@divegeester saidWhatever.
@Suzianne I see you have once again rocked up in an upset mood after your shift at the post office and decided to spend most of your posts bothering with me again 🙂
@very-rusty saidIf he does, he's enunciating it about as poorly as Tony Maggio did in third grade.
Suzianne,
I believe the Geester has a bad crush on you! 🙂
-VR
Tony sat behind me and entertained himself by pulling on my braids.
@suzianne saidYours is an odd brand of feminism.
If he does, he's enunciating it about as poorly as Tony Maggio did in third grade.
Tony sat behind me and entertained himself by pulling on my braids.
Suggesting that the reason a man disagrees with you - or is in conflict with you - is merely that he has some sort of sexual interest in you... isn't that just taking a rather shabby leaf from the humdrum misogynistic objectifying-of-women playbook?
Why can't the reason a man disagrees with you be that there is something of substance that you, as a woman, represent ~ and something of substance that you have to say? Why the trivializing sexual/romantic angle?
I am surprised that you go along with this rather demeaning banter where you are being cast as a sexual object and your sexual allure is the only reason that someone would engage negatively with what you say.
As I say, yours is an odd ~ dare I say, even superficial? ~ brand of online feminism.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28784
112d
@fmf saidHer post started, " 'IF' he does..."
Yours is an odd brand of feminism.
Suggesting that the reason a man disagrees with you - or is in conflict with you - is merely that he has some sort of sexual interest in you... isn't that just taking a rather shabby leaf from the humdrum misogynistic objectifying-of-women playbook?
Why can't the reason a man disagrees with you be that there is something of substance tha ...[text shortened]... t you say.
As I say, yours is an odd ~ dare I say, even superficial? ~ brand of online feminism.
Did you miss the 'IF' or was it just inconvenient for your argument?
112d
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI think what I have said about Suzianne's peculiar attitude to Very Rusty's banter on this occasion - and at least two previous occasions - is valid.
Her post started, " 'IF' he does..."
Did you miss the 'IF' or was it just inconvenient for your argument?
- Joined
- 14 Jan 19
- Moves
- 4150
He is well aware of 'ifs,' but he decides when to ignore them. Occasionally, he uses an 'if' statement and then unilaterally makes it disappear. In other words, he uses it correctly at first as a proposition, but in the next sentence he disregards it by affirming it with an "is" within the sentence.
112d
@pettytalk saidVery Rusty has been riffing in this particular way... a kind of vaguely misogynistic femme fatale riff... repeatedly over quite a long period of time. I find it curious that Suzianne goes along with it and doesn't just give it short shrift, no ifs or buts.
He is well aware of 'ifs,' but he decides when to ignore them. Occasionally, he uses an 'if' statement and then unilaterally makes it disappear. In other words, he uses it correctly at first as a proposition, but in the next sentence he disregards it by affirming it with an "is" within the sentence.
112d
I think daft speculation about divegeester's clashes with Suzianne being somehow connected to how sexually attractive she might be to him is a rather demeaning way of talking about her/to her. Surely the men who rush to her defence as if she were a damsel in distress think there's more substance to her than being a sexual object that causes sexual frustration?
112d
@ghost-of-a-duke saidIt wasn't her suggestion, never said it was; it's what Very Rusty is insinuating. He's done it numerous times. I am baffled as to why she tolerates the rather demeaning whiff that there is coming from this riff.
This wasn't her suggestion. Why the pretence that it was?
@ghost-of-a-duke saidNo. "You" refers to Suzianne. It is Very Rusty who has repeatedly been suggesting that the reason divegeester disagrees with her [i.e. Suzianne, who I refer to as "you" when I address her] is merely that he has some sort of sexual interest in her. No mistake. What I said was very precise.
You directed your post at Suzianne and said, "Suggesting that the reason a man disagrees with you - or is in conflict with you - is merely that he has some sort of sexual interest in you..."
Did you write 'you' by mistake?!