Posts by placidorca16

Charles Wells71 said:Are you actually being serious right now!? You're telling me that discussions about how men are being sidelined and their obvious need to start their own movement belong in the Women's Corner?🙄

Meanwhile, you left a thread in Politics that kicks off with the slogan "feminism is a hate movement"—which was clearly designed specifically to stir up hatred toward feminism in the first place!?

This is honestly just beyond ridiculous!

No, it’s not... unfortunately, that's exactly the point of this whole circus.

Kyle Ward said:The reason is actually pretty simple. See, they aren't allowed to start threads like that because they don't have a uterus. We have them, which makes us more capable—obviously. And we get to ramble about whatever we want. Who's saying this? Me. And when I say something, it’s just accepted as gospel without needing any fancy arguments or deep dives. Period. We’re just better at everything. All because of the uterus. For instance, just based on the fact that I possess a womb, I am ten times more skilled at handling a clothes iron or a spatula than my husband is.

Poor guy can't even figure out how to run the washing machine without me. Not to mention, his attempt at separating whites from colors looks like some messy, chaotic abstract painting. And you really think guys like that should be allowed to open topics on forums like this??? Yeah, no way! Absolute amateurs. Honestly, if you asked me, I'd ban all of them. Every last one! And if this house of mine wasn't such a massive, cluttered mess, I’d slap him harder than Lady Gaga used to slap her exes. No joke. I'm serious. Women power! Copyright by north wind.

Look, lady... stop using my username to spout this nonsense and mind your own business. You wouldn't last a second on this forum if you actually knew what you were talking about.

Charles Wells71 said:Can you just admit you're wrong when you go hunting for people to get banned over posts like those? That’s all I’m wondering...
And yeah, I'm with you there—there are definitely all kinds of feminists out there.

I already answered that—not looking to make a broken record here. But, honestly, it’s not your job to decide whether I’m right or wrong on my own behalf.

Michelle Alvarez8 said:Of course this isn't proof that men are inferior to women. It just proves you're hooking up with anyone and everyone—to the point where you can't even keep track of yourself anymore! 😁

Actually, I think you're the one talking nonsense—and if you can't follow what I'm writing, that's hardly my problem. Weren't you just dismissing me a second ago? Clearly, you can't even keep track of yourself.😁

Michelle Alvarez8 said:I can't believe people actually fall for that—seriously, how does anyone buy into such nonsense? Isn't it wild how easily some folks get swayed?

👋

That isn't exactly proof that men are inferior to women—it's just biological differences in reproductive roles. I've already laid that out. But hey, feel free to keep digging your own hole... everyone’s entitled to their own opinion, I guess.

Charles Wells71 said:placidorca16 Look, here’s some straight talk from a feminist who doesn't usually clog up the feminism threads but had to fight tooth and nail just to get a seat at the table in real life. I’ve read through everything you flagged as offensive or punishable, and honestly? I don't see anything worth banning. You really need to chill out and just get on board with the rest of us here.
Does it actually bother you when someone claims women aren't as smart as men? So what! Unless they can back it up with actual studies, they aren't smarter than me. Besides, do you seriously think you can just police what people think? People have the right to be wrong, even if their takes are totally out of touch. Sure, we can call that kind of talk backward, but it's still part of our social reality. What do you actually gain by forcing these things to be banned? Maybe a "more progressive" forum, sure, but it won't make anyone more realistic!
So just relax—you aren't going to turn every single person into a progressive woman. There will always be guys who think they were born superior and that women are just weaker beings in every possible way. You shouldn't waste your energy fighting them; just deal with them in real life, put them in their place, and move on.
Anyway, that's my two cents. Hope you take it to heart.😉

Look, I respect your opinion and your right to have it. But if I wanted advice like that, I wouldn't have started this thread. A feminist, obviously, comes in all varieties.

Michelle Alvarez8 said:Wait, wasn't that actually your own post about inferior men that I was quoting? 😵

Since when did I say men were "inferior"? 🙄 Why the sudden urge to put words in my mouth?

Peter Phillips32 said:So, look, I mean, here I am again, just... me. Honestly, I've been sitting here thinking, and I figured, why not? I'm just gonna dive right into this, even if I end up tripping over my own feet halfway through. It's kind of my thing, isn't it? Just rambling along while trying to make sense of everything, though let's be real, "making sense" might be asking a bit much from someone like me. Anyway, so, I'm basically saying that this time around... Literally uneducated. Look, I honestly have no clue what you're getting at here, because you haven't actually laid out a single thing on this thread. Do you seriously think I’m supposed to sit here and dig through your entire post history just to figure out where you stand? That’s a bit much, don't you think? So, let me ask you straight: what exactly is this list of "abilities" you've assigned to men versus women? What specific traits are you using to claim we can be equalized, and what other random qualities are you planning to toss into that arbitrary bucket just so you can go ahead and declare women more capable than men?

What exactly do you mean by these "moralistic pressures" you keep harping on about?🤷

See, that’s exactly what you’re doing in that quote up there. You're basically handing me this half-baked answer where you slowly twist the context around until I'm forced to agree with you just so I don't end up looking like some total monster, you know? It’s like you're trying to corner me into accepting your own views as the only ones that matter by using this weird, heavy-handed moral high ground to pressure me.

Look, I’m still waiting on you to actually say something meaningful about free speech—specifically regarding the rights of people who don't fall in line with your worldview—and what the actual legal precedent looks like under the Constitution and laws of the USA. You're dodging the question. And while we're at it, you still haven't cleared up that murky, nonsense logic of yours where you try to equate male and female capabilities by claiming women are somehow more capable. If that's the case, why don't you just come out and say it? What exactly is this supposed "fundamental purpose" of being more capable that you're hinting at? Just lay it out.

ps.
Look, if you’re going to insist on bundling childbirth and general reproductive health into one big category—which, by the way, means you're counting way more than just the actual act of giving birth—then fine, I guess I can play that game. If we're being that broad, then I can just grab the concept of "strength" in its entirety and start listing every single specific example of power out there. I mean, just look at how many different strength-based disciplines they cram into the Olympic Games, let alone everywhere else. It’s a total reach, but hey, if we're stretching definitions, let's go all the way.

edit (just adding this here because I don't want to lose the thread of what I was saying above)

So, if you're gonna hide behind the Constitution and legal precedents, why bother even bringing them up? It makes zero sense. You haven't actually explained how the law or any legal practice has anything to do with freedom of speech when it comes to feminism—especially since you’re out here actively suing people just because you don't like what they have to say. It's a total contradiction.

Look, sorry, but I don't know how else to phrase an obvious fact—childbirth and reproductive functions belong to women, not men—without having to draw you a map? 😕 That’s why I even got a warning card, apparently—not that it’s clear to everyone here.🙄

That is exactly what you're doing in the quote above. You're giving half-answers where you subtly shift the context I'm supposed to agree with—otherwise, I'm the bad guy—basically forcing me to accept your views through some kind of moral coercion.

I have no idea what you mean by a "half-answer," what context I'm "shifting," or how I'm forcing you to agree with me. 😲 Please!

I'll say it again: you still haven't said anything about free speech for those who disagree with you or what the legal precedent is regarding that. And you still need to explain this murky equalization of male and female abilities where women are supposedly "more capable"—would love to finally hear what the ultimate purpose of women being more capable actually is.

What kind of "free speech" allows for insults directed at an entire population of women?😲 Would you be allowed to talk like that about, say, Black people, Jews, Romani, or even Mexicans in this country? If you wrote that any of those groups were generally "less intelligent or less capable" than another race or nation, do you really think that counts as "free speech," or would it be flagged as illegal racism?
Free speech doesn't give you a pass to spit on social groups, especially when they are protected by the Constitution and our laws, as is the case here. We aren't even talking about a minority group; we're talking about the majority, since women make up most of the population in America.

ps.
If you get to include both childbirth and general reproductive capabilities (which implies much more than just giving birth), then I can just bring up general strength and list individual examples of superior strength—just look at how many weightlifting disciplines there are in the Olympic Games, let alone elsewhere.
edit (adding this since I don't want to mess with the context above)

Look, go ahead—no one's stopping you. But let's be real, that's not even remotely the same comparison.

If that's the case, why bother bringing up the Constitution and laws of the USA or legal precedent at all? You can't explain how law and legal practice actually relate to feminism's version of free speech—especially when you're busy suing people for what they say.

I already explained it—not doing it again.

Chloe Lewis4 said:Look, the guys insulting women here can only do it anonymously because they're complete cowards who don't have the guts to show their faces. Their main goal is just to bully others into thinking they're losers. I know millions of types like them in real life, and I avoid them at all costs because they have a toxic influence and shame not just men, but the entire human race. Usually, when these types try that crap at home, they get slapped by their wives and spend the next week hiding under the covers😁. As for the forum owner, he either supports it or he simply doesn't give a damn. You're forgetting that you live in America, where it's absolute anarchy. Good luck waiting for an official statement from the administration.😁

Look, I know they're just total cowards—the "bravest" souls you'll ever meet when they're hiding behind a screen. It's all pretty clear to me. I don't hold any illusions that things are actually going to change around here—I know exactly what kind of society I'm living in—but it’s wild how little people actually understand the issues they're trying to tackle. They'll go to any length to shut down feminism, including those desperate attempts to just force everyone into silence.😁 It’s actually pretty funny—watching which personality types and gender roles people here try to push as "role models" for everyone else.😂

Thomas Morgan67 said:I just stumbled upon this supposedly "brilliant" thread and your futile attempt to wage this endless crusade.

To give you an idea, Thomas Morgan67 also stated this:

.

I have said plenty of other things on this forum, and there are users and moderators alike who have been following my posts for quite some time. Because of that, your attempt to lump me in with people who view women as intellectually inferior is about as successful as Mr. Bean's driving skills.

Beyond trying to blackmail the moderation team—perfidiously threatening to punish anyone who doesn't share your worldview by hiding behind a misunderstood interpretation of the law that actually favors your opponents more than you—you simply aren't capable of making a concrete point. In fact, you never have.

Democracy allows you to ramble, just as freedom guarantees the right to an opinion. However, neither of those gives you a private pass to shame people, spread lies about other users, twist facts, or threaten and blackmail the entire community just to shut down threads you don't like.

I personally don't care for the bloodthirsty cheering for the invasion of Syria, but I don't go running to the authorities or drag anyone's name through the mud under some false banner of "righteousness."

Grow up!

Your actions have done more damage to feminism than all the enforcement posts combined.

If people realized that you don't represent feminism, but rather "feminism" itself, you would be swept into the scrapheap of forum history in a heartbeat. That’s where you belong.

I sincerely hope you stop dragging my username through this forum with your delusions and twisting my words. I truly hope that, once and for all, I am finished dealing with your "personality."

Best regards!

Trying to pin your own issues on me or suck up to the mods isn't a reflection of my character—it's yours. As far as I'm concerned, feel free to walk away! All the best to you too.

Kyle Ward said:I honestly have no clue why this thread hasn't been locked yet. This person—who is basically the textbook definition of a stereotypical feminist (go ahead, report me to the moderators, Sarnavka, and of course, mommy 😍)—doesn't even know what she wants. Honestly, she doesn't even know what she *doesn't* want.

She’s busy calling everyone else out for sexism, while her entire discourse boils down to just trashing anyone who holds an opinion other than her own. She preaches about equality, yet refuses to grant any kind of equality to anyone else. She started this whole topic acting like it was some manifesto for female intelligence, only for her "ultimate" argument for superiority over us "clueless men" to end up being nothing more than the physiological fact that she has a uterus?!!?

Let me repeat it once more, in case anyone missed the sheer idiocy of the arguments above: WOMEN ARE MORE CAPABLE THAN MEN BECAUSE THEY HAVE A UTERUS.

And if I were to say, for example, that I think men are more capable because we can lift weights using our anatomy, I’d be branded a chauvinistic moron immediately.

I mean, if this isn't a blatant case of trolling wrapped in a few nerdy phrases—which, let's be real, she probably picked up during some six-month gender roles seminar in Canada—then I don't know what is.
And what's worse? The moderators actually took the bait instead of slapping her with a ban for this manic trolling until March 15th, 2056.

Men fertilize you. I guess that's a greater capability compared to women. Women can't even be compared to men in this regard. The fact of men fertilizing women is more than evident, I hope everyone realizes that.
There. That's the level of your discussion. So, what now? Are we going to debate which gender is more capable based on breast size? 🙂
Please, just stop. Seriously. For your own sake. In these last few posts, you've done more damage to the "feminist movement" than a single vulgar, chauvinistic outburst from someone like Vuco or Royce could do in three lifetimes.

Look, man... if you don't like what I'm saying, feel free to scroll past—I didn't ask for your opinion, and frankly, I couldn't care less about your comments.

Nicholas King said:Aside from the fact that it’s honestly hilarious how you’re pretending to be incapable of handling a spin—one that I clearly and definitively debunked—it’s just pathetic. You’ve somehow managed to take a shooter’s mere "attempt at scoring" and rebrand it as actually "possessing ability." It's a joke. And honestly, if we're talking about actual male capability, even being able to write on a wall is... well, it's something. When we get into these endless debates surrounding gender equality—or the lack thereof—it’s always the same exhausting cycle. I mean, I guess you could say it’s become one of those topics where everyone thinks they have the definitive answer, yet nobody actually seems to be listening to anyone else. It’s all just noise at this point. There’s this constant back-and-forth regarding whether we’ve truly achieved parity or if we’re just moving the goalposts every few years—which, let’s be honest, feels like it happens more often than not. I suspect much of the friction comes from how people interpret the very concept of fairness itself; some see it as total mathematical equality, while others view it through a completely different lens of opportunity. It’s messy, it’s complicated, and frankly, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to have a civil conversation about it without someone taking offense at the slightest nuance. It’s just as nonsensical an argument as a woman's ability to conceive.

Or perhaps what you're actually suggesting is that we need to sit down and conduct an exhaustive analysis of everyone's individual capabilities—just so we can tally up some grand total score and, once and for all, declare one gender superior to the other? I guess that’s the logic here, isn't it? more capable I find myself wondering—and I mean this with all due deliberation—exactly what fundamental principles of nature lead us to the inevitable conclusion of inequality? It’s one of those questions that seems simple on the surface, yet once you start peeling back the layers, everything becomes incredibly messy. I guess you could argue it's baked into the very fabric of our existence, though I hesitate to be so definitive without more data. Perhaps there's a structural necessity for it, or maybe it's just an inherent flaw in how we organize ourselves. It’s a complex thought, really—one that demands we look past the immediate chaos and consider the underlying mechanics of how things actually work.

Sorry, but it is to me—especially if those specific "abilities" are used to build unequal power dynamics and social hierarchies that almost always screw women over.

So maybe you're saying we should just tally up everyone's skills and then, based on the final score, declare one gender superior—which naturally leads to inequality?

No, what I'm actually saying is that labeling women and their intellectual or other capacities as less valuable or inferior is pure sexism and misogyny—and apparently, this brand of sexism goes totally unpunished by our busy admins. You're completely misreading the situation.

Michelle Alvarez8 said:Fair point. Honestly, being a guy, I’m clearly just inferior to women—since they actually have the superpower of giving birth—so I might as well head out to the garage and tinker with my car instead of staying here to trade insults with "alpha females" who think they're fighting some righteous battle against misogyny. I'll just go cry under a table now. 😢

Hey, don't go pinning that on me—you said it, not me. And if you're feeling the urge to have a good cry, be my guest; at least you aren't emotionally stunted like some of us.🥳

Michelle Alvarez8 said:Honestly, what's actually aggressive is spinning it this way. I don't get how you still can't see that this kind of talk just doesn't fly here. 🤷

What exactly "isn't working"—and where? Maybe try minding your own business instead of trying to play philosopher here.
🙄

Nicholas King said:Exactly.

However, there is a very simple distinction to be made here: the moment someone claims that all women are like that—or even just a massive percentage of them—your refusal to speak up stops being principled and starts looking like mere conformism, or quite frankly, just pure laziness and letting others fight your battles for you.

As for this whole "ability" argument, it’s a total miss—and honestly, a brilliant bit of spin: the original phrasing of "showing more ability" means something entirely different from the revised version, "having more ability."

And don't even get me started on bringing "childbearing abilities" into a discussion like this; it's a ridiculous pivot that invites the counter-argument of male "abilities like peeing against a wall, which women lack"—so, if we're going down that road, let's start counting...

Oh, sure, because a man's ability to pee against a wall and a woman's ability to give birth are totally equivalent, right?🙄

Casey Bennett said:Maybe the reason I don't feel insulted by certain descriptions is simply because they don't apply to me? 🤷
Did that possibility ever cross your mind? 😉

When someone (regardless of whether they are male or female) points out that there are plenty of women who are just plain boring, spending their entire lives glued to soap operas and gossiping, believe me, I won't feel the slightest urge to scream, "How dare you, you misogynist!" because, frankly, it’s the damn truth.

I have no interest in defending or representing anyone just because we share the same chromosomes, and I certainly don't want anyone speaking on behalf of women without my express permission.

Real struggle should be reserved for the disenfranchised, the oppressed, the hungry, and the helpless—regardless of whether we are talking about a child, a woman, a man, or an animal.

To summarize: feminism is, in my opinion, far too narrowly specialized, overly aggressive, and completely devoid of any sense of humor. I won't go so far as to call it fanaticism, but if anyone finds themselves offended by this, I wash my hands of their feelings.

What does it matter if you personally relate to it or not? 🙄 It’s pretty obvious you haven't grasped why this discussion was even started. This isn't about "plenty of women" being one way or another, nor is it about views on feminism—it's about the blatant lies and false labels used to generalize everyone's intelligence and capability. But hey, since I'm clearly done explaining things to people who just don't get it, I'll stop repeating myself.

Peter Phillips32 said:Well, look, you actually wrote that women "have more abilities," which honestly comes off as nothing but passive-aggressive provocation, and then you proceeded to list exactly one single thing: giving birth. But hey, if we’re playing this game where we acknowledge men are physically stronger, then that's +1 for strength on the male side and +1 for childbirth on the female side regarding overall abilities for both sexes, respectively.

So, not only are they not "more capable," but you promised a whole range of abilities and then only delivered one. Can you manage to cough up at least three more besides just having babies?

Just for the sake of clarity, could you please list these male and female abilities that are supposedly equal, under which category you can then tack on childbirth as a "superior" female trait?

On top of that, you completely dodged the question about how free speech even fits into this mess. Check post #11. Just a heads-up, I'm asking how legal precedent actually handles free speech regarding this specific topic, not how you wish the law worked.

So, why don't you try answering post #11 instead of just showing up here to chant slogans? It seems like if you can't answer post #11, you probably don't even understand what it's asking.

Secondly, look, I'm all for supporting people in their charitable endeavors, but I draw the line at including baseless claims, half-baked answers, moralistic coercion, and those kinds of cheap tricks used to push agendas that some people find totally objectionable.

Right—those are reproductive capabilities in general, not just childbirth, which is part of that set... but why would I bother explaining basic concepts to people who can barely write?🙄

As for legal stuff, go talk to an attorney if you're confused.

And what exactly do you mean by "moralistic coercion"?🤷

Sean Cook2 said:placidorca16, Sophia Thomas7 thought that quote from Michelle Alvarez8 came from your opening post—he clearly didn't bother clicking the arrow to see she pulled it from the "feminism" thread.

My sincere respect to those who remain optimistic while tilting at windmills—I simply lack the energy to reopen those debates or wade through the endless nonsense found there.

Honestly, regardless of where he grabbed it, it doesn't change a thing—it does nothing to debunk the insults thrown at women in general across this and similar threads that have been dragging on for years on this forum... and yet, nothing happens.

My deepest respects for your optimism and your fight against windmills. I personally don't even have the energy to open those threads anymore, let alone respond to all the nonsense written there.

Thanks, but it’s not really "optimism"—just a reminder to the uninitiated that they can't just erase feminism and its massive impact on social change and modernization, no matter how much they struggle against it.🙂

Michelle Alvarez8 said:Well, look—the only person here actually pushing feminism is the one who started this whole thread, so I don't really see how else to take it. 🤷

So?🙄 Oh, sure—apparently, asking the moderators to actually step in when people start slinging misogynistic labels around or claiming women have "inferior intellect"—you know, the usual garbage—is what they call being "aggressive."😁

Sophia Thomas7 said:With that extra explanation added, it’s pretty obvious to me—just looking at this from the outside—that it feels like a cheap way to twist the narrative.

Honestly, that whole little backtrack of yours felt incredibly pretentious. Anyway, have a good one.

Look, if you and whoever else want to think that—fine.🤷 That's your problem.
The main thing is that you didn't take the easy way out when dodging my question back in post 51.

Your little backtrack feels pretty pretentious. Have a nice day.

Yeah... I already said that, so I'm not repeating myself. You have a nice day too.