Sex and the City quotes foster (female) stupidity

Calling you out. You are a liar and a coward. I never said that. You can’t actually make an argument. So you hallucinate. You see yourself as a rebel and I could fucking pop down to any bar, board room, military base, back room senate hearing and find a lot of guys spouting the same has not changed in thousands of years philosophy. And the more Power the men have in the World, the more they would, when they Think no mikes are around and often when they don’t even care if there care, spout the same shit you do.

That whore Word fits men better than women.

That doesn’t mean men are worse humans. The Word whore has a tremendous hatred of sex in it. You Think you are a maverick, male centered guy, and here you are spouting memes that come from religious hatred of the act of sex (and then also of women). If you really looked into it, you would see the incredible self-hatred men have that they do not face and that is driving this hatred of women, but you are like most of the right wing Conspiracy web sites - sure, they bitch about the illuminati, but nothing brings out their blood lust like a good thread bashing blacks or women.

You are a cliche.

And that particular cliche is subservient to Power. Good boy.

[/quote]

[/quote]
I’m a cliche? Says the metrosexual female ass kissing male feminista.

Tell your college campus feminist professor I said hello.

I don’t see “whore” as meaning anything bad.

Metrosexual???LOL. The rest is even more of a joke.
You have no idea what I am, how I live, any of it, and you still have no arguments.
You got nothing, frat boy.

What’s it mean to you? It obviously means something bad to JOker.

Moreno I’ve been called a leftist, a capitalist pig, a jesus freak, a crackhead…all kinds of things by all kinds of people. I think one thing people like about the internet is that they can decide who you are in their minds and then argue with whatever they hate whether you’re actually that person or not.

I think of “whore” the same way I think of “chef” or “car salesman” or “janitor”. It’s just a job. Can’t worry about being moral and all that until you’ve got food and shelter. Once the bills are paid we can entertain all kinds of philosophical things. I can’t judge people on how they make their money. (With some limits of course, I mean…I don’t want hitmen to have it easy.)

So you were just thinking that more women make money in the sex trade by directly selling their own physical contact than men do. I think that is true. I don’t think that is all that Joker is on about.

Thing is, for males it isn’t bad to be a whore because it doesn’t make them deviate from their role, in fact, it may help them achieve their role and the role of males is to spread their seed as much as they can (which means to have sex with as many women as they can).

The role of the female is a mother role - to have a child and caress it, and since you can have a child only with 1 man, the more the female deviates from being with only 1 man the more she fails at her role.

Yes, men and women are different organisms and should be judged by different standards. God designed it that way (right, my fellow theists?), so who are you to say otherwise?

Also, who the fuck is Joker?

Also, don’t forget other important roles of women, such as cooking, cleaning, vacuuming et cetera.

Frat boy? :laughing:

My only beef is the lack of honesty on women’s part.

Today there is this false veneer of bullshit hanging around women and sexual relationships.

If women were more honest with themselves, men, and the rest of society concerning their true nature there wouldn’t be any problem whatsoever.

With such honesty the treachery of women would become well known and men along with all of society would act accordingly in combating against it.

Good imagery 3sum.

Women belong in the submission of men. When they’re not in the submission of men they get out of control and fuck over society by destroying the traditional family unit as modern western civilization is an example of. Women belong on a tight leash otherwise they’ll disrupt society largely as a whole.

A man that must leash a woman shows that he is weak minded and fear filled, just as a woman is that feels she must control her man. Both are weak and lesser for it.

In 2008 the European Parliament decided to forbid advertisements showing women doing housework. They also forbid adverts showing strong men mowing the lawn.

This was followed by banning all allusions to the traditional gender role from schoolbooks, videos, computer games and the internet.
Women who just want to stay at home, have children and look after the house and the family, are already now regarded as being lazy, not to say asocial.

I think it’s useless blaming women for being like they are made now. They will merely feel insulted and start defending their new design or their designers, because they told them that they got more freedom now. You got to look behind the scenery. Whose interest is it to have women like this, who are only interested in money and career?

In the USA, it goes far beyond that. Films were not allowed to show the male hero saving a woman. She had to save herself and usually him too. They have slacked up on that a bit, but still women must be displayed as being at least as physically strong as men, smarter than men, more innocent than men, wiser than men, all n all better than men, and of course big lumbering black males lusting after super attractive white females, their superiors.

The new world is a world of psychologically and medically programmed drones to serve the Socialist Emperor Queen - Bee Hive, Ant Colony design. It isn’t life when someone else is making all of the decisions.

Of course all of it is “natural random evolution”. And since it is completely artificial, the only thing left when it is over is going to be a completely android life form (or a black hole). Homosapian is dead. He just doesn’t know it yet as the noise fades down to a simple whir.

And they aren’t going to stop any time soon.

Well said! I’d be interested in seeing an actual argument against this.

And I had a strange idea that the one being leashed and controlled is the weaker and fear filled one. The stronger one will submit the weaker one and control him/her. The strong are in control, the weak are subservient. Both are afraid - the strong one is afraid of losing his superior position, the weak one is afraid of the strong one.

Weren’t allowed? I mean I agree it’s totally unrealistic that a 45kg chick wins a fight against 3-5 grown 80-100kg males, but it’s an action movie, who cares. I don’t think they weren’t ALLOWED to do it, but it’s just more cunning to make a few relevant, strong female characters in a movie to market it towards the female (more precisely, lesbian and feminist) audience more successfully. Look at Fast and Furious 5 and 6. Almost all possible combinations of race and gender are represented with characters so people all around the world can identify with them.

Also, not everything is a conspiracy JSS, for fucks sake :laughing:

 No. The root meaning of 'whore' is somebody who trades sex for material gain. That's the exact opposite of somebody who will have sex with anyone, or who takes sex casually. 
If you actually know what the word 'whore' means, and know what the criticism [i]really is[/i] that men are making when they call women whores, then complaining about women being whores while complaining that you can't get laid is completely consistent.  You are attacking a strawman. 

Not saying women ARE whores, but statik wanted a counter argument, and it was just staring me in the face so I had to oblige.

Hm, the definition of a whore I used is simply a promiscuous person who has a lot of sex with a lot of people. I also use the word “slut” for that same meaning. Under that definition I actually agree with Moreno that men are bigger whores, it’s just that as I explained it’s not a bad thing for a man to be a whore while it is for a woman.

“Hooker” and “prostitute” is what I use for people who trade sexual services for material gain.

3sum, I think “escort” is considered a bit more polite. Just sayin…

But wouldn’t it be really naive, NOT to see a pattern in that?

Why do you think Hollywood likes it so much to portray the opposite of reality: making women more dominant/stronger while men submissive/weaker. Why is the feminist worldview and the “battle of the sexes” so much supported by the media. To get a few more lesbians in the cinemas? :laughing:

The most effective way to make a population more manageable is to divide it…divide et impera - divide and conquer-; this goes back to Machiavelli. When you see it in this context: If there are the means to program a society, do you really think they won’t be used?