Your opinions were fashionable during the 1960s. Now they are as dated as scratchy 45 rpm Beatle records. If blacks had any sense they would be trying to disprove the stereotype. Some do of course. It is not the fault of whites that so many do not.

 

Don't worry I've tried to explain to him a few times that there are cultural imperatives that are more important than race.

If you can find a microcosm of a society that steps outside his racially based conclusions according to the scientific method you now need to abandon your flawed (in this case racially based) hypothesis and restart with a new hypothesis (which I have advocated he examine cultural starting points).

US Military school systems fly in the face of everything the teachers union advocates in schools and yet the students score higher than the rest of the nation on standardized tests because culturally the US military personnel with school age children are more involved with their studies.

Culture trumps race, using the scientific method DL's hypothesis is flawed therefore he needs a new one.

 

I think nearly everybody privately believes that. Even when blacks are of superior intelligence they usually have children who are not. This is due to a well understood genetic process called "reversion to the mean."

I have documented this elsewhere on XNXX, but liberals are as resistant to facts about the biological reasons for racial differences as are conservatives resistant to facts about man made global warming. The difference is that it is safe to say in public that man made global warming is happening, and that it is a problem. It is often dangerous to point out why No Child Left Behind is leaving so many children behind, and why the race gap persists.

 

When have I been refuted? How? Explain.

 

I can agree to all of those terms but that's just rational thinking and not just feminism. Now as long as I don't get called pussy whipped...wait, I might be willing to go along with that, too.

 

I attended a private military school myself. The blacks there performed academically as well as the whites, and usually better athletically. Nevertheless, there were few of them. Also, there was no affirmative action policy in admissions so they had to be as promising as the whites in order to get in.

You might be talking about schools on military bases. These are for students whose parents could pass the Armed Forces Qualification Test. I am confident that the Armed Forces, unlike police forces and fire departments, does not accept blacks with lower scores than the cut off point for whites. I also suspect that blacks still perform less well on the average because fewer of them are children of officers - who must get higher scores on the AFQT - and also because of the reversion to the mean, that I have already explained in comment #225.

 

They are public schools on base. I was not talking about military academies or prep schools.

I've meet some pretty dull rocks of all shapes and colors in the Army.

Statistically speaking your officer children are rolled into the average of all students, and that too ethnically parallels the nation. There are actually more black students in the military schools (proportionally) because their are slightly more minorities than the national average in CSS branches.

I'm suggesting you examine the cultural difference between a 'Detroit City' school system and a US Military based public school, over the conclusion of race alone. There are cultural and philosophical differences that are stark and the results are harshly differnt.

 

See? You just refuse to recognize it.

But I am simply NOT going to have that debate with you again. Life is too short.

 

Wise move!!

 

I can't recognize what is not there. Do not make an assertion you cannot substantiate. I don't.

Once again, Kimiko, what have I said that is not true?

 

I told you...I've argued the point many times before with you. I've pointed out many of the obvious flaws in your reasoning. But the exercise is fruitless and a waste of my time. Just don't pretend it never happened.

 

If you stay home, it is your job. If I stay home it is my job. If we both work it is our job.

GTFO of here... Why, are you going to work like a man? Meaning you will not be bitchy a week a month and effect productivity, you will not take maternity leave all of a sudden, you will not "rush" to your kids school because he is sick, you will have just as few "doctor appointments" as a man does, and you will not skyrocket HR costs by harrasment charges. Every department I ever managed I would never hire a woman employee of child bearing age... it is just to much of a liability, and a lot of hours of productivity lost. I am all for women rights, but you have shot yourself in the foot with the amount of "rights" you want. You can't have it both ways, have kids and have a career, one will always suffer. We are not biologically and socially the same. Women's needs differ from men's needs and they effect the way you perform at work.

Civilization takes time, and people never give up power, you always have to take it. Society changes people in power. For a long time, Mariarchy was the acceptable system, then women lost the power. They did not give it. You want it, go get it.

 

I'm not sure how I missed this, but better late than never

I critisized you because you blame your low self-esteem & "lack of success with women" on every woman on Earth. I'm willing to bet that if sex is taken out of the equation that you don't have any relevant relationship with anybody, men or women. YOU are the common denominator, the rest of us here (both men & women) seem to have a variety of different relationships on-line and in real life. You appear to have none.

To say I don't respect men is another one of your delusional comments. Just because I don't respect you doesn't mean that I don't respect all men. I respect everybody until they say or do something to lose my respect.

I don't think you're a loser because women won't date you, I never thought (or said) that your life didn't have value for any reason. I think you're a loser because you come across as one in your posts, posts written by you that reflect who you are. I don't mean the "I'm a bald virgin" shit either, I mean the "all women suck" garbage you spew.

The sex doll was a tongue in cheek suggestion because you were looking for booty, it had nothing to do with looking for a wife or a mother.

If I am the type of woman that you refer to in your posts, then what does that have to do with other women on this site? You mean if I say something you don't like then it's the same as if Kimiko or Lioness said it? Should they be generalized in a category because I'm an asshole?

As for me being a self-admitted slut it is clear that I don't have delusions about who I am and I don't feel a need to apologize to anybody for who I am. First of all, you and I may have a different definition of "slut". But given that, my personality is visible here and in real life, just as yours is and that is why I think you aren't any different to women when your face-to-face. You may not speak the same but your lack of respect or anger shows in ways that you probably don't realize.

The fact that I have a working comprehension of the male mind & ego is exactly why I have a successful 20 year marriage. I have no desire to completely understand it. Your paranoia about women isn't the typical male mind.

My judgement of you is a response to your comments, so yes I can judge you and anybody else that posts information about themselves here, just like you judgeing me for me posting that I'm a slut wife.

You think you have it all figured out about why men can't get dates and women can. Your assumptions are that like a high school boy. The fact is that many women can't get dates either and there are many men that can get what they want (sexually) with a snap of the fingers.

As for a man pissing his name, I envy the ability but writing cursive isn't always legible and dotting an i is impossible without hands.

Tina :rose:

 

We have a lot of neat stuff over here that we keep secret from the Brits :excited:

Tina :rose:

 

Yeah...you're all for women's rights, all right. That shows with every word you post. One seldom sees such a fine example of 99 98/100% pure sexism. You and your neanderthal ilk have been subjugating women and denying them opportunity since the beginning of time. You hang your had on "biological and social" differences, but that's just an excuse. Any other excuse would have served as well.

 

This is the internet, there are no reprecautions (well limited) to speaking what's on your mind, no need for excuses. Plus, I have never been worried before of my reputation here, I am not now, so if I have to say something is not an excuse.
Women deny themselves opportunities. I know quite a few women (including the head HR where I worked) that would not hire women of child bearing age. As I said before, the demands are too heavy for any small to medium sized business. 2 women on maternity leave means 2 empty desks that the company is paying for and is getting nothing in return. That is a heavy burden to deal with. You want fair, then be fair. Don't ask for maternity leave, get a limited number of doctor's appointments, get someone else to take care of the sick kid, etc etc ... Something has to give, you can't do both well (be a mother and a worker). By pushing for rights EVERYWHERE you push people in taking extraordinary measures to cope with the limitations of rights to others, your new rights bring.

 

The Facts

First of all, I do have friends. Most of them are men. Since many women don't respect me, it would not make sense to befriend them. Would you be friends with someone who didn't respect you? I think not.

I do however know a few intelligent women. I met one just the other day. She is one of my neighbors. I was leaving my home when I saw her in front of my building. There was a TV on the sidewalk. She asked me if I knew whether or not it worked. "Is this your TV? Do you know if it works?" I told her that it wasn't mine and didn't know if it worked. Then I offered to take the TV into my apartment to test it for her. "Oh, could you? That would be great." I said sure. She then said, "do you mind if I come in?" I said sure, if you don't mind looking at my filthy apartment. No woman had ever been in my apartment before. I guess my apartment finally got it's cherry broken. She really must have trusted me to enter my apartment alone at 3:00 AM. That's right, 3:00 AM. No, I didn't rape her. I thought about it though. She was pretty. I'm only kidding ladies. I would never hurt a woman. Please don't get upset. She is fine, really. Well anyway, we plugged the TV in and it did come on. Unfortunately, when the screen lit up we noticed that it was shattered. Needless to say, she was disappointed. After that we talked for about an hour. She seemed to like me as a person. She smiled at me the whole time and told me that I had a great personality. What does that tell you about how I come across in real life?

You see, you have me pegged all wrong. When women get to know me, they tend to like me. I have been told by many people that I am both intelligent and funny. The problem is, most women never take the time to get to know me. I also met a nice woman a few weeks ago. She just moved into an apartment across the street from where I live. I met her when I was walking home from work. She was sitting outside listening to music and having a beer. I walked up to her and said hello. I shook her hand and introduced myself. She smiled at me and introduced herself. She then invited me to sit with her and hangout for a while. We talked for about two hours. We are now friends and talk on a regular basis. She is what you would call a "cool chic". You can say whatever you want in her presence and she will not get offended. She is like one of the guys. My female problems came up in our conversation. She told me that I'm a nice guy with a great personality. She also told me that my only problem is that I haven't met the right woman yet. I have heard that many times before.

You have judged me without having all of the facts. Your opinion is based on my posts in this forum and nothing else. You and some of the other members of this forum have a distorted view of me. I'm not the horrible woman hating jerk that you make me out to be. I do admit to ranting at times. However, it's just a way to vent my frustrations. I don't hate women. Not even you. I'm glad that you found love in your life. I'm happy for you. I only hope that you treat your man with dignity and respect. You are lucky to have him. Never forget that.

The sex doll comment was very hurtful. It was not at all funny. It was cruel and insensitive. You were implying that I was not worthy of a woman's love. How would you feel is someone posted a comment like that about you? You also accused me of only wanting sex. Nothing could be further from the truth. I want love, not just sex.

Yes, there are men who have an easy time getting women. There are also women who have trouble getting men. However, those tend to be rare cases.

 

You fall quite easily into the trap of thinking that all women have the bitch gene, when menstruating. There are as many that experience the event without turning in psychotics as there are who would murder you for the wrong word during that time.

Your assertion that women take more sick leave is actually supported by a report in the Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...34796/Women-take-more-sick-days-than-men.html however, it should be noted that

"...women are more likely to to try their hardest to make it to their desk and feel guilty if they succumb to illness..."

You may also be correcting in stating that it is the mother who leaves early, or takes time off, to pick up or look after sick children. But this surely only means that fathers won't leave work, or take time off to look after children.

Your whole post relys heavily on the the assumption that all women want to have children. As a woman, I can heartily and honestly say that I don't. Women are more than baby factories. We are as intelligent, hard-working, ambitious and career-conscious as our male counterparts.

Although historically there may well have been matriarchal societies, with females in position of power, this does not hold true of societies in general at present.

I do not ask for extra rights for females above those of males, only for the same rights.

 

I cant be bothered reading through several pages of this thread, so could someone please explain what the posters problem is?