logo Sign In

I'm a feminist! — Page 4

Author
Time

CP3S said:

Here, try this on:

C3PX said:

If I could work my will, there would be no religion, no one would believe in a god or gods, and they would be better for it.   No one would want to be Christians and no one would want to be religious.  Things would be so much simpler that way.  No offense to Christians or religious folk intended.

I feel like had I said this during any of our religious discussions, you would have been rather hurt and offended.

To be completely honest, though I try not to bring it up, I totally feel like the world would be far better off, though perhaps a bit less interesting, if religion were to altogether die off and become a a thing of the past that everyone cringes or laughs about. Kind of like how we cringe or sometimes chuckle when we think about the fact that doctors used to slice open arteries to let their patients bleed their fevers out.

Why am I saying all of this here and now when it doesn't relate to the topic at hand whatsoever? Because I could never imagine Mrebo applauding my forthrightness for saying such a thing.

If our opinions are backwards, bigoted, hateful, and mean-spirited, perhaps applause is better deserved when you keep it to yourself. If someone here came out and admitted that if they could work their will there would be no black people, because, you know, it would be less complicated that way, I really hope nobody here would applaud their forthrightness for it.

By the way, religious people are okay by me, I've known a lot of awesome and very intelligent religious people.

If it were an atypical expression of your beliefs on the subject, I very well might applaud you for stepping outside that normal zone of your usual socially-approved beliefs. Warbler doesn't do that often. And spitting out anti-religious views isn't that risky or out of character. So I see no need to applaud that.

I see no need to bully someone into silence. I know Warbler strenuously believes there should be no legal discrimination of any sort, he doesn't personally see any reason gay relationships should be seen differently than straight ones (though his church teaches otherwise), but he makes a comment on how  - purely hypothetically - society could be simpler if there was a single form of sexuality and he's a terrible bigot.

I actually thought Gaffer gave a very good response. It was actually responsive!

I'm still embarrassed about that restaurant bathroom.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mrebo said:

I see no need to bully someone into silence. I know Warbler strenuously believes there should be no legal discrimination of any sort, he doesn't personally see any reason gay relationships should be seen differently than straight ones (though his church teaches otherwise), but he makes a comment on how  - purely hypothetically - society could be simpler if there was a single form of sexuality and he's a terrible bigot.

Not trying to bully him into silence. I am really surprised to hear it coming from him, through. I genuinely found the things he said to be very offensive.

If I stated (purely hypothetically) that society could be simpler if there was only a single race (the white one, of course), would we be cool with this? Technically, Warbler is right, society would be much simpler without homosexuality, and then we wouldn't have to worry about being offending by people engaging in homosexual sex. Technically, if all humans were of the white variety, it would solve societies issues with racism, and we wouldn't have to worry about our daughters growing up to date brown people.

Author
Time

Society would be much simpler without sexuality altogether.

If a simple life is better than a complicated one try being an amoeba.

Author
Time

Warbler said:

yes this, exactly.  If I could work my will, there would be no homosexuals, everyone would be straight and be fine with it.   No one would want to be gay and no one would want to switch genders.  Things would be so much simpler that way.  No offense to homosexuals or transgenders intended.

O H  G O O D  G O D .

 

You know, Warb, Google Maps tells me Skokie is only a 12 hour drive from where you live. Not that long of a trip to meet some nice like minded people with green shirts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTT1qUswYL0

Mmmh, too bad you're 30 years too late. Even that ship has sailed.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I don't think Warb is being deliberately fascistic.

He may be expressing views which accidentally chime with that sort of ideology and need to have a good hard think about what he is saying there.

Replace the word "homosexuals" with "Jews", "gay" with "Jewish", "straight" with "Christian","genders" with "religions", "transgenders" with" Mormons" and the sentence is just as worryingly wacky.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Bingowings said:

I don't think Warb is being deliberately fascistic.

He may be expressing views which accidentally chime with that sort of ideology and need to have a good hard think about what he is saying there.

Replace the word "homosexuals" with "Jews", "gay" with "Jewish", "straight" with "Christian","genders" with "religions", "transgenders" with" Mormons" and the sentence is just as worryingly wacky.

Yeah, but never the less, I was really offended by that statement. And hyperbole is my weapon against such pinnacles of ignorance.

I mean wow, I've heard some homophobic slurs in my time, but this ranks up there with this.

Author
Time

CP3S said:

greenpenguino said:

sometimes I like to wear dresses too :(

It's annoying that I can never find high heels in my size too.

Not sure if serious...

 

Yeah, I'm being serious :P

Leonardo said:

Bingowings said:

I don't think Warb is being deliberately fascistic.

He may be expressing views which accidentally chime with that sort of ideology and need to have a good hard think about what he is saying there.

Replace the word "homosexuals" with "Jews", "gay" with "Jewish", "straight" with "Christian","genders" with "religions", "transgenders" with" Mormons" and the sentence is just as worryingly wacky.

Yeah, but never the less, I was really offended by that statement. And hyperbole is my weapon against such pinnacles of ignorance.

I mean wow, I've heard some homophobic slurs in my time, but this ranks up there with this.

Yeah, that was a really horrible thing to say, even if weren't intentionally mean spirited.

 

<span style=“font-weight: bold;”>The Most Handsomest Guy on OT.com</span>

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

Gaffer Tape said: To constantly wedge people into a one-size-fits-all mentality, I feel, is to the ultimate detriment of humanity because it immediately and irrevocably limits us for the sake of maintaining an arbitrary classification that someone else created.  For the sake of simplicity.

but it is what he have to do in the case of public restrooms, unless you think each place should have billions of restrooms, 1 for each individual person.

Warbler is brilliantly hilarious at times. I'm not at all being sarcastic, Warbler. The matter-of-fact statement of absurdity is truly great.

Yeah, I admit that is pretty funny.  Still, though, I find it even more interesting that Warbler's immediate response, joking or not, is not a statement of inclusion but rather an assertion that "different people must be separated."

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time

I wonder what Warblers default setting view of a 'gay' person is? 

Author
Time

Bingowings said:

A man looking at his junk presumably.

<span style=“font-weight: bold;”>The Most Handsomest Guy on OT.com</span>

Author
Time

Bingowings said:

A man looking at his junk presumably.

Woo-hoo, I always wanted to be gay!

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

Bingowings said:

A man looking at his junk presumably.

Woo-hoo, I always wanted to be gay!

I think he meant "his" as in "Warb's".

Or have I missed a FrinkFunny™?

Author
Time

Leonardo said:

TV's Frink said:

Bingowings said:

A man looking at his junk presumably.

Woo-hoo, I always wanted to be gay!

I think he meant "his" as in "Warb's".

Or have I missed a FrinkFunny™?

Oh, darn.  Well, at least I don't need to get a divorce now.

Author
Time

ok this is asinine.   After all the posts I've made defending the rights of homosexuals and whatnot, this is the reaction I get?  I am nazi bigot!?!?!?  that is just bullshit!   

I said what I said not because I dislike gays, but because I dislike all the complications.   

Author
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

Warbler's logic is flawed. Since 1978, procreation no longer requires copulation.

my logic is not flawed.   If everyone had been born homosexual and men and women never had sex with each other, we would never have made it to 1978. 

Author
Time

CP3S said:

Gaffer Tape said:

I absolutely hate those communal trough-style urinals like you find in sports stadiums.

Sports stadiums use those?

old sports stadiums.   I don't think any of the newer ones have those.

CP3S said:

The only place I have seen those trough-style urinals are in gay bars.

not sure if serious.

Author
Time

CP3S said:

Let's say I want to engage in sexual relations with some dude, or I aspire to become a women when I can afford it; how does this make things complicated for you?

hello?  we were just talking about one of the complications in this very thread before I made my 'nazi statement'.

Author
Time

CP3S said:

Warbler said:

TV's Frink said:

Warb, your comment about everyone being straight was pretty offensive, no matter how much you say "no offense."

well I am sorry to offend, but life would be much simpler if no one was or wanted to be homosexual.    I suppose you could also argue that everything would be just as simple if no one was or wanted to be heterosexual.  But then you'd have a problem,  humanity would cease to exist because no one was having babies(since everyone was homosexual and therefore men and women were not having sex with each other) 

You seem to be saying that you are basically just anti-sex (or at least feel that sexuality makes things complicated), but have to accept sexuality as a necessary evil for the sake of procreation. Is this accurate?

no, I was simply saying that without men and women having sex with each other, the human race would not reproduce and would therefore die out.

CP3S said:

Here, try this on:

C3PX said:

If I could work my will, there would be no religion, no one would believe in a god or gods, and they would be better for it.   No one would want to be Christians and no one would want to be religious.  Things would be so much simpler that way.  No offense to Christians or religious folk intended.

I feel like had I said this during any of our religious discussions, you would have been rather hurt and offended, Warb.

To be completely honest, though I try not to bring it up, I totally feel like the world would be far better off, though perhaps a bit less interesting, if religion were to altogether die off and become a a thing of the past that everyone cringes or laughs about. Kind of like how we cringe or sometimes chuckle when we think about the fact that doctors used to slice open arteries to let their patients bleed their fevers out.

Why am I saying all of this here and now when it doesn't relate to the topic at hand whatsoever? Because I could never imagine Mrebo applauding my forthrightness for saying such a thing.

well, I could easily how things would be less complicated without any religions.   

Author
Time

Gaffer Tape said:

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

Gaffer Tape said: To constantly wedge people into a one-size-fits-all mentality, I feel, is to the ultimate detriment of humanity because it immediately and irrevocably limits us for the sake of maintaining an arbitrary classification that someone else created.  For the sake of simplicity.

but it is what he have to do in the case of public restrooms, unless you think each place should have billions of restrooms, 1 for each individual person.

Warbler is brilliantly hilarious at times. I'm not at all being sarcastic, Warbler. The matter-of-fact statement of absurdity is truly great.

Yeah, I admit that is pretty funny.  Still, though, I find it even more interesting that Warbler's immediate response, joking or not, is not a statement of inclusion but rather an assertion that "different people must be separated."

that was not my point at all.   You were arguing against a one size fits all mentality.   But in the case of public restrooms we do have to think in those terms because it would be ridiculous for every place to have a separate restroom for each individual.  

Author
Time

Leonardo said:

TV's Frink said:

Bingowings said:

A man looking at his junk presumably.

Woo-hoo, I always wanted to be gay!

I think he meant "his" as in "Warb's".

Or have I missed a FrinkFunny™?

so now you are going after my concern that a gay man might want to try to look at my stuff in the restroom.   Tell me, would there be any complaint made about a woman concerned that in a unisex bathroom,  a straight man might try to look at her stuff?  

Author
Time

I'd imagine most women wouldn't use a urinal but then why would you have one in a unisex toilet?

If you are in a toilet cubicle and a willy watcher pops his head over or under the cubicle you would have as much right to complain as a woman would.

Author
Time

CP3S said:

Mrebo said:

I see no need to bully someone into silence. I know Warbler strenuously believes there should be no legal discrimination of any sort, he doesn't personally see any reason gay relationships should be seen differently than straight ones (though his church teaches otherwise), but he makes a comment on how  - purely hypothetically - society could be simpler if there was a single form of sexuality and he's a terrible bigot.

Not trying to bully him into silence. I am really surprised to hear it coming from him, through. I genuinely found the things he said to be very offensive.

this coming from the guy that once defended the ban on gays openly serving in the military due to all the complications that arise from gay and straight soldiers using the same bathrooms and showers, sleeping in the same rooms, and using the same foxholes.