publiusvarus wrote:
Couldn't be that women actually get angry more often than men?
I would imagine that that would depend a lot on what sort of men they spend their time with......
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Buawhahahaha! The Hellbeast goes postal!
Buawhahahaha! The Hellbeast goes postal!Follow
Couldn't be that women actually get angry more often than men?
I would imagine that that would depend a lot on what sort of men they spend their time with......
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
That's angry? Irritation at a stupid question maybe.
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
I will however say that Clinton looks like hell in that video. I don't know if she was suffering from African jungle plague or jetlagged or bad lighting or what but she looks like she's on death's door. Even compared to photos from a day or two ago.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Quote:
I think most women have witnessed men engage in aggressive **** waving contests, only to criticize women as being unreasonable when they detect a whiff of anger. It definitely frustrates assertive women in positions of power who are always in an unenviable position of toeing a very tight line with much less latitude than their (white) male counterparts.
I have never met a lady, or man for that matter, who was more emotional or angry than I am on average. I'm quite taciturn about things for most people, but if I trust the person, I'm often assertive and very willing to make my thoughts clear. That doesn't seem to matter, though. Culturally, men and women seem to have separate vehicles for expressing their anger. Men don't, and eventually blow up all over the place. Women can just let it out sporadically, we all complain about how dumb the other gender is when it comes to dealling with these mental issues, and then shrug it off, accept that we won't ever understand the other sex, and then laugh about it. It's almost like a coping mechanism.
That's how it's supposed to work, but whenever sexism rears its head it's not just women that get handed a **** sandwich: when you're operating under the mindset that ladies fly off the handle, you make it so that men can not fly off the handle, disenfranchising both genders. It sickens me as a man, independently of the repugnance of typical women oppression, that men have this opinion of themselves. So, hey men? Stop being sexist against men please.
I thought Pensive was a chick. Tailmon syndrome?
MentalFrog wrote:
I thought Pensive was a chick. Tailmon syndrome?
I always picture Pensive as a gently pulsating disembodied brain floating in a tank of liquid nutrients.
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
Mmm, gentle pulsation.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Quote:
I thought Pensive was a chick. Tailmon syndrome?
Understandable, given how emotional he is. Real men don't have emotions.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
I think it's interesting to notice the difference in how the men and women of the forum are reacting. It is not entirely different across gender lines (like Joph and Ash are more in line with the majority of the women) but I think it says something culturally about how women's anger is interpreted. I think most women have witnessed men engage in aggressive **** waving contests, only to criticize women as being unreasonable when they detect a whiff of anger. It definitely frustrates assertive women in positions of power who are always in an unenviable position of toeing a very tight line with much less latitude than their (white) male counterparts. (wualified only because men of color, from what I've observed, are definitely criticized more often for their anger)
The difference between men and women here is that men will call out other men for being jackasses. Women must form a support group and rally the troops.
See how the female posters have reacted in this thread as a classic example.
Edited, Aug 11th 2009 6:24pm by BrownDuck
Heh. You're such a tool sometimes, BD.
#62REDACTED,
Posted: Aug 11 2009 at 3:46 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) It ain't easy, bein' cheesy.
The Great BrownDuck wrote:
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
I think it's interesting to notice the difference in how the men and women of the forum are reacting. It is not entirely different across gender lines (like Joph and Ash are more in line with the majority of the women) but I think it says something culturally about how women's anger is interpreted. I think most women have witnessed men engage in aggressive **** waving contests, only to criticize women as being unreasonable when they detect a whiff of anger. It definitely frustrates assertive women in positions of power who are always in an unenviable position of toeing a very tight line with much less latitude than their (white) male counterparts. (wualified only because men of color, from what I've observed, are definitely criticized more often for their anger)
The difference between men and women here is that men will call out other men for being jackasses. Women must form a support group and rally the troops.
See how the female posters have reacted in this thread as a classic example.
Edited, Aug 11th 2009 6:24pm by BrownDuck
Or see the Sarah Palin thread, for another example.
The Great BrownDuck wrote:
See how the female posters have reacted in this thread as a classic example.
Male posters protested as well...
When I said that Totem had "issues," I meant with women. Of course, he wouldn't say these things about a Republican woman, but still.
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
Or see the Sarah Palin thread, for another example.
Even women have a tolerance threshold.
Quote:
Male posters protested as well...
Yeah, I was just making a casual generalization. It's my specialty. For what it's worth, I don't think Hilary was "over the top", but she should have asked for clarification or simply reserved comment, IMO.
The Great BrownDuck wrote:
For what it's worth, I don't think Hilary was "over the top", but she should have asked for clarification or simply reserved comment, IMO.
No, she should have kneed him in the nuts and walked away.
See, we've got this the wrong way round. If women become so easily emotional and angry, because of biological reasons, then we should allow them more leeway in being aggressive and violent. The threshold should be lower, instead of higher. After all, they can't help it. It's in their genes. It's nature.
So yes, a knee in the balls, and maybe a shove to the ground. It's only fair.
trickybeck wrote:
Of course, he wouldn't say these things about a Republican woman, but still.
Republican women arn't actually *real* women, thats why.
I'm no expert in alien anatomy, but that hand doesn't look completely human to me.....
And as for that Michelle Malkin bint! Don't get me started....
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
paulsol wrote:
trickybeck wrote:
Of course, he wouldn't say these things about a Republican woman, but still.
Republican women arn't actually *real* women, thats why.
I'm no expert in alien anatomy, but that hand doesn't look completely human to me.....
And as for that Michelle Malkin bint! Don't get me started....
Gah! Post a warning with that shit, will ya? You never know when someone's kid might be playing at their knees and catch a glimpse of something that looks like it might come creeping out of the closet one night...
Quote:
If women become so easily emotional and angry, because of biological reasons, then we should allow them more leeway in being aggressive and violent. The threshold should be lower, instead of higher. After all, they can't help it. It's in their genes. It's nature.
Maybe women are just... unnatural!
I saw it on the news and thought it was a *****-slap of hilariously epic proportions.
I don't think Mrs. Clinton likes her husband very much.
I don't think Mrs. Clinton likes her husband very much.
The Great BrownDuck wrote:
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
I think it's interesting to notice the difference in how the men and women of the forum are reacting. It is not entirely different across gender lines (like Joph and Ash are more in line with the majority of the women) but I think it says something culturally about how women's anger is interpreted. I think most women have witnessed men engage in aggressive **** waving contests, only to criticize women as being unreasonable when they detect a whiff of anger. It definitely frustrates assertive women in positions of power who are always in an unenviable position of toeing a very tight line with much less latitude than their (white) male counterparts. (wualified only because men of color, from what I've observed, are definitely criticized more often for their anger)
The difference between men and women here is that men will call out other men for being jackasses. Women must form a support group and rally the troops.
See how the female posters have reacted in this thread as a classic example.
Edited, Aug 11th 2009 6:24pm by BrownDuck
Did you have this expectation that the women in this thread would agree with your stance that a woman shouldn't be president or did you realize that your statement just reinforced concerns that criticisms of her anger is interpreted as sexism?
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
The Great BrownDuck wrote:
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
I think it's interesting to notice the difference in how the men and women of the forum are reacting. It is not entirely different across gender lines (like Joph and Ash are more in line with the majority of the women) but I think it says something culturally about how women's anger is interpreted. I think most women have witnessed men engage in aggressive **** waving contests, only to criticize women as being unreasonable when they detect a whiff of anger. It definitely frustrates assertive women in positions of power who are always in an unenviable position of toeing a very tight line with much less latitude than their (white) male counterparts. (wualified only because men of color, from what I've observed, are definitely criticized more often for their anger)
The difference between men and women here is that men will call out other men for being jackasses. Women must form a support group and rally the troops.
See how the female posters have reacted in this thread as a classic example.
Edited, Aug 11th 2009 6:24pm by BrownDuck
It is Nihilist to deny out emotions,of which anger is one. It's not something to be suppressed, but expressed and fade away. In the most pleasurable way possible. Considering the anger that such an insult would inflict into Hillary's mind, she showed totally understandable that she castrate the guy, but a tiny little scornful clearification is too angry for you?
The Great BrownDuck wrote:
men will call out other men for being jackasses.
They like to claim they will, but spend just as much time ******** behind the scenes as women do.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
I think it's interesting to notice the difference in how the men and women of the forum are reacting. It is not entirely different across gender lines (like Joph and Ash are more in line with the majority of the women) but I think it says something culturally about how women's anger is interpreted. I think most women have witnessed men engage in aggressive **** waving contests, only to criticize women as being unreasonable when they detect a whiff of anger. It definitely frustrates assertive women in positions of power who are always in an unenviable position of toeing a very tight line with much less latitude than their (white) male counterparts. (wualified only because men of color, from what I've observed, are definitely criticized more often for their anger)
Edited, Aug 11th 2009 2:50pm by Annabella
Edited, Aug 11th 2009 2:50pm by Annabella
To be fair, my opinion would've been just the same had a male mimicked Hilary's response to the letter. It has 0 to do with me being a male and her being a female and, in my opinion, absolutely nothing to do with sexism, outside of BD's typical attempt at trolling the female populous of Allakhazam.
Her gestures alone gave hindsight that she felt insulted someone would ask her of her husband's opinion. Honestly, I would've asked first what the interpreter meant then maybe be a bit perturbed. She jumped the gun right off of the bat and felt the need to remind everyone that she's the secretary of state.
"I think it's interesting to notice the difference in how the men and women of the forum are reacting. It is not entirely different across gender lines (like Joph and Ash are more in line with the majority of the women)" --Anna
Well, yeah, of course.
/glances surreptitously at Jophiel's and Ash's prominent camel toes
Totem
Well, yeah, of course.
/glances surreptitously at Jophiel's and Ash's prominent camel toes
Totem
You could hardly call that postal. I felt that her response, given the question that she had, was perfectly acceptable. I know that if I was constantly living in the shadow of someone else's limelight, despite my own accomplishments, I'd be a bit cross about the subject as well. It's human nature.
Recent Visitors: 310
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (310)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Buawhahahaha! The Hellbeast goes postal!
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC