Fuck it- statues

tGreenWay wrote:If statues aren't a big deal, then let's put up a statue of Gen. Sherman in Atlanta.

Turtleneck wrote:1) You are not going to get an apology. If you meant something else, you sure could have found a better way to say it. Can you explain what this means? Why do you specifically say "jeans" if clothing like skirts are acceptable?  

LooseGoose wrote:dress conservatively (Jeans and a top - not talking anything too radical)

2) We have been over this. The playing in traffic and running around the woods analogies are beyond terrible. They both imply A) the victim is at least partially responsible for being harmed, and B) when somebody is harmed it is the result of an accident. That is a perfectly reasonable interpretation of your own words.

3) I will says it again: it is not my fault you put together one of the most God awful analogies in the history of the Internet message boards. If you were trying to say something other than what I wrote above, maybe you should have typed something up that was not nearly as stupid. Nothing I have said is a lie. Nothing. It is only a lie to you because you do not like how others have interpreted your ridiculous post based on the words you chose and ideas you presented.

3) The Taney and Lincoln comparisons are absurd. You are either being disingenuous, or are just historically illiterate. What? Do you think nobody here has read either the Dred Scot decision or the Lincoln-Douglas debates? Think again. In Dred Scot, Taney said African American could never be citizens, and upheld the practice of slavery by preventing the federal government from banning slavery in the territories. Tell me, in the Lincoln quote you provide from the fourth debate, where did Lincoln discuss the need to uphold the institution of slavery? Where exactly in his debate with Douglas on that night in September of 1858 did he say that slavery was a necessary feature of American society, and that the federal government was in no position to end slavery? Taney and Lincoln did not hold similar positions on the slavery issue no matter how often you suggest otherwise.

tGreenWay wrote:If statues aren't a big deal, then let's put up a statue of Gen. Sherman in Atlanta.

DWags wrote:

tGreenWay wrote:If statues aren't a big deal, then let's put up a statue of Gen. Sherman in Atlanta.

Ok, that's fucking great.

LooseGoose wrote:

Not once does the word "skirt" appear in either of my "damning" quotes.   I won't wait for an apology for your lie since you're too arrogant to offer one.  

And BTW not once in there do I in any way blame women for rapes.   That's a fiction and you know it.  I don't apologize for any of that advice for people.   IF you want to dress as a deer and dance in the woods, have at it.

And I see everyone jumped right on the Columbus stuff......anyone ready to defend the destruction of the Taney statue yet?   How about closing the memorial to that racist Lincoln?   You know the guy - aka The Great Emancipator.....amazing how people can change their views, except in libby world.

tGreenWay wrote:If statues aren't a big deal, then let's put up a statue of Gen. Sherman in Atlanta.

NigelUno wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

No.  Calling you stupid for lying about what I posted is fair game.  And you blatantly lied about what I offered the wager on.  

Where did I lie about what you posted?

I'll wait.  

LooseGoose wrote:
Not once does the word "skirt" appear in either of my "damning" quotes.   I won't wait for an apology for your lie since you're too arrogant to offer one.  

And BTW not once in there do I in any way blame women for rapes.   That's a fiction and you know it.  I don't apologize for any of that advice for people.   IF you want to dress as a deer and dance in the woods, have at it.

And I see everyone jumped right on the Columbus stuff......anyone ready to defend the destruction of the Taney statue yet?   How about closing the memorial to that racist Lincoln?   You know the guy - aka The Great Emancipator.....amazing how people can change their views, except in libby world.

Turtleneck wrote:1) You are not going to get an apology. If you meant something else, you sure could have found a better way to say it. Can you explain what this means? Why do you specifically say "jeans" if clothing like skirts are acceptable?  .

Turtleneck wrote:2) We have been over this. The playing in traffic and running around the woods analogies are beyond terrible. They both imply A) the victim is at least partially responsible for being harmed, and B) when somebody is harmed it is the result of an accident. That is a perfectly reasonable interpretation of your own words.

Turtleneck wrote:3) The Taney and Lincoln comparisons are absurd. You are either being disingenuous, or are just historically illiterate. What? Do you think nobody here has read either the Dred Scot decision or the Lincoln-Douglas debates? Think again. In Dred Scot, Taney said African American could never be citizens, and upheld the practice of slavery by preventing the federal government from banning slavery in the territories. Tell me, in the Lincoln quote you provide from the fourth debate, where did Lincoln discuss the need to uphold the institution of slavery? Where exactly in his debate with Douglas on that night in September of 1858 did he say that slavery was a necessary feature of American society, and that the federal government was in no position to end slavery? Taney and Lincoln did not hold similar positions on the slavery issue no matter how often you suggest otherwise.

tGreenWay wrote:If women are contributing to their own rapes, maybe they shouldn't just dress conservatively, but maybe cover their faces, too.

LooseGoose wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:1) You are not going to get an apology. If you meant something else, you sure could have found a better way to say it. Can you explain what this means? Why do you specifically say "jeans" if clothing like skirts are acceptable?  .

As I said earlier, I didn't expect one even when you were proven to be distorting what I said.  No surprise at all since in your mind it's impossible to be wrong.    Your statement seems to imply that because I didn't mention every possible clothing combination that you were somehow correct is absurd.

LooseGoose wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:2) We have been over this. The playing in traffic and running around the woods analogies are beyond terrible. They both imply A) the victim is at least partially responsible for being harmed, and B) when somebody is harmed it is the result of an accident. That is a perfectly reasonable interpretation of your own words.

No.  It's a complete distortion of what I said by those that want to smear me.   There can be no other motive for such a bullshit distortion.

LooseGoose wrote:See you guys later - have fun amongst yourselves.  

It's much more fun for you when you've achieved the purity of thought by all agreeing on everything.

               

Please let me know when the first of you advises your teenage daughter to dress skimpily, get sloppy drunk, ditch her friends and sneak off somewhere alone with a guy(s) she doesn't know.

Until you tell me that's how you advise your daughters to act at a party you're all a steaming bunch of hypocrites for playing with what I said.

LooseGoose wrote:See you guys later - have fun amongst yourselves.

It's much more fun for you when you've achieved the purity of thought by all agreeing on everything.



Please let me know when the first of you advises your teenage daughter to dress skimpily, get sloppy drunk, ditch her friends and sneak off somewhere alone with a guy(s) she doesn't know.

Until you tell me that's how you advise your daughters to act at a party you're all a steaming bunch of hypocrites for playing with what I said.

LooseGoose wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:3) The Taney and Lincoln comparisons are absurd. You are either being disingenuous, or are just historically illiterate. What? Do you think nobody here has read either the Dred Scot decision or the Lincoln-Douglas debates? Think again. In Dred Scot, Taney said African American could never be citizens, and upheld the practice of slavery by preventing the federal government from banning slavery in the territories. Tell me, in the Lincoln quote you provide from the fourth debate, where did Lincoln discuss the need to uphold the institution of slavery? Where exactly in his debate with Douglas on that night in September of 1858 did he say that slavery was a necessary feature of American society, and that the federal government was in no position to end slavery? Taney and Lincoln did not hold similar positions on the slavery issue no matter how often you suggest otherwise.

Nor were they traitors which was the criteria a couple days ago. Now both of them are getting the CSA treatment by leftists.

LooseGoose wrote:See you guys later - have fun amongst yourselves.

It's much more fun for you when you've achieved the purity of thought by all agreeing on everything.



Please let me know when the first of you advises your teenage daughter to dress skimpily, get sloppy drunk, ditch her friends and sneak off somewhere alone with a guy(s) she doesn't know.

Until you tell me that's how you advise your daughters to act at a party you're all a steaming bunch of hypocrites for playing with what I said.

NigelUno wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Nor were they traitors which was the criteria a couple days ago. Now both of them are getting the CSA treatment by leftists.

How do you know who damaged the Lincoln statue?

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:I don't understand something here. Who exactly is the offended party here? The decision makers who decide to take a statue down because they think it's the right thing to do? Or the white supremacists who show up with tiki torches to protest the removal of those statues?

I really don't give a fuck about statues to be honest. I do care about denouncing Nazis and white supremacists.

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:I'm still lmao at those fools with their Lowe's bought tiki torches. If I were on my computer right now I would post 3 :: rolling laughing:: guys.

I have two tiki torches in my garage. My 7 year old really wanted to have a tiki party. Do you think he and I should light them and march to 7-11 to get Slurpees?

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Warning- breitbart

For those of you that don't want to click- apparently some bill Clinton accusers want a statue of bill Clinton in South Dakota taken down. The article frames it as "the lefts protests of confederate monuments has backfired!"

Can you imagine living in a world where you think anyone would actually give a shit if they took down a statue of bill Clinton?

GRR Spartan wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Warning- breitbart

For those of you that don't want to click- apparently some bill Clinton accusers want a statue of bill Clinton in South Dakota taken down. The article frames it as "the lefts protests of confederate monuments has backfired!"

Can you imagine living in a world where you think anyone would actually give a shit if they took down a statue of bill Clinton?

I wasn't aware were any statues of President Clinton. If there was one I would expect it to be in Hope Arkansas or Little Rock but South Dakota?

LooseGoose wrote:
Now fully prepared for the "quit blaming the victim you heartless son of a bitch" posts.
Want to reduce rapes?  

Tell the women to:
       reduce or stop drinking.  
       stay with friends
       dress conservatively (Jeans and a top - not talking anything too radical)
    
If just those things happened I'd bet actual rapes would decrease by 90% or more.   I doubt that a sexual predator is looking for a reasonably sober woman in a group of people that's fully dressed.

LooseGoose wrote:Someone better tell MSU that the SwillBin denizens think they're blaming the victim by giving them good advice. Go tear'em up you Tigers of Justice......if you can knock down a few statues on the way all the better!!!

LooseGoose wrote:
Now fully prepared for the "quit blaming the victim you heartless son of a bitch" posts.
Want to reduce rapes?  

Tell the women to:
       reduce or stop drinking.  
       stay with friends
       dress conservatively (Jeans and a top - not talking anything too radical)
    
If just those things happened I'd bet actual rapes would decrease by 90% or more.   I doubt that a sexual predator is looking for a reasonably sober woman in a group of people that's fully dressed.

LooseGoose wrote:Someone better tell MSU that the SwillBin denizens think they're blaming the victim by giving them good advice. Go tear'em up you Tigers of Justice......if you can knock down a few statues on the way all the better!!!

LooseGoose wrote:
Now fully prepared for the "quit blaming the victim you heartless son of a bitch" posts.
Want to reduce rapes?  

Tell the women to:
       reduce or stop drinking.  
       stay with friends
       dress conservatively (Jeans and a top - not talking anything too radical)
    
If just those things happened I'd bet actual rapes would decrease by 90% or more.   I doubt that a sexual predator is looking for a reasonably sober woman in a group of people that's fully dressed.

Cameron wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:Someone better tell MSU that the SwillBin denizens think they're blaming the victim by giving them good advice.  Go tear'em up you Tigers of Justice......if you can knock down a few statues on the way all the better!!!

"Now fully prepared for the "quit blaming the victim you heartless son of a bitch" posts.
Want to reduce rapes?  

Tell the women to:
       reduce or stop drinking.  
       stay with friends
       dress conservatively (Jeans and a top - not talking anything too radical)
    
If just those things happened I'd bet actual rapes would decrease by 90% or more.   I doubt that a sexual predator is looking for a reasonably sober woman in a group of people that's fully dressed.

Feel free to point out how wrong I am, but I don't think anyone was objecting much to the "stay with friends" bit of your advice. It was the other aspects, mostly clothing-related, which the image you shared mentions nothing about.

It's also pertinent to note that nothing in that image you shared mentioned these as ways of avoiding being sexually assaulted. I'd argue that it's as much or more advice for avoiding being mugged/robbed than it is anything to do with sexual assault/rape.

NigelUno wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:Someone better tell MSU that the SwillBin denizens think they're blaming the victim by giving them good advice. Go tear'em up you Tigers of Justice......if you can knock down a few statues on the way all the better!!!

So weird. They didn't use the 'dress like a deer in the woods' analogy.

LooseGoose wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

So weird. They didn't use the 'dress like a deer in the woods' analogy.

Please dress like that and walk in the woods up here on 11/15 to prove me wrong you dolt.....otherwise stfu.