User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
USA
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 7:12:22 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By wyomingnick: Yeah there's a lot more bad men out there than one in 50,000. Criminal records and sex offender registry should make that a pretty easy hypothesis to prove, the amount of men that would do harm to a woman or even a man for that matter in the woods if they were totally alone with no witnesses and had full ability to do what they wanted is a lot higher than one in 50,000. The good news is most of those violent criminally-minded Men aren't likely to be found in the woods, they're more likely to be found on city streets where they're a little more limited with what they can get away with.. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By wyomingnick: Originally Posted By Notcalifornialegal: Originally Posted By xd341: But it's not 1 in 100 it's 1 in 100,000 or 50,000. That's the entire point. If you encountered 10K bears in the wild, you'd get eaten. We have ole timmy what's his name as proof. He didn't get to 10K bears, got eaten, he was an idiot that took his idiot girlfriend down with him. She, ironically, chose the man, still got eaten by the bear. Sometimes you can't win. That makes bears more dangerous by a factor of 5 or 10, ya know as long as we are making shit up. So in a pure random situation you'd have better odds choosing the random man. But men are somehow more dangerous. It's not true, we all know it's not true, but there is a point that is trying to be made. Men are bad, worse than bears even. The problem is the point that is really being made is that women are emotional and illogical and probably shouldn't be trusted with life or death decisions. That's not right, it's not fair or good for women. Yet here we are. memetic warfare achievement unlocked....."own goal" Ehh.... it's probably closer to 1 in 100.  Yeah there's a lot more bad men out there than one in 50,000. Criminal records and sex offender registry should make that a pretty easy hypothesis to prove, the amount of men that would do harm to a woman or even a man for that matter in the woods if they were totally alone with no witnesses and had full ability to do what they wanted is a lot higher than one in 50,000. The good news is most of those violent criminally-minded Men aren't likely to be found in the woods, they're more likely to be found on city streets where they're a little more limited with what they can get away with.. I personally know 2 guys that are on lists because they dated a 17 year old girl when they were 18. I'm guessing the same goes for other statistics. There are so many laws now that we are all criminals. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 7:14:25 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By xd341: At this point, it can't be "not getting it". She has picked her hill, and will die upon it, probably eaten by a bear.  Part of me respects it, part of me doesn't. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By xd341: Originally Posted By RC03: I just knew you wouldn't get it... Slow it down and think... The OTHER women, are talking about each other's fathers, husbands and sons. You know, like yours. That's the kind of shit those people are spreading. Pretty disgusting, isn't it? Part of me respects it, part of me doesn't. Me waiting around on the livestreams of the bear encounters. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 7:16:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Naamah]
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RC03: I just knew you wouldn't get it... Slow it down and think... The OTHER women, are talking about each other's fathers, husbands and sons. You know, like yours. That's the kind of shit those people are spreading. Pretty disgusting, isn't it? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Veccio: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By xd341: Originally Posted By Naamah: The percentage of each doesn't matter. Only the worst case scenarios. That's the point I've been trying to make. That's legit, it's understandable, but it's not factual or logical. It doesn't have to be, but it's important that we all recognize it for what it is. Except that's not irrational. There are thousands of women raped and murdered every year while going about their daily activities. Millions, if you start counting worldwide totals. And given the choice between two horrible possibilities, women are choosing the one that seems less horrible to them. Are there emotions involved? Sure. Logic too. But in no way is it irrational. Women are choosing what SEEMS less horrible based on an emotional illogical scenario. There's nothing logical about going 'hurr durr I choose to be with a bear', especially when the people saying it have to be terribly naive to believe it in the first place. The funny part is this; After they take their turn on Facebook (or whatever the fuck platform (apparently arfcom now) grandstanding about picking the bear. They will eventually realize the "random men" the other grandstanding women are talking about are their own fathers, husbands and sons. Except they aren’t. You’re choosing to turn it into that based on your own emotions over hearing that women consider the worst a bear can do to be preferable to the worst a man can do, but that doesn’t mean they’re saying what you’re taking from it. Of course some number of them have probably been molested by their fathers or brothers, so they may be factoring them into the equation. I just knew you wouldn't get it... Slow it down and think... The OTHER women, are talking about each other's fathers, husbands and sons. You know, like yours. That's the kind of shit those people are spreading. Pretty disgusting, isn't it? Some random woman has no reason to inherently trust my father, brother, or son. They don’t know them from Adam. Just like I don’t know their fathers, brothers, or sons. Every bad guy out there is for sure someone’s son, possibly someone’s brother or father. Being a father, brother, or son doesn’t exclude someone from being a bad guy. I know my male relatives are good guys, because I know them. I have a lifetime of experience with them. Some random woman doesn’t, and it doesn’t bother me a bit if they don’t want to be alone with them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 7:27:51 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Naamah: Some random woman has no reason to inherently trust my father, brother, or son. They don’t know them from Adam. Just like I don’t know their fathers, brothers, or sons. Every bad guy out there is for sure someone’s son, possibly someone’s brother or father. Being a father, brother, or son doesn’t exclude someone from being a bad guy. I know my male relatives are good guys, because I know them. I have a lifetime of experience with them. Some random woman doesn’t, and it doesn’t bother me a bit if they don’t want to be alone with them. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Veccio: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By xd341: Originally Posted By Naamah: The percentage of each doesn't matter. Only the worst case scenarios. That's the point I've been trying to make. That's legit, it's understandable, but it's not factual or logical. It doesn't have to be, but it's important that we all recognize it for what it is. Except that's not irrational. There are thousands of women raped and murdered every year while going about their daily activities. Millions, if you start counting worldwide totals. And given the choice between two horrible possibilities, women are choosing the one that seems less horrible to them. Are there emotions involved? Sure. Logic too. But in no way is it irrational. Women are choosing what SEEMS less horrible based on an emotional illogical scenario. There's nothing logical about going 'hurr durr I choose to be with a bear', especially when the people saying it have to be terribly naive to believe it in the first place. The funny part is this; After they take their turn on Facebook (or whatever the fuck platform (apparently arfcom now) grandstanding about picking the bear. They will eventually realize the "random men" the other grandstanding women are talking about are their own fathers, husbands and sons. Except they aren’t. You’re choosing to turn it into that based on your own emotions over hearing that women consider the worst a bear can do to be preferable to the worst a man can do, but that doesn’t mean they’re saying what you’re taking from it. Of course some number of them have probably been molested by their fathers or brothers, so they may be factoring them into the equation. I just knew you wouldn't get it... Slow it down and think... The OTHER women, are talking about each other's fathers, husbands and sons. You know, like yours. That's the kind of shit those people are spreading. Pretty disgusting, isn't it? Some random woman has no reason to inherently trust my father, brother, or son. They don’t know them from Adam. Just like I don’t know their fathers, brothers, or sons. Every bad guy out there is for sure someone’s son, possibly someone’s brother or father. Being a father, brother, or son doesn’t exclude someone from being a bad guy. I know my male relatives are good guys, because I know them. I have a lifetime of experience with them. Some random woman doesn’t, and it doesn’t bother me a bit if they don’t want to be alone with them. I honestly can't take you seriously at this point. Good day to you. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 7:30:55 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Naamah: About 500,000 murders annually in the world, and ~250,000 reported rapes in 65 countries. Of course, those countries where there are the most rapes are drastically underreported (and incidentally not included in the statistics either) due to the severe consequences raped women face (honor killings and such). I think I have a pretty good handle on things, thanks. How many of those acts are men against women strangers? This is out of 8 billion people... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 7:31:12 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tsg68: All she has to do is nag the man and he’ll run away. The bear also. But the bear would probably run away first. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 7:53:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: TxRabbitBane]
[#7]
Lol another fantasy built upon Disney-esque delusions about nature.
Choose the bear- no skin off my nose. I choose the young, attractive, mentally healthy female over the obese, man hating head case. I reproduce, you become a cat lady until you die a lonely death, and never realize it’s the product of your choices. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 8:09:03 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RC03: I honestly can't take you seriously at this point. Good day to you. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Veccio: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By xd341: Originally Posted By Naamah: The percentage of each doesn't matter. Only the worst case scenarios. That's the point I've been trying to make. That's legit, it's understandable, but it's not factual or logical. It doesn't have to be, but it's important that we all recognize it for what it is. Except that's not irrational. There are thousands of women raped and murdered every year while going about their daily activities. Millions, if you start counting worldwide totals. And given the choice between two horrible possibilities, women are choosing the one that seems less horrible to them. Are there emotions involved? Sure. Logic too. But in no way is it irrational. Women are choosing what SEEMS less horrible based on an emotional illogical scenario. There's nothing logical about going 'hurr durr I choose to be with a bear', especially when the people saying it have to be terribly naive to believe it in the first place. The funny part is this; After they take their turn on Facebook (or whatever the fuck platform (apparently arfcom now) grandstanding about picking the bear. They will eventually realize the "random men" the other grandstanding women are talking about are their own fathers, husbands and sons. Except they aren’t. You’re choosing to turn it into that based on your own emotions over hearing that women consider the worst a bear can do to be preferable to the worst a man can do, but that doesn’t mean they’re saying what you’re taking from it. Of course some number of them have probably been molested by their fathers or brothers, so they may be factoring them into the equation. I just knew you wouldn't get it... Slow it down and think... The OTHER women, are talking about each other's fathers, husbands and sons. You know, like yours. That's the kind of shit those people are spreading. Pretty disgusting, isn't it? Some random woman has no reason to inherently trust my father, brother, or son. They don’t know them from Adam. Just like I don’t know their fathers, brothers, or sons. Every bad guy out there is for sure someone’s son, possibly someone’s brother or father. Being a father, brother, or son doesn’t exclude someone from being a bad guy. I know my male relatives are good guys, because I know them. I have a lifetime of experience with them. Some random woman doesn’t, and it doesn’t bother me a bit if they don’t want to be alone with them. I honestly can't take you seriously at this point. Good day to you. Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a son? Or a brother? Or a father? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 8:39:47 PM EDT
[Last Edit: macman37]
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Naamah: About 500,000 murders annually in the world, and ~250,000 reported rapes in 65 countries. Of course, those countries where there are the most rapes are drastically underreported (and incidentally not included in the statistics either) due to the severe consequences raped women face (honor killings and such). I think I have a pretty good handle on things, thanks. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By pezboytate: Originally Posted By Naamah: Except that’s not irrational. There are thousands of women raped and murdered every year while going about their daily activities. Millions, if you start counting worldwide totals. And given the choice between two horrible possibilities, women are choosing the one that seems less horrible to them. Are there emotions involved? Sure. Logic too. But in no way is it irrational. I think the number of men raping or murdering strangers is way higher in your head than it is in real life and that is the root of the problem. About 500,000 murders annually in the world, and ~250,000 reported rapes in 65 countries. Of course, those countries where there are the most rapes are drastically underreported (and incidentally not included in the statistics either) due to the severe consequences raped women face (honor killings and such). I think I have a pretty good handle on things, thanks. Except you won’t answer if you’d get in a car with a woman vs. a man. 😂. FYI I have been called a white knight in arf threads previously. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 8:41:04 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Naamah: Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a son? Or a brother? Or a father? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Veccio: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By xd341: Originally Posted By Naamah: The percentage of each doesn't matter. Only the worst case scenarios. That's the point I've been trying to make. That's legit, it's understandable, but it's not factual or logical. It doesn't have to be, but it's important that we all recognize it for what it is. Except that's not irrational. There are thousands of women raped and murdered every year while going about their daily activities. Millions, if you start counting worldwide totals. And given the choice between two horrible possibilities, women are choosing the one that seems less horrible to them. Are there emotions involved? Sure. Logic too. But in no way is it irrational. Women are choosing what SEEMS less horrible based on an emotional illogical scenario. There's nothing logical about going 'hurr durr I choose to be with a bear', especially when the people saying it have to be terribly naive to believe it in the first place. The funny part is this; After they take their turn on Facebook (or whatever the fuck platform (apparently arfcom now) grandstanding about picking the bear. They will eventually realize the "random men" the other grandstanding women are talking about are their own fathers, husbands and sons. Except they aren’t. You’re choosing to turn it into that based on your own emotions over hearing that women consider the worst a bear can do to be preferable to the worst a man can do, but that doesn’t mean they’re saying what you’re taking from it. Of course some number of them have probably been molested by their fathers or brothers, so they may be factoring them into the equation. I just knew you wouldn't get it... Slow it down and think... The OTHER women, are talking about each other's fathers, husbands and sons. You know, like yours. That's the kind of shit those people are spreading. Pretty disgusting, isn't it? Some random woman has no reason to inherently trust my father, brother, or son. They don’t know them from Adam. Just like I don’t know their fathers, brothers, or sons. Every bad guy out there is for sure someone’s son, possibly someone’s brother or father. Being a father, brother, or son doesn’t exclude someone from being a bad guy. I know my male relatives are good guys, because I know them. I have a lifetime of experience with them. Some random woman doesn’t, and it doesn’t bother me a bit if they don’t want to be alone with them. I honestly can't take you seriously at this point. Good day to you. Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a son? Or a brother? Or a father? Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a daughter? Or a sister? Or a mother? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 8:46:25 PM EDT
[#11]
White man is dog to his woman. When she gets tired, he puts down his tomahawk to feed her laziness.
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 8:50:42 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RC03: I honestly can't take you seriously at this point. Good day to you. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Veccio: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By xd341: Originally Posted By Naamah: The percentage of each doesn't matter. Only the worst case scenarios. That's the point I've been trying to make. That's legit, it's understandable, but it's not factual or logical. It doesn't have to be, but it's important that we all recognize it for what it is. Except that's not irrational. There are thousands of women raped and murdered every year while going about their daily activities. Millions, if you start counting worldwide totals. And given the choice between two horrible possibilities, women are choosing the one that seems less horrible to them. Are there emotions involved? Sure. Logic too. But in no way is it irrational. Women are choosing what SEEMS less horrible based on an emotional illogical scenario. There's nothing logical about going 'hurr durr I choose to be with a bear', especially when the people saying it have to be terribly naive to believe it in the first place. The funny part is this; After they take their turn on Facebook (or whatever the fuck platform (apparently arfcom now) grandstanding about picking the bear. They will eventually realize the "random men" the other grandstanding women are talking about are their own fathers, husbands and sons. Except they aren’t. You’re choosing to turn it into that based on your own emotions over hearing that women consider the worst a bear can do to be preferable to the worst a man can do, but that doesn’t mean they’re saying what you’re taking from it. Of course some number of them have probably been molested by their fathers or brothers, so they may be factoring them into the equation. I just knew you wouldn't get it... Slow it down and think... The OTHER women, are talking about each other's fathers, husbands and sons. You know, like yours. That's the kind of shit those people are spreading. Pretty disgusting, isn't it? Some random woman has no reason to inherently trust my father, brother, or son. They don’t know them from Adam. Just like I don’t know their fathers, brothers, or sons. Every bad guy out there is for sure someone’s son, possibly someone’s brother or father. Being a father, brother, or son doesn’t exclude someone from being a bad guy. I know my male relatives are good guys, because I know them. I have a lifetime of experience with them. Some random woman doesn’t, and it doesn’t bother me a bit if they don’t want to be alone with them. I honestly can't take you seriously at this point. Good day to you. She argues just to argue (in bad faith) as many modern/progressive women do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 9:48:11 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macman37: Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a daughter? Or a sister? Or a mother? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macman37: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Veccio: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By xd341: Originally Posted By Naamah: The percentage of each doesn't matter. Only the worst case scenarios. That's the point I've been trying to make. That's legit, it's understandable, but it's not factual or logical. It doesn't have to be, but it's important that we all recognize it for what it is. Except that's not irrational. There are thousands of women raped and murdered every year while going about their daily activities. Millions, if you start counting worldwide totals. And given the choice between two horrible possibilities, women are choosing the one that seems less horrible to them. Are there emotions involved? Sure. Logic too. But in no way is it irrational. Women are choosing what SEEMS less horrible based on an emotional illogical scenario. There's nothing logical about going 'hurr durr I choose to be with a bear', especially when the people saying it have to be terribly naive to believe it in the first place. The funny part is this; After they take their turn on Facebook (or whatever the fuck platform (apparently arfcom now) grandstanding about picking the bear. They will eventually realize the "random men" the other grandstanding women are talking about are their own fathers, husbands and sons. Except they aren’t. You’re choosing to turn it into that based on your own emotions over hearing that women consider the worst a bear can do to be preferable to the worst a man can do, but that doesn’t mean they’re saying what you’re taking from it. Of course some number of them have probably been molested by their fathers or brothers, so they may be factoring them into the equation. I just knew you wouldn't get it... Slow it down and think... The OTHER women, are talking about each other's fathers, husbands and sons. You know, like yours. That's the kind of shit those people are spreading. Pretty disgusting, isn't it? Some random woman has no reason to inherently trust my father, brother, or son. They don’t know them from Adam. Just like I don’t know their fathers, brothers, or sons. Every bad guy out there is for sure someone’s son, possibly someone’s brother or father. Being a father, brother, or son doesn’t exclude someone from being a bad guy. I know my male relatives are good guys, because I know them. I have a lifetime of experience with them. Some random woman doesn’t, and it doesn’t bother me a bit if they don’t want to be alone with them. I honestly can't take you seriously at this point. Good day to you. Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a son? Or a brother? Or a father? Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a daughter? Or a sister? Or a mother? Nope. People are shady AF. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 9:49:09 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HecklerKac: She argues just to argue (in bad faith) as many modern/progressive women do. I don't think so. Men and women generally view these things VERY differently. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 9:49:45 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macman37: Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a daughter? Or a sister? Or a mother? I know two daughters. One I’m inclined to trust because I know her parents. The other one not so much; she’s kind of a loose cannon. I don’t trust my sister as far as could spit a rat. I trust my mother because I watched them close the lid on her and I followed her to the cemetery, watched them put her in ground, and fill in the grave. The cemetery is visible on Google Earth and I check now and then to make sure she hasn’t risen up out of the ground. IOW, trust but verify. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 9:50:50 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Naamah: Nope. People are shady AF. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By macman37: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Veccio: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By xd341: Originally Posted By Naamah: The percentage of each doesn't matter. Only the worst case scenarios. That's the point I've been trying to make. That's legit, it's understandable, but it's not factual or logical. It doesn't have to be, but it's important that we all recognize it for what it is. Except that's not irrational. There are thousands of women raped and murdered every year while going about their daily activities. Millions, if you start counting worldwide totals. And given the choice between two horrible possibilities, women are choosing the one that seems less horrible to them. Are there emotions involved? Sure. Logic too. But in no way is it irrational. Women are choosing what SEEMS less horrible based on an emotional illogical scenario. There's nothing logical about going 'hurr durr I choose to be with a bear', especially when the people saying it have to be terribly naive to believe it in the first place. The funny part is this; After they take their turn on Facebook (or whatever the fuck platform (apparently arfcom now) grandstanding about picking the bear. They will eventually realize the "random men" the other grandstanding women are talking about are their own fathers, husbands and sons. Except they aren’t. You’re choosing to turn it into that based on your own emotions over hearing that women consider the worst a bear can do to be preferable to the worst a man can do, but that doesn’t mean they’re saying what you’re taking from it. Of course some number of them have probably been molested by their fathers or brothers, so they may be factoring them into the equation. I just knew you wouldn't get it... Slow it down and think... The OTHER women, are talking about each other's fathers, husbands and sons. You know, like yours. That's the kind of shit those people are spreading. Pretty disgusting, isn't it? Some random woman has no reason to inherently trust my father, brother, or son. They don’t know them from Adam. Just like I don’t know their fathers, brothers, or sons. Every bad guy out there is for sure someone’s son, possibly someone’s brother or father. Being a father, brother, or son doesn’t exclude someone from being a bad guy. I know my male relatives are good guys, because I know them. I have a lifetime of experience with them. Some random woman doesn’t, and it doesn’t bother me a bit if they don’t want to be alone with them. I honestly can't take you seriously at this point. Good day to you. Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a son? Or a brother? Or a father? Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a daughter? Or a sister? Or a mother? Nope. People are shady AF. Appreciate the answer. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 9:52:41 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PlaneJane: I know two daughters. One I’m inclined to trust because I know her parents. The other one not so much; she’s kind of a loose cannon. I don’t trust my sister as far as could spit a rat. I trust my mother because I watched them close the lid on her and I followed her to the cemetery, watched them put her in ground, and fill in the grave. The cemetery is visible on Google Earth and I check now and then to make sure she hasn’t risen up out of the ground. IOW, trust but verify. What's your personal best distance for spitting a rat? Sounds very technique dependant. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 9:53:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: macman37]
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PlaneJane: I know two daughters. One I’m inclined to trust because I know her parents. The other one not so much; she’s kind of a loose cannon. I don’t trust my sister as far as could spit a rat. I trust my mother because I watched them close the lid on her and I followed her to the cemetery, watched them put her in ground, and fill in the grave. The cemetery is visible on Google Earth and I check now and then to make sure she hasn’t risen up out of the ground. IOW, trust but verify. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PlaneJane: Originally Posted By macman37: Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a daughter? Or a sister? Or a mother? I know two daughters. One I’m inclined to trust because I know her parents. The other one not so much; she’s kind of a loose cannon. I don’t trust my sister as far as could spit a rat. I trust my mother because I watched them close the lid on her and I followed her to the cemetery, watched them put her in ground, and fill in the grave. The cemetery is visible on Google Earth and I check now and then to make sure she hasn’t risen up out of the ground. IOW, trust but verify. Here’s what I know Jane, and I want to preface this by saying honestly, that I have enjoyed your posts here from the start: This entire thread’s worth of discussion is vulgar and wrong. We should honestly not even be entertaining it. It’s bullshit, designed to keep us mistrusting each other. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 9:53:33 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macman37: Appreciate the answer. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macman37: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By macman37: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Veccio: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By xd341: Originally Posted By Naamah: The percentage of each doesn't matter. Only the worst case scenarios. That's the point I've been trying to make. That's legit, it's understandable, but it's not factual or logical. It doesn't have to be, but it's important that we all recognize it for what it is. Except that's not irrational. There are thousands of women raped and murdered every year while going about their daily activities. Millions, if you start counting worldwide totals. And given the choice between two horrible possibilities, women are choosing the one that seems less horrible to them. Are there emotions involved? Sure. Logic too. But in no way is it irrational. Women are choosing what SEEMS less horrible based on an emotional illogical scenario. There's nothing logical about going 'hurr durr I choose to be with a bear', especially when the people saying it have to be terribly naive to believe it in the first place. The funny part is this; After they take their turn on Facebook (or whatever the fuck platform (apparently arfcom now) grandstanding about picking the bear. They will eventually realize the "random men" the other grandstanding women are talking about are their own fathers, husbands and sons. Except they aren’t. You’re choosing to turn it into that based on your own emotions over hearing that women consider the worst a bear can do to be preferable to the worst a man can do, but that doesn’t mean they’re saying what you’re taking from it. Of course some number of them have probably been molested by their fathers or brothers, so they may be factoring them into the equation. I just knew you wouldn't get it... Slow it down and think... The OTHER women, are talking about each other's fathers, husbands and sons. You know, like yours. That's the kind of shit those people are spreading. Pretty disgusting, isn't it? Some random woman has no reason to inherently trust my father, brother, or son. They don’t know them from Adam. Just like I don’t know their fathers, brothers, or sons. Every bad guy out there is for sure someone’s son, possibly someone’s brother or father. Being a father, brother, or son doesn’t exclude someone from being a bad guy. I know my male relatives are good guys, because I know them. I have a lifetime of experience with them. Some random woman doesn’t, and it doesn’t bother me a bit if they don’t want to be alone with them. I honestly can't take you seriously at this point. Good day to you. Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a son? Or a brother? Or a father? Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a daughter? Or a sister? Or a mother? Nope. People are shady AF. Appreciate the answer. So exactly what were you trying to pin me to? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 9:54:11 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Naamah: So exactly what were you trying to pin me to? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By macman37: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By macman37: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By RC03: Originally Posted By Veccio: Originally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By xd341: Originally Posted By Naamah: The percentage of each doesn't matter. Only the worst case scenarios. That's the point I've been trying to make. That's legit, it's understandable, but it's not factual or logical. It doesn't have to be, but it's important that we all recognize it for what it is. Except that's not irrational. There are thousands of women raped and murdered every year while going about their daily activities. Millions, if you start counting worldwide totals. And given the choice between two horrible possibilities, women are choosing the one that seems less horrible to them. Are there emotions involved? Sure. Logic too. But in no way is it irrational. Women are choosing what SEEMS less horrible based on an emotional illogical scenario. There's nothing logical about going 'hurr durr I choose to be with a bear', especially when the people saying it have to be terribly naive to believe it in the first place. The funny part is this; After they take their turn on Facebook (or whatever the fuck platform (apparently arfcom now) grandstanding about picking the bear. They will eventually realize the "random men" the other grandstanding women are talking about are their own fathers, husbands and sons. Except they aren’t. You’re choosing to turn it into that based on your own emotions over hearing that women consider the worst a bear can do to be preferable to the worst a man can do, but that doesn’t mean they’re saying what you’re taking from it. Of course some number of them have probably been molested by their fathers or brothers, so they may be factoring them into the equation. I just knew you wouldn't get it... Slow it down and think... The OTHER women, are talking about each other's fathers, husbands and sons. You know, like yours. That's the kind of shit those people are spreading. Pretty disgusting, isn't it? Some random woman has no reason to inherently trust my father, brother, or son. They don’t know them from Adam. Just like I don’t know their fathers, brothers, or sons. Every bad guy out there is for sure someone’s son, possibly someone’s brother or father. Being a father, brother, or son doesn’t exclude someone from being a bad guy. I know my male relatives are good guys, because I know them. I have a lifetime of experience with them. Some random woman doesn’t, and it doesn’t bother me a bit if they don’t want to be alone with them. I honestly can't take you seriously at this point. Good day to you. Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a son? Or a brother? Or a father? Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a daughter? Or a sister? Or a mother? Nope. People are shady AF. Appreciate the answer. So exactly what were you trying to pin me to? A shred of logical consistency. |
|
|
|
WA, USA
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 9:54:28 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RRA_223: Yet another proof that most modern women are insufferable cunts. "Coexist" bumper sticker while importing misogynistic illegals from third world countries and publicly shaming the men that forged from barbarianism the civilization that protects their right to prance around in yoga paints sipping lattes with an expectation of safety and comfort from the real predators that lurk in the woods.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 9:58:03 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 30calTBLkid: What's your personal best distance for spitting a rat? Sounds very technique dependant. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 10:01:31 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macman37: It’s bullshit, designed to keep us mistrusting each other. To be fair, I don’t trust anyone until I get to know them, and even then, there are levels of trust. There are people I would trust to select ripe avocados for me, and there are people I would trust to watch my pocketbook, and there are people I would trust to watch my children. Just because I would trust someone to pick me out a ripe avocado doesn’t mean I trust them to watch my children. Very different levels of trust. But realistically, if anyone is getting upset that the man vs. bear thing is a thing (because it sows discord and perpetuates mistrust), but they aren’t similarly speaking out when posters here call all women psychopaths and whores and children who shouldn’t have rights, I’d say they need to seriously examine how devoted they are to ending the divisiveness. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 10:13:12 PM EDT
[#24]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 10:14:05 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryNever change, man. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 10:14:33 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macman37: Here’s what I know Jane, and I want to preface this by saying honestly, that I have enjoyed your posts here from the start: This entire thread’s worth of discussion is vulgar and wrong. We should honestly not even be entertaining it. It’s bullshit, designed to keep us mistrusting each other. I think it's a fascinating topic. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 10:14:40 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ronin72: I used to think of you as one of the rare ones that had common sense and critical thinking skills. Thank you for correcting me.  Never clicked on an abortion thread? Oof. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 10:16:44 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryThread now contains furry. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 10:18:50 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By xd341: I gotta be honest, I've learned a few things in this thread, but the distance planejane can spit a rat would be by far the most interesting. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By xd341: Originally Posted By 30calTBLkid: What's your personal best distance for spitting a rat? Sounds very technique dependant. @PlaneJane Inquiring minds want to know. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 10:24:42 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TriggerGSP: Never clicked on an abortion thread? Oof. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TriggerGSP: Originally Posted By Ronin72: I used to think of you as one of the rare ones that had common sense and critical thinking skills. Thank you for correcting me. Never clicked on an abortion thread? Oof. Oh, this should be interesting. What do you think my position on abortion is? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 10:35:43 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Naamah: To be fair, I don’t trust anyone until I get to know them, and even then, there are levels of trust. There are people I would trust to select ripe avocados for me, and there are people I would trust to watch my pocketbook, and there are people I would trust to watch my children. Just because I would trust someone to pick me out a ripe avocado doesn’t mean I trust them to watch my children. Very different levels of trust. But realistically, if anyone is getting upset that the man vs. bear thing is a thing (because it sows discord and perpetuates mistrust), but they aren’t similarly speaking out when posters here call all women psychopaths and whores and children who shouldn’t have rights, I’d say they need to seriously examine how devoted they are to ending the divisiveness. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Naamah: Originally Posted By macman37: It’s bullshit, designed to keep us mistrusting each other. To be fair, I don’t trust anyone until I get to know them, and even then, there are levels of trust. There are people I would trust to select ripe avocados for me, and there are people I would trust to watch my pocketbook, and there are people I would trust to watch my children. Just because I would trust someone to pick me out a ripe avocado doesn’t mean I trust them to watch my children. Very different levels of trust. But realistically, if anyone is getting upset that the man vs. bear thing is a thing (because it sows discord and perpetuates mistrust), but they aren’t similarly speaking out when posters here call all women psychopaths and whores and children who shouldn’t have rights, I’d say they need to seriously examine how devoted they are to ending the divisiveness. I do agree by and large. There are those I’d trust similarly. I’ve been called a “white knight” and other things by the male folk here in many other threads when I just keep an even keel about things gender related… The guys who call women psycho and whores have been hurt by women, and would be deserving of our pity if it weren’t for their pugnaciousness. I sincerely hope you were not referring to me obliquely with your last paragraph. I am telling people that this discussion is irritatingly divisive and unnecessary and have also defended women (see above) when appropriate. This “bear vs. man” discussion is decidedly not a place I would ever defend women (or anyone) in. The premise is preposterous on it’s face and we should laugh at people seriously debating it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 10:37:18 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TaskForce: I think it's a fascinating topic. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TaskForce: Originally Posted By macman37: Here’s what I know Jane, and I want to preface this by saying honestly, that I have enjoyed your posts here from the start: This entire thread’s worth of discussion is vulgar and wrong. We should honestly not even be entertaining it. It’s bullshit, designed to keep us mistrusting each other. I think it's a fascinating topic. You’re free to do so and rock on. I think it’s an unnecessary distraction meant to keep us mistrusting each other via mental masturbation. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 10:42:31 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macman37: You're free to do so and rock on. I think it's an unnecessary distraction meant to keep us mistrusting each other via mental masturbation. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 10:57:59 PM EDT
[#34]
Let's switch this up a little bit and change the venue.
Would you rather ride an elevator up 20 floors with a random man, or a random bear? Bear in mind (chuckle) that the random man in the elevator could be just as psychotic as the random man you pictured in the woods. So which do you choose for your elevator companion? If you choose the man, is it because you know there are other men nearby in the building who might come to your rescue? They are men too. Is it because the bear is much more powerful than the man, and you might stand a better chance of surviving a fight with the man? Because that same logic applies in the woods as well. I'm really interested in hearing the answer to this. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 11:00:53 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macman37: You’re free to do so and rock on. I think it’s an unnecessary distraction meant to keep us mistrusting each other via mental masturbation. I don't understand how this is different than any other social commentary. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 11:09:54 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By xd341: I gotta be honest, I've learned a few things in this thread, but the distance planejane can spit a rat would be by far the most interesting. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By xd341: Originally Posted By 30calTBLkid: What's your personal best distance for spitting a rat? Sounds very technique dependant. I hate to disappoint you boys, it’s just a figure of speech intended to convey an inexpressibly short distance. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 11:29:09 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jambalaya: Let's switch this up a little bit and change the venue. Would you rather ride an elevator up 20 floors with a random man, or a random bear? Bear in mind (chuckle) that the random man in the elevator could be just as psychotic as the random man you pictured in the woods. So which do you choose for your elevator companion? If you choose the man, is it because you know there are other men nearby in the building who might come to your rescue? They are men too. Is it because the bear is much more powerful than the man, and you might stand a better chance of surviving a fight with the man? Because that same logic applies in the woods as well. I'm really interested in hearing the answer to this. You consider being confined to a space the size of an elevator with a bear to be the same as being in the same woods? The most interesting thing about this thread is seeing how people interpret a scenario that offers little in terms of explicit detail. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2024 11:36:10 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bohr_Adam: You consider being confined to a space the size of an elevator with a bear to be the same as being in the same woods? The most interesting thing about this thread is seeing how people interpret a scenario that offers little in terms of explicit detail. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bohr_Adam: Originally Posted By Jambalaya: Let's switch this up a little bit and change the venue. Would you rather ride an elevator up 20 floors with a random man, or a random bear? Bear in mind (chuckle) that the random man in the elevator could be just as psychotic as the random man you pictured in the woods. So which do you choose for your elevator companion? If you choose the man, is it because you know there are other men nearby in the building who might come to your rescue? They are men too. Is it because the bear is much more powerful than the man, and you might stand a better chance of surviving a fight with the man? Because that same logic applies in the woods as well. I'm really interested in hearing the answer to this. You consider being confined to a space the size of an elevator with a bear to be the same as being in the same woods? The most interesting thing about this thread is seeing how people interpret a scenario that offers little in terms of explicit detail. |
|
|
|
SD, USA
|
Posted: 5/16/2024 1:25:01 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macman37: Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a daughter? Or a sister? Or a mother? Pregnant women are statistically the worst. Just under a million kill their own offspring, while all additional intentional homicides are less than 25 thousand. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/16/2024 1:43:15 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PlaneJane: I hate to disappoint you boys, it’s just a figure of speech intended to convey an inexpressibly short distance. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PlaneJane: Originally Posted By xd341: Originally Posted By 30calTBLkid: What's your personal best distance for spitting a rat? Sounds very technique dependant. I hate to disappoint you boys, it’s just a figure of speech intended to convey an inexpressibly short distance. I knew it. No one would spit a perfectly good rat out. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/16/2024 1:45:00 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jambalaya: Let's switch this up a little bit and change the venue. Would you rather ride an elevator up 20 floors with a random man, or a random bear? Bear in mind (chuckle) that the random man in the elevator could be just as psychotic as the random man you pictured in the woods. So which do you choose for your elevator companion? If you choose the man, is it because you know there are other men nearby in the building who might come to your rescue? They are men too. Is it because the bear is much more powerful than the man, and you might stand a better chance of surviving a fight with the man? Because that same logic applies in the woods as well. I'm really interested in hearing the answer to this. I'm not coming to that rescue. "Help, there's a bear in the elevator!" Yeah, right. Oldest trick in the book. That's a mugging waiting to happen. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/16/2024 2:21:33 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HecklerKac: I personally know 2 guys that are on lists because they dated a 17 year old girl when they were 18. I'm guessing the same goes for other statistics. There are so many laws now that we are all criminals. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HecklerKac: Originally Posted By wyomingnick: Originally Posted By Notcalifornialegal: Originally Posted By xd341: But it's not 1 in 100 it's 1 in 100,000 or 50,000. That's the entire point. If you encountered 10K bears in the wild, you'd get eaten. We have ole timmy what's his name as proof. He didn't get to 10K bears, got eaten, he was an idiot that took his idiot girlfriend down with him. She, ironically, chose the man, still got eaten by the bear. Sometimes you can't win. That makes bears more dangerous by a factor of 5 or 10, ya know as long as we are making shit up. So in a pure random situation you'd have better odds choosing the random man. But men are somehow more dangerous. It's not true, we all know it's not true, but there is a point that is trying to be made. Men are bad, worse than bears even. The problem is the point that is really being made is that women are emotional and illogical and probably shouldn't be trusted with life or death decisions. That's not right, it's not fair or good for women. Yet here we are. memetic warfare achievement unlocked....."own goal" Ehh.... it's probably closer to 1 in 100. Yeah there's a lot more bad men out there than one in 50,000. Criminal records and sex offender registry should make that a pretty easy hypothesis to prove, the amount of men that would do harm to a woman or even a man for that matter in the woods if they were totally alone with no witnesses and had full ability to do what they wanted is a lot higher than one in 50,000. The good news is most of those violent criminally-minded Men aren't likely to be found in the woods, they're more likely to be found on city streets where they're a little more limited with what they can get away with.. I personally know 2 guys that are on lists because they dated a 17 year old girl when they were 18. I'm guessing the same goes for other statistics. There are so many laws now that we are all criminals. I get that but I am talking about real criminals. 17 and 18 won't do it in most states, but I don't doubt you either I know it will in some. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/16/2024 2:25:11 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jambalaya: Let's switch this up a little bit and change the venue. Would you rather ride an elevator up 20 floors with a random man, or a random bear? Bear in mind (chuckle) that the random man in the elevator could be just as psychotic as the random man you pictured in the woods. So which do you choose for your elevator companion? If you choose the man, is it because you know there are other men nearby in the building who might come to your rescue? They are men too. Is it because the bear is much more powerful than the man, and you might stand a better chance of surviving a fight with the man? Because that same logic applies in the woods as well. I'm really interested in hearing the answer to this. This is an interesting change of venue vs the woods. And I think picking the average man should be the obvious answer for all but a few completely batshit insane women. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/16/2024 4:07:58 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JackRebney: Retarded feminist/leftist shit, near as I can gather. Something about women would rather be alone in the woods with a bear than a man, I think is what I've gathered without really looking into it. That's exactly what it is. Combination of fear, sexism and inability to understand statistics. "There are more sexual assaults than bear attacks so I'd be safer with a bear" |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/16/2024 5:31:42 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PlaneJane: I hate to disappoint you boys, it's just a figure of speech intended to convey an inexpressibly short distance. It's still the most interesting part of this thread. I'd actually never heard that one. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/16/2024 5:33:19 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bohr_Adam: You consider being confined to a space the size of an elevator with a bear to be the same as being in the same woods? The most interesting thing about this thread is seeing how people interpret a scenario that offers little in terms of explicit detail. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/16/2024 5:34:41 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 30calTBLkid: I'm not coming to that rescue. "Help, there's a bear in the elevator!" Yeah, right. Oldest trick in the book. That's a mugging waiting to happen. Bro...who hurt you?  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/16/2024 7:32:18 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TaskForce: I don't understand how this is different than any other social commentary. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TaskForce: Originally Posted By macman37: You’re free to do so and rock on. I think it’s an unnecessary distraction meant to keep us mistrusting each other via mental masturbation. I don't understand how this is different than any other social commentary. Unlike true social commentary, this is literally simply meant to make women mistrust men, with the reciprocal “bitches be crazy” from the MGTOW crowd, of which we have a sizable contingent. The fact this wasn’t laughed out of here on page one is kind of sad. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/16/2024 8:51:21 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By xd341: No, we get it. It's still the most interesting part of this thread. I'd actually never heard that one. It’s certainly not original. I’m not that creative. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/16/2024 9:43:49 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By winxlite: Pregnant women are statistically the worst. Just under a million kill their own offspring, while all additional intentional homicides are less than 25 thousand. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By winxlite: Originally Posted By macman37: Do…do you automatically trust someone because they are a daughter? Or a sister? Or a mother? Pregnant women are statistically the worst. Just under a million kill their own offspring, while all additional intentional homicides are less than 25 thousand. Puts it into perspective. |
|
|
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
