20-year old women made Mexican police chief

[Challenger Grim]

I guess the parable of the good Samaritan or the parable of the Lost Son were something that Epo skipped, in his bible. Oh well, who needs the actual words of Christ when we got the holy prophet of Roissy, to tell us how to think and yet (to Epo) you wonder why I and others accuse you of not being a Christian? How can you be a Christian, while holding up a guy, that is un-Christ like, in both attitude and ideals, to be a standard to follow? As James said, "How could salt water and fresh water, flow from the same stream" and likewise, how can a man be preaching about upholding the sacred vow of marriage, if he works on finding ways to sleep with lots of women?

And don't forget that as defined by John, Roissy is very much an antichrist.

[Epoetker]

Yep, that's the way to be, don't try to solve the problem, by trying to turn sex into what it's suppose to be, simply taking advantage of the situation, by having sex with tons of women! Yep, that will sure teach those women! The absurdity of such a situation and the un-Christian like behavior, should be obvious to those, with a brain, but not you, eh?

Most taking advantage of the situation are not actively describing online in great detail how they took advantage of the situation. Or how people could keep those like him from taking advantage of the situation. And Roissy is not a Christian, so if anything, his actions are far more generous that one should expect from the unregenerate.

Even a broken clock, is right twice a day dear, it's too bad that your holy prophet writes guides about how to sleep with lots of women, but you are too stupid/ignorant to notice this and instead you just bow at his feet. Sorry, but how could a person be talking about being married to one man/women and having sex with just them, when he writes guides about how to sleep, with lots of women?

Because the first thing that happened when Roissy started writing his guide was him getting messages from married men saying things like "Thank you for helping me understand my wife!" "Oh my God, her silly tests all make sense now!" "How else can Game help me in a long term relationship?" Etc., ad nauseam. The Church has been derelict in its duty of teaching the nature of women and masculinity to civilized man, and Roissy is picking up the slack, entirely in his spare time.

Even if the husband is beating his wife and sleeping with other women?

A husband does not beat his wife and sleep with other women without a reason. Divorce is most definitely permissible in such a situation, but it is not always advisable. You describe these actions as though they take place in a vacuum.

Please, there's just as many scum bag men as their are women and you are deluding yourself if you think otherwise.

Let them marry each other, then. And let us cut them off from divorce so that they may leave the rest of us in peace.

Of course, you will not believe me because you can see no faults in men, but I know of several cases of this going on, including a women that was so badly beaten by her ex-husband, that she had to have her tailbone removed because of how severe her now ex-husband, beat her. Do you think she should of stayed with such a man? Yes or no?

Why did she stay with such a man when every law, social system, court, and public service was on her side?

I don't think so, but as you reveal below, you'll always see women in the worst light known and men in the best light known because your deluded world will not let you see otherwise.

I will see women in the worst light and men in the best light because right now women have all the legal, social, and increasingly fiscal power in a marriage. Your examples are useless to me without context, and you have no context because you have no philosophy of marriage.

I always thought that the vows went both ways and that the husband was suppose to take his vows seriously too. Do you think that a man that doesn't take his vows to his wife seriously, to care for her and to provide for her and instead spends his days sitting around and doing nothing or even worse, beating her, taking his vows seriously?

Hyperbole that has no basis in actual cases. I honestly can't see a reason for even the worst of men to spend every day beating their wives. What do they do for the rest of the day?

If he can't take his vows seriously and doesn't do his duty, as a husband, why should a women be held to vows that her husband has cast aside?

So if a husband loses his job, he's automatically not keeping his vows? Does the marriage vow guarantee employment?

Sorry dear, but rather you want to believe it or not, divorce is used by both men and women, for revenge against their former spouse and the fact that you try to blame women, for it all, shows your true colors and how deluded you really are.

Your assertions are meaningless, without numbers, or statistics, or proportions, or case studies, or context, or comparison.

BTW real journalism was dead the second I turned on something like CNN or Fox News and found them recording people's comments, to their blog, as some legitimate news source or having stories, such as the teenage girl that got carpal tunnel syndrome, by texting (as though that is anything new or even worthy of a national news network's attention). I don't care much for the 'legitimate' news sources and I care even less for those that post on blogs and back-water sources that claim to be 'news sources'

And this is probably the reason why. You hate the common people, the common experience, the common voice, and common sense. You hate doing the work of looking for the truth, and instead want some human face in a three-piece suit and a somnolent voice to do it all for you. You cling to the emotional appeal of the persons you know as the only real thing in the world. You hate thinking that you might actually be wrong, or worse, say something that turns out to be wrong, or misunderstood, and have to correct yourself. So you take refuge in vagueness and right-sounding words and lash out blindly at everything that contradicts your experience.

You, in short, defend feminism the way you should be defending your husband and future children.

I would observe here in parenthesis that much of the recent official trouble about women has arisen from the fact that they transfer to things of doubt and reason that sacred stubbornness only proper to the primary things which a woman was set to guard. One's own children, one's own altar, ought to be a matter of principle-- or if you like, a matter of prejudice. On the other hand, who wrote Junius's Letters ought not to be a principle or a prejudice, it ought to be a matter of free and almost indifferent inquiry. But take an energetic modern girl secretary to a league to show that George III wrote Junius, and in three months she will believe it, too, out of mere loyalty to her employers. Modern women defend their office with all the fierceness of domesticity. They fight for desk and typewriter as for hearth and home, and develop a sort of wolfish wifehood on behalf of the invisible head of the firm. That is why they do office work so well; and that is why they ought not to do it.

-What's Wrong With the World

Do you think children are free and that people shouldn't pay for their children?

Do you think that decisions are free and that people shouldn't pay for them just because they have children?

For once, you are 100% right on this. Too bad though that such an ego, is against the very nature of Christ, huh?

Had you the hundredth part of Christ's truth on your side you could puncture my ego in a heartbeat. Your words are winds, not Swords.

And this comes from the same person that spends his days calling women, he doesn't even know, sluts and whores and bad mouths, a women, he doesn't even know? You might want to remove the plank out of your eye before you tell others about their speck in their's. Anyway, I don't use blogs as news sources because again... blogs are not legitimate news sources...

Where does this "blogs are not legitimate" rule come from?

I don't cite blogs because blogs could be written by anybody, from a world class scholar to the kid, that isn't tall enough to see over the counter yet. Of course, your parroting of Vdare.com (which I'm finding isn't the best news source itself), is an indication of how you'll worship at the feet of anybody that agree with you. Sorry, I don't much care to read those who worship after taking a look at Rossy and his ick. I think I'll stick to reading Chesterton, Lewis, or actual good reading, not crap. Try this again or are you running out of ways to say, "You don't blow before the holy prophet's (aka people you agree with), so you must worship at the feet of feminist!" over and over again?

You have not quoted Chesterton or Lewis against me yet. Given how Chesterton most definitely agrees with me, and Lewis was more focused on straight Christianity, it's no surprise. If you will learn nothing from the world you will learn even less from the greatest Christian writers of the twentieth century. You are bound by your own hatred for the voice of common men, and will not hear the voice of God though He speaks through a thousand of them. Roissy would no doubt laugh at the further confirmation that women seek an alpha to trust above all else, and will not make a decision when there's someone at the top of the social hierarchy to make it for them.

[lilpixieofterror]

Most taking advantage of the situation are not actively describing online in great detail how they took advantage of the situation. Or how people could keep those like him from taking advantage of the situation. And Roissy is not a Christian, so if anything, his actions are far more generous that one should expect from the unregenerate.

Maybe, but that doesn't excuse why you treat him like a holy prophet or why you try to hold him up as an example to follow, instead of Christ. How do you excuse your worship of him and of his writings, when you're suppose to hold yourself up to a higher standard?

Because the first thing that happened when Roissy started writing his guide was him getting messages from married men saying things like "Thank you for helping me understand my wife!" "Oh my God, her silly tests all make sense now!" "How else can Game help me in a long term relationship?" Etc., ad nauseam. The Church has been derelict in its duty of teaching the nature of women and masculinity to civilized man, and Roissy is picking up the slack, entirely in his spare time.

My husband doesn't find it hard to understand me, but I tend to find most men have this problem called 'not listening' (so do many women, but that's beside the point). A married man wants to 'get' his wife, it's rather simple:

1. Love her unconditionally, even when she's being hard to love.
2. Let her know that you love her everyday, in both your words and your actions.
3. Be there for her, when she needs you most.
4. Be a good husband, listen to her, care for her, and she will do the same for you.
5. Most important of all, Love God with all of your heart, mind, and strength. This will help you to become both a better husband and father (if you have any children).

Of course, this only assumes that your wife is doing the same. AKA men do not need some stupidity, written by a guy that writes guides about how to sleep with lots of women, instead, what they need is to is take the sound advice that God has given them and apply it.

A husband does not beat his wife and sleep with other women without a reason. Divorce is most definitely permissible in such a situation, but it is not always advisable. You describe these actions as though they take place in a vacuum.

Of course, always blame the women, no matter what! Sorry Epo, but a vow, counts for the man too and I don't remember the man's vows saying that it was ok for him to sleep with other women or to beat his wife, when things are not going his way. I always thought that to love and cherish, though good and bad, went both ways. Sorry Epo, but nobody has the right to beat their wives, husband, or children, regardless of what is going on. The fact that you try to make excuses for such behavior, is indeed an indication of your attitude.

Let them marry each other, then. And let us cut them off from divorce so that they may leave the rest of us in peace.

If it was that simple, you wouldn't have good men/women being hurt by bad men/women, we would know who was good and who was bad, the problem is... we don't. Unless you have a good amount of intuition, that is (and even that, is wrong, at times).

Why did she stay with such a man when every law, social system, court, and public service was on her side?

She did, sooner or latter, but you seem to want to believe that it doesn't happen. Trust me, it does happen and I have seen it, first hand, at an abused women's home. It happens, everyday and rather you want to believe it or not, the evidence is right there, for all of us to see.

I will see women in the worst light and men in the best light because right now women have all the legal, social, and increasingly fiscal power in a marriage. Your examples are useless to me without context, and you have no context because you have no philosophy of marriage.

What one of us here is married? Oh that is it right, it's me, not you, so yes, I have quite a philosophy of marriage because I am married for one and two, I love philosophy and I actually have submerged myself, on the philosophy of marriage because of how it effects me. Anyway, to stay married, is easy in concept, but hard in reality, but the concepts are found, in the Bible and with our relationship with Christ. As Christ has loved me, even when it's hard to, I should love my husband, even when it's hard to and he should do the same for me, aka, we must show the love of Christ, to our spouse. We should never go to bed mad and never leave one another company, mad at one another (you may never get the chance to take it back). Tell each other, daily, you love each other. Show random acts of love, to one another. Don't say something out of anger, but wait until you calm down and talk it over. So sorry to burst your bubble, but I have understood what it means to be married, for a while now and I am putting that into practice. It's cute that you don't think that I know what I'm talking about, but I do because I am married and you are not and I have a strong marriage, at that. What about you?

Hyperbole that has no basis in actual cases. I honestly can't see a reason for even the worst of men to spend every day beating their wives. What do they do for the rest of the day?

Beating your wife/husband/child, even once, is one too many times and the fact that you just ignore that it happens and seem to imply that a few times, is ok, is an indication of what kind of man, you really are. So is ok for a husband to beat his wife, as long as he only does it a few times a week or month?

So if a husband loses his job, he's automatically not keeping his vows? Does the marriage vow guarantee employment?

There is a difference between losing your job and attempting to provide for your family and being a dead beat that doesn't even try. Do you know the difference between the two or do I need to paint you a pretty little picture, to help you understand it better?

Your assertions are meaningless, without numbers, or statistics, or proportions, or case studies, or context, or comparison.

Funny how 'your assertions' are ok, but mine, must need numbers to back them up. Just yet, another example, of how you hold yourself to another standard, to others. Anyway, take a trip to an abused woman's home, if you ever want to see, first hand, the abuse that man women go though and that is just the physical one, the mental and emotional last far longer. Yet again, the fact that you just ignore it, is an indication of what kind of person you are.

And this is probably the reason why. You hate the common people, the common experience, the common voice, and common sense. You hate doing the work of looking for the truth, and instead want some human face in a three-piece suit and a somnolent voice to do it all for you. You cling to the emotional appeal of the persons you know as the only real thing in the world. You hate thinking that you might actually be wrong, or worse, say something that turns out to be wrong, or misunderstood, and have to correct yourself. So you take refuge in vagueness and right-sounding words and lash out blindly at everything that contradicts your experience.

Translation: "WAAA!!! You disagree with me, so you mus that common people and the common experience!"

I guess 'the truth' means adopting a position that agrees with you? Sorry dear, but you're the one that wants to pretend as though women don't get beat and when the facts, bite you in the face, you just ignore it or even better... accuse me of hating 'the common people'. How is bringing up the fact that men, do beat their wives, 'hating' anybody? If anything, the fact that you make excuses for such behavior, is an indication of who here hates people and that is you, not I. I care a great deal about people and that is why I am defending 'the common people', from your ignorance and stupidity.

You, in short, defend feminism the way you should be defending your husband and future children.

For starters, how many times do I need to tell you that I'm not a modern feminist, until it sinks in or was I right all the long? That you'll accuse people that disagree with you, of being things you hate? Second, I am defending my husband because I know he wouldn't want to be associated with your ick and the fact that many men have already joined in condemning you and your idiocy, is an indication that they don't want to be either. Yet again, you lose and just too stupid/ignorant to see it. Always the fundy, eh?

Do you think that decisions are free and that people shouldn't pay for them just because they have children?

So the children should starve, for your principles? Just wow...

BTW I haven't read that book, by Chesterton, but unlike you, I am going to hold judgment until I do.

Had you the hundredth part of Christ's truth on your side you could puncture my ego in a heartbeat. Your words are winds, not Swords.

People with large egos, hardly ever see themselves as wrong, no matter what. But you carry no truth in Christ, but instead you carry the truth of your holy prophet, Rossey with you. Anyway, since you love to quote GK Chesterton, you might want to take a look at what he had to say about ego's:

Now, the psychological discovery is merely this, that whereas it had been supposed that the fullest possible enjoyment is to be found by extending our ego to infinity, the truth is that the fullest possible enjoyment is to be found by reducing our ego to zero.
GK Chesterton, Heretics

There you go Epo, now I'm going to wait for your excuse making or did you just ignore that little part, of his writings because they didn't fit into your delusions? I just happen to have a lot of his writings, sitting right next to me, so please try me.

Where does this "blogs are not legitimate" rule come from?

The fact that they could be written by anybody, from a scholar at a major university to some 3rd grader, that can't even reach the kitchen sink, to get himself a drink of water?

You have not quoted Chesterton or Lewis against me yet. Given how Chesterton most definitely agrees with me, and Lewis was more focused on straight Christianity, it's no surprise. If you will learn nothing from the world you will learn even less from the greatest Christian writers of the twentieth century. You are bound by your own hatred for the voice of common men, and will not hear the voice of God though He speaks through a thousand of them. Roissy would no doubt laugh at the further confirmation that women seek an alpha to trust above all else, and will not make a decision when there's someone at the top of the social hierarchy to make it for them.

Oh, I was just waiting for you to fall right into my trap and you did. Have fun digging your way out, but I so happen to be doing a self study on GK Chesterton, right now and ran across the quote above, a few days ago and was just waiting for a perfect chance to use it. Thanks for the help! Now don't forget to go report back to your holy prophet and kiss his ring before him and tell yourself, over and over again, that I 'hate the common man', when I don't. However; I'm not the one making excuses for husband beating their wives nor am I selling myself delusions, to help me sleep at night. Sorry dear, but who is on my side? Oh, that's right, everybody is and who is on your side? That's right, nobody is, so again... who is on the side of the 'common man' and who is on the side of insanity? That is you! Keep making a fool of yourself because I don't seek any guidance from 'alphas' at all because any man that has tried your ticks, has usually ended up, in pain, the second I use a pressure point against whatever limb he has happened to try to touch me with (and I am quite proficient at using them and can put 200+ lbs men, on their knees). Keep embarrassing yourself, I can't do it without you.

Edited to add: Do you agree with what Chesterton said about the US, in Heretics or not? If you want, I'll give you the quote and you can tell me, what you think of it because I personally disagree with it (although, to be fair to him, he was writing before the great world wars, so taking that into mind, what he said isn't quite so bad).

[lilpixieofterror]

And don't forget that as defined by John, Roissy is very much an antichrist.

CG, but Epo is such a blind follow, he'll believe anything. Shoot, watch him show his ignorance of GK Chesterton and how he quotes GKC when he agrees with him, but doesn't, when he disagrees with him. Think Epo will agree on what GKC said on ego's or about the US or will he just bellow some more because he was counting on me being ignorant of GK's work (when I'm not)?

[Challenger Grim]

CG, but Epo is such a blind follow, he'll believe anything. Shoot, watch him show his ignorance of GK Chesterton and how he quotes GKC when he agrees with him, but doesn't, when he disagrees with him. Think Epo will agree on what GKC said on ego's or about the US or will he just bellow some more because he was counting on me being ignorant of GK's work (when I'm not)?

He'll somewhat try to argue that...

Actually, you do. Those snippets are the entirety of his atheist argument. If all of his arguments against God's existence are specious throwaway half measures of one or two sentences, and all of his arguments against feminism are linked, footnoted, commented, supported with evidence textual, scientific, and experiential, and confirmed with additional stories by bloggers Christian and non across the world, then I'll reference him on feminism and not on atheism, which he argues far worse than, say, Steven den Beste, whom I also quoted at length on science and engineery things back in the old Tweb days. (Steven den Beste is also most definitely a beta by Roissy's definition. Somehow, that didn't stop me from following his arguments.)

(I've also noticed that smaller blogs by avowed Christians that make the same arguments Roissy does about the nature of women have an appalling tendency toward getting deleted. Methinks the power of feminist Christians to squish politically incorrect truth is far more widespread than the power of atheists to do so.)

Remember: it's not what you say, but what Epo THINKS you said that's important.

And I'm jealous. I'm actually trying to look for some Chesterton to catch up on. Except for 2 books, a lot of his stuff is hard to find in this area.

My husband doesn't find it hard to understand me, but I tend to find most men have this problem called 'not listening' (so do many women, but that's beside the point). A married man wants to 'get' his wife, it's rather simple: 1. Love her unconditionally, even when she's being hard to love. 2. Let her know that you love her everyday, in both your words and your actions. 3. Be there for her, when she needs you most. 4. Be a good husband, listen to her, care for her, and she will do the same for you. 5. Most important of all, Love God with all of your heart, mind, and strength. This will help you to become both a better husband and father (if you have any children).

That reminds me of a joke.

After your list there, it then goes "and what does a wife need to do to 'get' her husband? Show up naked with food and drink." XD

[Challenger Grim]

A husband does not beat his wife and sleep with other women without a reason. Divorce is most definitely permissible in such a situation, but it is not always advisable. You describe these actions as though they take place in a vacuum.

Of course, always blame the women, no matter what! Sorry Epo, but a vow, counts for the man too and I don't remember the man's vows saying that it was ok for him to sleep with other women or to beat his wife, when things are not going his way. I always thought that to love and cherish, though good and bad, went both ways. Sorry Epo, but nobody has the right to beat their wives, husband, or children, regardless of what is going on. The fact that you try to make excuses for such behavior, is indeed an indication of your attitude.

That is really funny. So a husband won't cheat without reason but a wife... wouldn't she also have reasons for cheating? Plus, while he's right that nothing happens in a vacuum, wouldn't that line also shoot down a lot of his points?

Also for fun... http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...nderInequality

[rogue06]

Has anyone heard if young and pretty Ms. Garcia is still alive or has been sexually and financially seduced by a drug lord yet ?

Don't know if she's the same one having been 38 rather than 20.

Female Police Chief Murdered in Mexico

The newly appointed female police chief of the northern Mexican town of Meoqui was shot and killed on her way to work by a convoy of gunmen who reportedly worked for drug traffickers, authorities said.

Hermila Garcia Quinones, 38, was sworn in on Oct. 9 as chief of the 90-person police force. Despite the growing drug-related violence in the region, "La Jefa," as Garcia Quinones was known, refused to have bodyguards or carry a weapon.



Source

© source where applicable

[Crow]

Different names.

[lilpixieofterror]

He'll somewhat try to argue that...

Remember: it's not what you say, but what Epo THINKS you said that's important.

I've noticed that too and when it comes to defending the holy prophet (Rossey), he seems to show as must devotion, in that activity, as an apologist shows in defending Christ. Got to wonder... who side is he in?

And I'm jealous. I'm actually trying to look for some Chesterton to catch up on. Except for 2 books, a lot of his stuff is hard to find in this area.

I found numerous books, by Chesterton, on the book store, but as I recall reading Ignatius Press is releasing book that has almost all of his major works, on it (I got one that had numerous fictional stories and included Heretics and Orthodoxy). You could try looking for it, on Amazon, if you are having trouble.

That reminds me of a joke.

After your list there, it then goes "and what does a wife need to do to 'get' her husband? Show up naked with food and drink." XD

That is pretty much it, really. That joke is far closer to reality, than you might think...

[lilpixieofterror]

That is really funny. So a husband won't cheat without reason but a wife... wouldn't she also have reasons for cheating? Plus, while he's right that nothing happens in a vacuum, wouldn't that line also shoot down a lot of his points?

Of course, but you're not thinking like Epo, in his world, women are evil and would run off, with the nearest male (if their husband were not watch them), but men do no evil and are always honorable. Of course, nothing will convenience him otherwise because again, in his world, those who disagree with him, are the thing he hates (aka feminist, regardless of how much they actually do sound, like feminist).

Also for fun... http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...nderInequality

Not a bad link, although I don't agree with all of it.

[Challenger Grim]

That is pretty much it, really. That joke is far closer to reality, than you might think...

Pixie, I'm a guy. I have a pretty good idea how close to reality that joke is.

Of course, but you're not thinking like Epo, in his world, women are evil and would run off, with the nearest male (if their husband were not watch them), but men do no evil and are always honorable. Of course, nothing will convenience him otherwise because again, in his world, those who disagree with him, are the thing he hates (aka feminist, regardless of how much they actually do sound, like feminist).

Ah, Belkar syndrome. http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0335.html

[gharfish]

Don't know if she's the same one having been 38 rather than 20.

Female Police Chief Murdered in Mexico

The newly appointed female police chief of the northern Mexican town of Meoqui was shot and killed on her way to work by a convoy of gunmen who reportedly worked for drug traffickers, authorities said.

Hermila Garcia Quinones, 38, was sworn in on Oct. 9 as chief of the 90-person police force. Despite the growing drug-related violence in the region, "La Jefa," as Garcia Quinones was known, refused to have bodyguards or carry a weapon.



Source

© source where applicable

"The google" says nothing of her death, but I did see that FOX News reported the death of this woman, Ms. Quinones. Very sad.

This woman is a criminal sciences student who was offered the job by the town's mayor because he especially liked her ideas (of a number of ones submitted to him in writing) on curbing drug-related violence. She is a ten year resident of [that] city. She is assembling a large'ish task force, which she wants to include a few other woman. She has two bodyguards.

She is married with one child. That is definitely a problem, IMO, and is for others, I'm sure. Maybe another part of the problem the press and others have with her is also that she really is an attractive woman, physically. See this GETTY photo of her:

[gharfish]

Ok, that didn't work. Let me try again...

This is Marisol Valles Garcia:

[gharfish]

I almost forgot the other reason I don't accept the 'she's braver than you' argument.

Look at where you can find Mexican beauty queens.



I always go shopping with a truck full of AKs, so I can't doubt the veracity of her claim.



Here's a thought-maybe the reason so many young women like doing public service work in areas filled with violent men has little to do with a love for the public service in question.

Let's check a picture of her....okay, definitely. Shopping trips in gun trucks are in her future.

It would have been helpful if you had also checked wikipedia on Ms. Zuniga. More happened, later.

The judge in the case against her then boyfriend Angel Orlando Garcia Urquiza found there to be no evidence that tied her to his criminal activities. She would be released, no beauty titles anymore (pageant officials acted fast), but also no guilt assigned to her by the court.


>

[lilpixieofterror]

Pixie, I'm a guy. I have a pretty good idea how close to reality that joke is.

Guys, so predictable...

Ah, Belkar syndrome. http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0335.html

That sounds about right because after all, take a look at the people here he hates and you'll find that many of them tend to fit into groups he hates (which seems to be women with careers, women who have children and are unmarried, men who defend these women, evolutionist, etc) and in his world, if he hates them, than every sterotype about them must be correct (women with careers must have not earned it and got it because they are a women, women who have children and are single must have taken advantage of a man and must be collecting child support because of it, that men that attack his nonsense must be 'controled by women', or that evolution is of the devil and those who believe in it must be evil). To him, there is no in betweens and you are either a person he hates or not.