating this community is unimportant to you, then it seems to be a reasonable conclusion that you are only here for the lulz. A.k.a. a troll.

If you would like to change that perception, I would suggest changing your attitude and start looking inward.

Just a thought.

Although I do not like calling people trolls just because they have different opinions, the evidence is beginning to stack up that Clyde is just here to stir the pot and cause agitation.

So I +1 your statement.
54) Message boards : Politics : Racist? [yes you are] (Message 1652533)
Posted 15 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor
..

Again incorrect regarding which In-Laws I was speaking of, AND WHAT Situation. It WAS NOT about Ferguson, of course.

...

The context of the discussion was clearly your inlaw's views on Ferguson. You even wrote : "My son-in-law, and I, believed in waiting for more information, before coming to a conclusion in the Ferguson Incident.

Now we both believe the Officer did nothing to stand trial for."
and then went on to expand on that statement in more general terms. It is quite obvious what subject of the conversation was. It was you that chose to think I was referring to something else.

OK... We both move on.

Don't worry, Clyde. I absolutely knew that you wouldn't admit that you had been mistaken about me calling your in laws closet racists. Even re-reading that post several times I cannot see your particular interpretation. As to you making clear which in-laws you were talking about...well you switch about in your head and expect people to follow that you've gone from talking about one thing to another. Sorry, my mind reading capabilities have never been that good. I can only go on what you actually write, not what you think you write.

I take it this means you are not leaving forever?
55) Message boards : Politics : Racist? [yes you are] (Message 1652338)
Posted 16 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor


Regarding In-laws you stated were 'Closet Racists', who say one thing when with the family, but 'when alone...'

I understood that your inlaws were black.

You claimed that your inlaws agreed with your stance that the Ferguson troubles were not race related.

You then claimed that your inlaws agreed with you.

I then made the brief reply "Or at least that is what they say to your face."

There is absolutely nothing in that sentence claiming that your inlaws are closet racists and it is the only place I can find a discussion about your inlaws.

Or at least that is what they say to your face.

Here is the Deal: If you still deny. I will produce YOUR comments, and message number, about them.

I've done that for you. Enjoy.

If I am incorrect - I go 'silent forever'.

There is no need to do that on my account.

If you are shown to be wrong, in your continued denial - You go 'silent 1 month'.

Deal?

You really are really desperate to shut me up. I don't make deals like that.

I absolutely stand by my point that your in-laws may claim they agree with you about your views on the Ferguson situation and racism just to keep harmony in the family.

As you can see the conversation where I made that comment was about views on the racism in Ferguson and not the racism (or lack of) of your in laws.

Are you going to let this go now? Because it is getting really old.
56) Message boards : Politics : Racist? [yes you are] (Message 1652147)
Posted 16 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor

"Writing Racist Things"?

YOU wrote:

You mean like your comment about black criminals all being murderers, rapists and robbers? Would that fall under that category?

Didn't say that, of course. YOU said ALL. Not me.

It was implied by what you wrote.

YOU made that HATEFUL Allegation.

Regarding my In-Laws: Yes you did.

Nope.

Regarding my Grandchildren: (Self Censored)

We both know what I wrote about your grandchildren. It was pretty clear. Yet you seem to want to pretend I wrote something different.

You are nearing my, and others in the PM's patience, regarding your Violating The Rules. By calling persons Vile and Evil names.

You don't think calling me vile on many occasions is rude? I do. I think you are very rude.

I also don't care what you claim people say in pm's to you. People say things in pms to me about you. So what? They say it in emails too...and on the phone. People say stuff, Clyde..but unless they write it here it doesn't actually bring anything to the debate.

Your above Post has compounded your Actions.

Can you stop the hateful name calling?

We will see.

If you stop saying racist things, then I will stop pointing out that they are racist. Do we have a deal?
57) Message boards : Politics : Political CONvEnience of Madame Yoga (Message 1652122)
Posted 16 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor
Is the letter to Iran from 47 Republican senators correct about Congress' role in nuclear deal?

The think that sticks out in this whole thing is not whether the Republicans could or can do this, but that they are so uncaring about the long term consequences for American relations with other countries.

They would rather "get one over Obama" than realise that there are going to be long term consequences for American because of the way they have undermined their own President in the eyes of the rest of the world.

I am assuming that the Republicans think that at some point they will have a President. However, they have set about devaluing that seat in the long term.

To an outsider it is such an act of crass stupidity that I simply cannot fathom why they would do it.

From the article: "The possible agreement with Iran is being negotiated between the five permanent United Nations Security Council members plus one: the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia and China, plus Germany. So for the agreement to be truly modified, the other signatories would have to sign off, Peake said -- something that is hardly a sure thing."

So now the Republicans have tried to sabotage a deal that its allies are also invested in. So what happens in the future when there is a Republican President and they suddenly want to work with these countries? Have they made it easier or harder for America in the long run?

These aren't small players on the world stage who are going to pissed at them. This is not Nicaragua. (which by they way, wasn't a similar situation at all).

America just took their dirty laundry out and washed it in public. Its a dumb move. Really dumb.
58) Message boards : Politics : Racist? [yes you are] (Message 1652112)
Posted 16 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor

You are babbling, because of your, never ending Hateful Assumptions.

You are the one that implied that there are more black people in prison because they are all murderers, rapists and robbers. I pointed out that it was a racist assumption.

To put the best 'spin' on your Posts, including previously Stating My In-Laws may be 'Closet Racists' and about my Grandchildren:

I'm pretty sure I didn't actually state that at all.

I think what I said is that your grandchildren will be subjected to racism.
I also said that your in laws wouldn't necessarily want to discuss the topic with you for the sake of family harmony. Mainly because white people get really defensive about the topic. Much like you are right now.

If I said I am for 'Free Speech': Your Unthinking reply 'Oh, then you believe it is correct to falsely shout FIRE, in a Movie Theater'.

huh?

That is how YOU reply.

That is the Best interpretation.

I believe there is something much more...

They do destroy your Hateful Allegations, which are against The Rules -

No abusive comments involving race, religion, nationality, gender, class or sexuality.

You mean like your comment about black criminals all being murderers, rapists and robbers? Would that fall under that category?

Your Negative, and Hateful Comments Regarding Race (White) and Gender (Male).

Pointing out you are a white male is not hateful. It does however mean you have a certain set of experiences that are very different to those who are not. You live in a system that has less obstacles in your path than the rest of us. It is very likely that you are completely unaware of the privilege you have because of your race and gender.

No messages that are deliberately hostile or insulting.

You might want to check how many of your posts break this rule before you start pointing the finger at others.

NO reason for me to be Racist (because of my Race?)

Because of the things you write.

Continue with these type of Posts. Accusing those of Racism, and other things. When it is YOUR Posts, and accusations, which show something internal.

Stop writing racist things then!
59) Message boards : Politics : Racist? [yes you are] (Message 1652109)
Posted 16 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor

ES, I didn't start out to tell a lie about the public or private lawyers, but I was also surprised by the article. I would have expected some difference, given the amount of bad press PD's get. I'm actually glad to see they are doing their jobs well. It also points out how bad a job the press/media do when reporting on the criminal justice system.

The press/media like to go with sensationalism. Here in Canada we get both the American News and the Canadian News and there is a clear difference in the way reporting is done and the way stories are presented by the media.

You are forgetting one person who is in the mix, likely the single most important person who can inject bias. Figure out who that is yet? A government employee if that helps you think about it. (I just thought about again, there are actually two people that haven't been mentioned that fit the description, but perhaps you don't know the American Justice system enough to name them.)

I do not know how it differs from the Canadian and the UK system. In the UK the police are the ones that decide if charges will be brought. In BC the police can only recommend charges. It is the crown that lays the charges. I have no idea if there is variation like this in the US between the states or not.

As to sentences, when you look it up, federally you will find that congress has set them an they are very detailed, start looking in 18 United States Code. In many states their legislatures have also mandated sentences. In some states it is still up to the judge within some legislated limits.

Then there are many factors that go into the systemic bias against black people.

In Ferguson the report showed that the police were used to raise funds by harassing its citizen's with unjustifiable charges and fines. The racism occurred because these charges and fines were mostly always targeted at black people.

Elsewhere, black people are over also targeted by the police. They justify it by the claim that black people are more likely to be doing something wrong. (a claim that is factually wrong).

The prosecutor then gets to decide what he or she will prosecute. Further bias will be made apparent at this stage. Also they are more likely to be presented with a black "criminal" in the first place as the white criminals don't always make it this far.

According to you, the judge has little discretion what charges are bought, but they can decide guilty or not guilty I am assuming?

They are all enforcing laws that are often written in such a way that they disproportionately target a particular demographic. For example, the anti-marijuana laws when first written would mainly have affected black people. Now that more and more white people are smoking weed, the laws are suddenly being overturned.
60) Message boards : Politics : Racist? [yes you are] (Message 1651929)
Posted 17 days ago by Profile Es99Project donor

You might have read the link. It notes that conviction rates for public vs. private lawyers are identical. I'm surprised you didn't take me to task for saying private lawyers get people off, because they don't. I admit I did play on your bias.

I took your statement on good faith because I didn't think you would knowingly lie. Next time I'll know better. ;)

Now think again about the process. There is a judge who has been replaced by a sentencing table. There is police officer who made the arrest. There is a jury that decides the facts. There is a defense lawyer who challenges the testimony. There are the experts who give their science reports. Who is left with authority that can be used in a biased manner?

As I now know I cannot take your statements on faith I will now actually have to check this is even true.

Even if there is a slight bias at each of these steps it will add up to a large bias in the outcome.

For example, do these sentencing tables disproportionately affect minorities by insisting on harsher sentences for crimes that they are more likely to commit?

I do not think that there is so little leeway as you propose as many white people will be let off with warnings before they even get dragged into the justice system. Those that do end up in it are less likely to get jail time when convicted. So this doesn't add up with your claim of rigid sentences for all crimes.


Previous 20 · Next 20

Copyright © 2015 University of California