Social conservatism

[Ban-jani]

i dont really know what to say to this.
your own words highlight why you are wrong
i will take a few examples for you.
Walking a woman home, i too would do this if i thought they were in any way vulnerable, but unlike you i would also do this with my male friends if i thought they were vulnerable. You are assuming the women are vulnerable because they are women.
Carrying a bag. Again I too would carry a bag for a woman if i was stronger and they were struggling, but unlike you i would also do this for a male friend if i was stronger and they were struggling
I try to include everyone in a conversation regardless of being a man or a womnen

Yes because you want a society that doesn’t differentiate between the sexes.

We are talking generally here.

I did say if the man was elderly I would do it. If my mate had an injury or was disabled, I’d carry his bag.

What I am saying is I would offer it to every woman I come across, I wouldn’t automatically to every man.

If I see a 20/30/40/50 year old bloke, who looks reasonably fit and healthy, carrying a suitcase on to a train, I’m not going to offer to do it for him. He’d think I was barking mad.

I would to a woman of any age.

If a man was vulnerable, maybe as I’ve described before, elderly for example, then yes, I’d make sure he got home alright too.

But I wouldn’t for your average bloke who is of fitness and health, but I would for ALL women.

I honestly cannot fathom what’s wrong with any of that. There isn’t, you’re just being purposefully difficult.

 

[dronefromsector7G]

We've noticed.

Play to your strengths

 

[pirate]

Yes because you want a society that doesn’t differentiate between the sexes.

We are talking generally here.

I did say if the man was elderly I would do it. If my mate had an injury or was disabled, I’d carry his bag.

What I am saying is I would offer it to every woman I come across, I wouldn’t automatically to every man.

If I see a 20/30/40/50 year old bloke, who looks reasonably fit and healthy, carrying a suitcase on to a train, I’m not going to offer to do it for him. He’d think I was barking mad.

I would to a woman of any age.

If a man was vulnerable, maybe as I’ve described before, elderly for example, then yes, I’d make sure he got home alright too.

But I wouldn’t for your average bloke who is of fitness and health, but I would for ALL women.

I honestly cannot fathom what’s wrong with any of that. There isn’t, you’re just being purposefully difficult.

i know you cant see whats wrong with it.

but it is wrong, because all those actions assumes the woman cant look after herself simply because shes a woman.

i know you wont understand or agree with this, so should we just leave it there instead of going round and round?

 

[Ban-jani]

i know you cant see whats wrong with it.

but it is wrong, because all those actions assumes the woman cant look after herself simply because shes a woman.

i know you wont understand or agree with this, so should we just leave it there instead of going round and round?

Well I can honestly tell you that most of the time I offer these things I am taken up on it and even when I am not, they are very appreciative I’ve offered.

Maybe you know more than women and can speak for them though, eh?

Yeah let’s leave it there, you’re making me despair.

 

[urban genie]

Play to your strengths

****

 

[Ancient Citizen]

weekly thread with left wingers asking why normal people aren't like them and then backslapping themselves about it with the usual derogatory tone until one of them hits Godwin's gammon law and they have to start yet another thread.

Lol, it's like a gathering at a pub called 'The Losers Retreat,' vague philosophical sermons on the beauties of socialism, and the usual sniping and
disparaging of anything else. All finished off with a back slapping, self congratulatory, smug fest, that then turns to wails of frustration when
a 'Working Class' completely disregards the argument, by not voting for
any of it. What follows, is rage, followed by frustration and name calling
at this demographic, and surprise, surprise, they hear it, and give it the finger
yet again.
I couldn't be arsed trying, if the penny hasn't dropped yet, all it brings is more misery, stick to the football.

 

[urban genie]

You’re actually misinterpreting what I’ve said. I think there’s a handful of you who make it your mission to try and twist what I say out of some dislike, it’s odd.

My point about intimidation was in a physical sense, I said “especially if it’s dark and they’re alone”.

I didn’t mean in a fucking meeting in an office.

Our female CEO and our ex female CEO would have me for breakfast in a meeting but they’d likely feel more intimidated than I would walking home at night.

These are the subtle differences I’m talking about.

To put that into context, I usually cross the road and not walk directly behind a woman if it’s late and I’m on my way home from the pub, I wouldn’t necessarily do this for a bloke.

Now you are just making shit up as you go along everytime someone challenges your comments you change their meaning.

At no point last night did you bring in the Physical aspect into this, you waffled about language, people disagreed you then waffled about men working harder that's why they succeed, now thise have both been shot down as bollocks you turn to the physical aspect, strangely after I just mentioned it

You are very good at using a posters reply to your advantage I will grant you that.


Also you state this was a throw away comment about men and women you originlly said in passing, yet you ended that post with some bollocks about leftwing pseudoscience, purposely inviting the debate that has since transpired, something you are also very good at, diverting a thread to a topic you want and then trying to prove your ideology is superior or right, unfortunatley you normally get shot down by most psoters, who in turn you then generalise as either commies or far left or coyrbinistas, sometime implying it was a joke because of it's ridiculousness.

Naturally posters like Myself and Rascal will never agree with you and I can say I have a bias opinion especially with conservatism and capitalism, I dislike both, but a lot of posters here are centrists and have still called you out as wrong.

Anyway it's saturday and I'm bored of this now, time to do something with my day off

 

[stonerblue]

1/ Belief in hetrosexual marriage - yes

2/ and rejection of same sex couples - no, the gay social conservatives say “heeeyyyyy”

3/ Reducing government and state dependency and shrinking the state - no (social not economic, read the title)

4/ Anti-abortion - absolutely, killing humans is morally reprehensible

5/ Anti-euthanasia - see above

6/ Anti- immigration unless it suits - limit it, not “anti”

7/ Belief that church and state should intertwine - not precious about this, religious freedom is more important

8/ Where they have one a devotion to the monarchy - We are better for Her Majesty

9/ Nationalism (not to be confused with patriotism) - utter piddle

Who the fuck are you to say abortion and/or euthanasia is morally reprehensible?

 

[Ban-jani]

Now you are just making shit up as you go along everytime someone challenges your comments you change their meaning.

At no point last night did you bring in the Physical aspect into this, you waffled about language, people disagreed you then waffled about men working harder that's why they succeed, now thise hqve both been shot down as bollocks you turn to the physical aspect, strangely after Ixjust mentioned it

You are very good at using a posters reply to your advantage I will grant you that.


Also you state this was a throw away comment about men and women you originlly said in passing, yet you ended that post with some bollocks about leftwing pseudoscience, purposely inviting the debate that has since transpired, something you are also very good at, diverting a thread to a topic you want and then trying to prove your ideology is superior or right, unfortunatley you normally get shot down by most psoters, who in turn you then genrealise as either commies or far left or coyrbinistas, sometime implying it was a joke because of it's ridiculousness.

Naturally posters like Myself and Rascal will never agree with you and I can say I have a bias opinion especially with conservatism and capitalism, I dislike both, but a lot of poster here are centrists and still call you out as wrong.

Anywqy it's saturday and I'm bored of this now, time to do something with my day off

Lloyd made the suggestion that conservatives keep women down because we’re somehow scared of them.

The notion that men and women are the same in all areas and it’s only society that makes them different, is a pseudoscience that has come out of the identity political crowd, which is left wing. It’s not all left wingers, but it has come out of that area of politics. For the record my mates are all Labour voters and most of them disagree with that notion and would agree with me on the how-you-treat-women debate.

Men on average do work longer hours and women have kids (yes they are different, who’d have thought) and this means careers are affected. Of course some women don’t and go to the top but generally speaking, more women choose to be homemakers and work part time than men.

None of what I’ve said is false and I stand by it. None of it has been shot down.

Rascal is a hateful bigot, I’ve no time for him. Regarding centrists, that’s because centrists typically have liberal social views and right wing economic views. Not always, but centrism in Britain is founded on liberalism, as you probably know. That’s why they disagree with me.

Anyway, enjoy your Saturday.

 

[Ban-jani]

Who the fuck are you to say abortion and/or euthanasia is morally reprehensible?

Who the fuck are you to say they’re not?