Misrep at A Voice for Men

[Zymologist]

Oh yeah, the uber rights that come with having absolutely no societal power of being able to insult and deride people without oppressing them.

Reasonable definitions of things like sexism and racism include power in their analysis. Here's a [url=[/COLOR]http://misandry-mermaid.tumblr.com/post/49132216263/on-misandry-being-real-and-not-being-real]nice post[/url (By misandry mermaid, no less!) Misandry is used so often as an injoke in feminist circles, because lol male tears.

Apparently the average dictionary definition is unreasonable.

[Epoetker]

Back to the OP, I am dying to see Epo admit that a link was misused.

I have not, to my knowledge, ever quoted Paul Elam about anything, even MRM related, because 99 times out of 100 there were better sources for it. Who appointed me a judge or arbiter among him and Jessica Valenti? Neither are currently notable for being anything but extreme ideologues of their respective positions, due to their trust in political and legal action over finding and preaching the truth.

As long as my name's on this forum, such trifles will be designated as the foolish wastes of precious time they are. When you've got something on Dalrock, Roissy, or even Welmer from the Spearhead, then you can call me.

[Darth Xena]

Can't just admit it?

[Darth Xena]

On any of the axes (gender, race, sexual orientation, disability, etc etc) we are absolutely no where near "the oppression of the minority over the majority" becoming an issue.

I think I know a photographer and baker that would disagree with you.

[Outis]

I think I know a photographer and baker that would disagree with you.

As I have repeatedly pointed out, the laws (in both of these particular cases, state laws) forbidding discrimination based on sexual orientation are based on the same logic as the laws that forbid discrimination based on race, or religion, or disability, or gender. Why do you, seemingly, approve of that logic in all cases save sexual orientation?

[Darth Xena]

As you have been repeatedly been shown to be wrong. You refuse to see it.

(and FWIW, I do not believe in anti-discrimination laws in the private sector any longer)

[Outis]

As you have been repeatedly been shown to be wrong.

Nope. I have been repeatedly shown that you and others disagree with the assessment. And I have, in turn, repeatedly demonstrated that the law, and the courts, disagree with you.

(and FWIW, I do not believe in anti-discrimination laws in the private sector any longer)

Ah, so we should be back to the days of "Whites Only", in your opinion?

[Darth Executor]

Ah, so we should be back to the days of "Whites Only", in your opinion?

We should move forward to days where it's not the government's job to manage the reputations of various progressive vassals (or enemies for that matter).

[Darth Xena]

I refuse to engage your baiting.

I believe the free market is the way to address such things today.

I do believe at times there is need for limited intervention to right inequities with an expiration period to let the market take over.

There is no chance in hell things would go back to whites only or that ever a homosexual can't find a baker instead of maliciously targeting someone to sue them.

[Outis]

I refuse to engage your baiting.

And I refuse to refrain from calling out bigotry.

[KingsGambit]

Still waiting for Epo to own up

[Darth Xena]

And I refuse to refrain from calling out bigotry.

Might start with the mirror.

[Outis]

Might start with the mirror.

Nope. Bigotry would be if I distrusted or disparaged Christians solely because they are Christian. I do not. I disparage some (most certainly not all) Christians based on what they do.

Nothing more. Nothing less.

[seasanctuary]

Well there is this for example. Any affirmative action program that includes gender. Lowing physical requirements for women and not for men in the military. Shrill media freakout at criticism of women when equivalent criticism of men is laughed at.

Thanks for your response. I don't think those items justify the characterization of "uber rights," and are instead part of the process of not treating women as second-class citizens.

If you can't see it, I really have zero patience to explain it.

We women just wuvvvv our protected class status.

I don't expect everyone to always be ready to explain their positions to someone who doesn't understand them, but I do appreciate the hints and if you had any resources to point at that strike the proper balance between "no problem" and "misogyny," I would appreciate it. I still read manboobz and appreciate you pointing that out a while back.