Feminist Threads, Cue Trolls

[Vigile]

 

Wouldn't want the truth to come out that men and women are different or anything. Honesty must mean one is still religiously oppressing the ladies.

This is why you're impossible to take seriously.

 

No one is debating whether men and women are different. You are claiming women are incompetent and lazy. You have no evidence to support your claims. They meet the definition of prejudice and your behaviour meets the definition of bigotry. That's why you don't get a free pass from me.

Your words, not mine and rank and I didn't say anything that isn't common knowledge to reasonable people. I won't go tit for tat with you, just let my own words stand by themselves and don't re frame them for others as you aren't qualified to be honest or accurate.

[gall]

 

 

 

For what it's worth, I think women should be treated equally.

 

 

 

For what it's worth, I also think that men and women should be treated equally/fairly, as all humans should.

 

 

For what it is worth all humans are born equal. The terms women, men, children, boy, person. They are all the same to me. Human is the only one that matters in my eyes. ALL equal.

 

 

 

 

feminism is a hot topic in most religous circles considering most religous people I know do everything they can to keep women "in their place". It sickens me.

 

TRP, (first quote) Buffettphan (second quote) and Gall (third and fourth quotes) I appreciate you saying the above.

 

The thing is, certain other posters say things like "women are not good at mechanical work" and "a lot of women just want to stay home and live off their husband's income" that don't really gel with your sentiments.  They do sound like the kind of things that would be said by people who have not eradicated that religious desire to keep women "in their place" that you refer to, Gall.

 

It's because of sexist comments like these that I want lurkers and newcomers (particularly women) to see that there will be pushback from people who want equality.  Skepticism is a vital part of the deconversion process but unfortunately for some people hyperskepticism gets used as a justification for sexism.  Feminism challenges all of us to review ourselves to see where we are being sexist.  If we write it off as just an ideology to be resisted at all costs, then we miss out on confronting our own attitudes that may well need confronting after being exposed to the sexism inherent in xianity.

 

All newcomers to this site will eventually find out that there is heated debate here about issues that some people find controversial.  Those who wish to avoid this can probably figure out which subforums to stick to.  I say "some" people because gender equality shouldn't be controversial and for most of us, isn't.  I think where it gets controversial is when people are being challenged about their own attitudes.  At least we do that here, unlike xianity where sexist attitudes are maintained and allowed to flourish.

 

 

When you see me comment I am commenting for me and me alone. I am not making anyones opinion but my own.

 

 

If small minded individuals cannot handle this discussion and must resort to age old tactics of reductioninsm for feminist issues that is not my concern. They do that only to themselves and make themselves obvious in their effort.

 

If you have issue with other peoples comments address them directly. I have not met many forward thinking christians when it comes to womens rights or freedoms. Most have the classic views you mention here. it is pretty disgusting and holding our country and the human race back from its rightful place. That place is us together working towards betterment of the race as a whole... we are a long way off from that but I won't bend or budge from the opinion that we are capable of so much more.

 

It is through patience and action things change. I will keep saying what I am saying about equality to anyone that will listen until the country lines in the sand and the one sidedness of a lot of barbarians on the planet still changes, or I will die and that will be the end of my effort. Hopefully I did enough while living to actually make some difference, chances are I won't but maybe someone who heard or read my words will have a power I do not and actually produce change for the future.

[JadedAtheist]

The thing is, certain other posters say things like "women are not good at mechanical work" and "a lot of women just want to stay home and live off their husband's income" that don't really gel with your sentiments.  They do sound like the kind of things that would be said by people who have not eradicated that religious desire to keep women "in their place" that you refer to, Gall.

 

 

I'm not trying to be a smart ass here, but while I understand how the statement "women are not good at mechanical work" can be understood as sexist, I'm unsure of how Vigile's comment "I know a lot of women just want to stay home and live off their husband's income" is sexist. It is after all his experience, which I'm guessing is descriptive as opposed to prescriptive.

[gall]

I don't think the difference here is over equality.  Most of the men I know have no problem with women being treated "equally".  The problem, as I see it, is over the definition of "equality".  Until we establish what we all mean by the term, threads such as these will go nowhere.  And in the process, we may be driving off more than we save.

 

The definition of this word is not complex.

 

From: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/equality:

 

1.

the state or quality of being equal; correspondence in quantity, degree, value, rank, or ability.

2.

uniform character, as of motion or surface.

3.

Mathematics. a statement that two quantities are equal; equation.

 

it is no mystery what equal means. If one has an argument to the very definition of this word in english I suggest they take it up with those that write dictionaries

 

seriously though is it that hard to understand that equality is having an equal standing for your opinions and thoughts in a public setting at the same level as all others no matter how invalid that we may think they are. It is not hard to give that which you want for yourself to others if you truly value equality.

[gall]

 

The thing is, certain other posters say things like "women are not good at mechanical work" and "a lot of women just want to stay home and live off their husband's income" that don't really gel with your sentiments.  They do sound like the kind of things that would be said by people who have not eradicated that religious desire to keep women "in their place" that you refer to, Gall.

 

 

I'm not trying to be a smart ass here, but while I understand how the statement "women are not good at mechanical work" can be understood as sexist, I'm unsure of how Vigile's comment "I know a lot of women just want to stay home and live off their husband's income" is sexist. It is after all his experience, which I'm guessing is descriptive as opposed to prescriptive.

 

 

if he is saying he personally knows women that want this that is one thing and not sexist. if he is saying (and the way he wrote it sort of implies it) that he feels all women or most are saying that well that is just way off base. I guess it would be up to him to clarify at this point.

[Vigile]

I don't think the difference here is over equality.  Most of the men I know have no problem with women being treated "equally".  The problem, as I see it, is over the definition of "equality".  Until we establish what we all mean by the term, threads such as these will go nowhere.  And in the process, we may be driving off more than we save.

We aren't in the business of saving. People don't not De convert because of bad experience with others anymore than people don't leave the church because they didn't like the people there. I agree with you that definition of equality is at issue. We'll hash that out until it becomes boring or until we learn from one another and adapt our position and then move on to the next sacred cow. It may not be for you, but it is important for some of us to freely challenge dogma. This is one of the few Places we can do that. There are tons of places people can go to sing cumbaya.

 

unfortunately, dogma invades all our lives. What better place to challenge this than a board of ex dogmites?

 

If people don't like it, they can avoid the tot and politics threads.

[Vigile]

I have no idea how you got all or most from my statement. I also know plenty of women who are workaholics, just hard workers, etc. Most of my favorite supervisors have been female. So much of this entire debate would have gone so much easier if people wouldn't infer and just read words plainly as they are written.

 

 

The thing is, certain other posters say things like "women are not good at mechanical work" and "a lot of women just want to stay home and live off their husband's income" that don't really gel with your sentiments. They do sound like the kind of things that would be said by people who have not eradicated that religious desire to keep women "in their place" that you refer to, Gall.

 

I'm not trying to be a smart ass here, but while I understand how the statement "women are not good a7t mechanical work" can be understood as sexist, I'm unsure of how Vigile's comment "I know a lot of women just want to stay home and live off their husband's income" is sexist. It is after all his experience, which I'm guessing is descriptive as opposed to prescriptive.

 

if he is saying he personally knows women that want this that is one thing and not sexist. if he is saying (and the way he wrote it sort of implies it) that he feels all women or most are saying that well that is just way off base. I guess it would be up to him to clarify at this point.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

Wouldn't want the truth to come out that men and women are different or anything. Honesty must mean one is still religiously oppressing the ladies.

This is why you're impossible to take seriously.

No one is debating whether men and women are different. You are claiming women are incompetent and lazy. You have no evidence to support your claims. They meet the definition of prejudice and your behaviour meets the definition of bigotry. That's why you don't get a free pass from me.

Your words, not mine and rank and I didn't say anything that isn't common knowledge to reasonable people. I won't go tit for tat with you, just let my own words stand by themselves and don't re frame them for others as you aren't qualified to be honest or accurate.

 

People can read your words themselves and see that you agreed with rank that "women are not good at mechanical work" and your various ridiculous comments about "lots of" and "plenty of" women lazing around on their husband's money.  You both are affected by outdated prejudices and you haven't resiled from anything you've said about it or provided a shred of evidence to support your views.  Now you are trying to deflect by accusing me of lying but your words are there for everyone to read.    

 

Vigile's posts about women lazing around are #70 and #75 here:

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/62975-miss-nevada-a-black-belt-gets-bashed-by-feminists-after-suggesting-women-learn-self-defense/page-4?hl=husband#entry959731

[gall]

I have no idea how you got all or most from my statement. I also know plenty of women who are workaholics, just hard workers, etc. Most of my favorite supervisors have been female. So much of this entire debate would have gone so much easier if people wouldn't infer and just read words plainly as they are written.

 

 

The thing is, certain other posters say things like "women are not good at mechanical work" and "a lot of women just want to stay home and live off their husband's income" that don't really gel with your sentiments. They do sound like the kind of things that would be said by people who have not eradicated that religious desire to keep women "in their place" that you refer to, Gall.

I'm not trying to be a smart ass here, but while I understand how the statement "women are not good a7t mechanical work" can be understood as sexist, I'm unsure of how Vigile's comment "I know a lot of women just want to stay home and live off their husband's income" is sexist. It is after all his experience, which I'm guessing is descriptive as opposed to prescriptive.

 

if he is saying he personally knows women that want this that is one thing and not sexist. if he is saying (and the way he wrote it sort of implies it) that he feels all women or most are saying that well that is just way off base. I guess it would be up to him to clarify at this point.

 

 

 

I get lots of things others don't fully understand. I see things the way I want to just as all of the rest of the human race does. I also work hard at trying to see them as others do so that I am not just being a selfish ass. if more people would just do that sexism and all the other ridiculous "isms" would not carry so much weight.

 

It should be a people first movement not a man or woman first movement. Can't have those apes sneaking up on us thinking they have rights... seriously though my views are only my views.

[gall]

 

 

 

Wouldn't want the truth to come out that men and women are different or anything. Honesty must mean one is still religiously oppressing the ladies.

This is why you're impossible to take seriously.

No one is debating whether men and women are different. You are claiming women are incompetent and lazy. You have no evidence to support your claims. They meet the definition of prejudice and your behaviour meets the definition of bigotry. That's why you don't get a free pass from me.

Your words, not mine and rank and I didn't say anything that isn't common knowledge to reasonable people. I won't go tit for tat with you, just let my own words stand by themselves and don't re frame them for others as you aren't qualified to be honest or accurate.

 

People can read your words themselves and see that you agreed with rank that "women are not good at mechanical work" and your various ridiculous comments about "lots of" and "plenty of" women lazing around on their husband's money.  You both are affected by outdated prejudices and you haven't resiled from anything you've said about it or provided a shred of evidence to support your views.  Now you are trying to deflect by accusing me of lying but your words are there for everyone to read.    

 

Vigile's posts about women lazing around are #70 and #75 here:

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/62975-miss-nevada-a-black-belt-gets-bashed-by-feminists-after-suggesting-women-learn-self-defense/page-4?hl=husband#entry959731

 

 

I doubt very much anyone that read it would disagree with this that actually wants to see our race further itself not just one half of the race. Until these attitudes change for a larger amount of people sad as it is there are a great many that think this way still. I came from a small area where this was the attitude of most men especially those with lower levels of education. The only ones that had different views had left the area at some point in their lives to larger and more diverse surroundings and it changed them.

[Vigile]

People are free to read my own words. I have no problem with you quoting them. I have a problem with you framing what I really meant by them, such as using the phrase lazing around. You are a real piece of work. If you act like this in rl, you're probably quite lonely.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

People are free to read my own words. I have no problem with you quoting them. I have a problem with you framing what I really meant by them, such as using the phrase lazing around. You are a real piece of work. If you act like this in rl, you're probably quite lonely.

Go on keep throwing abusive comments at me, it doesn't take away what you said on both counts, let's not forget you agreeing with Rank that "women are not good at mechanical work" which is actually the more sexist of the two comments.

 

You said "laze around" and you're complaining because I said "lazing around"?  Really?  Is that all you got?

 

 

 

I know lots of women who are perfectly content to laze around 

[gall]

People are free to read my own words. I have no problem with you quoting them. I have a problem with you framing what I really meant by them, such as using the phrase lazing around. You are a real piece of work. If you act like this in rl, you're probably quite lonely.

 

 

 

People are free to read my own words. I have no problem with you quoting them. I have a problem with you framing what I really meant by them, such as using the phrase lazing around. You are a real piece of work. If you act like this in rl, you're probably quite lonely.

Go on keep throwing abusive comments at me, it doesn't take away what you said on both counts, let's not forget you agreeing with Rank that "women are not good at mechanical work" which is actually the more sexist of the two comments.

 

You said "laze around" and you're complaining because I said "lazing around"?  Really?  Is that all you got?

 

 

 

I know lots of women who are perfectly content to laze around 

 

 

 

Personal attacks do nothing to further conversation or real debate. It just confuses the topic and draws attention away from what is actually important.

 

it really doesn't matter what you intended it matters what you wrote. Be clear be blunt, don't take it personally even if others want you to...

[Vigile]

Fair enough, forgot I used that term. In the context I wrote it, I stand by it. There must be 100k people living in rublyovka and you don't see men in restaurants drinking champagne brunches nor are there any shows on TV called real house husband's of Beverly Hills. That some women are like this in no way dismisses the many women who are not, never less, they are out there in significant numbers.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

Fair enough, forgot I used that term. In the context I wrote it, I stand by it. There must be 100k people living in rublyovka and you don't see men in restaurants drinking champagne brunches nor are there any shows on TV called real house husband's of Beverly Hills. That some women are like this in no way dismisses the many women who are not, never less, they are out there in significant numbers.

I don't disagree that such couples exist, where the husband willingly provides financial support for his wife, but my issue with your post was more to do with your opinion about "most" women's attitude to the possibility.  The context was that several posters were discussing the fact that women's looks are emphasised more than men's, and whether men experience an equally unhelpful expectation that they should be "a good earner".  I said I thought placing such an expectation on men was an archaic belief that has no place in an advanced secular society, to which you responded:

 

 

 

that's nice and all, but I've been around the world and haven't seen anywhere it isn't true. I even doubt most women seriously follow this sentiment when push comes to shove. If their man wants to sit around and be a couch husband they'd flip a lid on him. Meanwhile, I know lots of women who are perfectly content to laze around on their husband's money. This in no way implies there aren't many hardworking women. I know there are. That also, however, doesn't make anything I wrote less true. 

 

I interpreted your post to mean you think most women would like to have their man provide for them.  I don't think that's true.  At least not here in NZ.  In my experience most women want, and are prepared, to be financially independent and occupied with paid work outside the home.  For the few short years when young children need care during the day, many women choose to stay home and provide that care but that is not what you were talking about.  You were talking about women who laze around.  I suspect the only women who seriously want such a lifestyle are in the upper class, and still, many upper class women choose paid work outside the home because lazing around is boring and involves losing dignity and independence.

 

You are also claiming that "women are not good at mechanical work", which is a prejudiced view.  

 

"prej·u·dice  [prej-uh-dis]  Show IPA

noun

1.

an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or withoutknowledge, thought, or reason.

2.

any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable orunfavorable.

3.

unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, especially of ahostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/prejudice "

 

I doubt that anyone knows how good women are at mechanical work because I doubt it has been studied.  I think reasonable people accept that there is no good reason a woman can't be just as competent as a man at mechanical or any other work.  The low participation of women in mechanical jobs says nothing about women's ability as there are likely several unrelated contributing factors.

1.  

[Vigile]

Fine, I'm a troglodyte. You'll see me how you wish. I doubt others who know me would agree, but such it is.

 

Let's say you win this round via attrition.

[Jutta]

Just a lurker here-- but I had to post...

Could this thread just end please? The knee-jerk overkill reaction to feminism is putting me off to this whole board! The only enlightenment I have gained is realization that atheism doesn't cure misogyny in it's most basic forms. Split hairs all you want, but my grandmother could not vote when she turned 18. One of my aunts was raped at 16 years and said nothing until she was in her 70s because she knew she would have been blamed for it. Whether you like it or not, feminism, as with civil rights activism, have good and valid reasons for their existence. 

[FreeThinkerNZ]

Just a lurker here-- but I had to post...

Could this thread just end please? The knee-jerk overkill reaction to feminism is putting me off to this whole board! The only enlightenment I have gained is realization that atheism doesn't cure misogyny in it's most basic forms. Split hairs all you want, but my grandmother could not vote when she turned 18. One of my aunts was raped at 16 years and said nothing until she was in her 70s because she knew she would have been blamed for it. Whether you like it or not, feminism, as with civil rights activism, have good and valid reasons for their existence. 

That's a valuable piece of enlightenment to gain.

 

Welcome to Ex-C.  Not everyone here is anti-equality.

[RankStranger]

Just a lurker here-- but I had to post...

Could this thread just end please? The knee-jerk overkill reaction to feminism is putting me off to this whole board! The only enlightenment I have gained is realization that atheism doesn't cure misogyny in it's most basic forms. Split hairs all you want, but my grandmother could not vote when she turned 18. One of my aunts was raped at 16 years and said nothing until she was in her 70s because she knew she would have been blamed for it. Whether you like it or not, feminism, as with civil rights activism, have good and valid reasons for their existence. 

 

With the possible exception of one christian who posts regularly around here, I don't think anybody on this forum has any issue with feminism where those points are concerned. 

 

But when feminists directly argue that the law should show preferential treatment toward women (and they have on this forum), and when feminists appear (to me) to demand adherence to their preferred ideology over observed reality... well I'm gonna have a hard time taking them seriously.

 

We get into some pretty intense debates around here.  It's not for everybody- but it's what a lot of us love about this website.

[JadedAtheist]

Just a lurker here-- but I had to post...

Could this thread just end please? The knee-jerk overkill reaction to feminism is putting me off to this whole board! The only enlightenment I have gained is realization that atheism doesn't cure misogyny in it's most basic forms. Split hairs all you want, but my grandmother could not vote when she turned 18. One of my aunts was raped at 16 years and said nothing until she was in her 70s because she knew she would have been blamed for it. Whether you like it or not, feminism, as with civil rights activism, have good and valid reasons for their existence. 

The thread was dead for 3 days, now it looks live you've unfortunately revived it.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

Just a lurker here-- but I had to post...

Could this thread just end please? The knee-jerk overkill reaction to feminism is putting me off to this whole board! The only enlightenment I have gained is realization that atheism doesn't cure misogyny in it's most basic forms. Split hairs all you want, but my grandmother could not vote when she turned 18. One of my aunts was raped at 16 years and said nothing until she was in her 70s because she knew she would have been blamed for it. Whether you like it or not, feminism, as with civil rights activism, have good and valid reasons for their existence. 

 

With the possible exception of one christian who posts regularly around here, I don't think anybody on this forum has any issue with feminism where those points are concerned. 

 

But when feminists directly argue that the law should show preferential treatment toward women (and they have on this forum), and when feminists appear (to me) to demand adherence to their preferred ideology over observed reality... well I'm gonna have a hard time taking them seriously.

 

We get into some pretty intense debates around here.  It's not for everybody- but it's what a lot of us love about this website.

 

This from the guy who is proud of his sexism.  You just sound butthurt.

[RankStranger]

 

 

 

Wouldn't want the truth to come out that men and women are different or anything. Honesty must mean one is still religiously oppressing the ladies.

This is why you're impossible to take seriously.

No one is debating whether men and women are different. You are claiming women are incompetent and lazy. You have no evidence to support your claims. They meet the definition of prejudice and your behaviour meets the definition of bigotry. That's why you don't get a free pass from me.

Your words, not mine and rank and I didn't say anything that isn't common knowledge to reasonable people. I won't go tit for tat with you, just let my own words stand by themselves and don't re frame them for others as you aren't qualified to be honest or accurate.

 

People can read your words themselves and see that you agreed with rank that "women are not good at mechanical work" and your various ridiculous comments about "lots of" and "plenty of" women lazing around on their husband's money.  You both are affected by outdated prejudices and you haven't resiled from anything you've said about it or provided a shred of evidence to support your views.  Now you are trying to deflect by accusing me of lying but your words are there for everyone to read.    

 

Vigile's posts about women lazing around are #70 and #75 here:

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/62975-miss-nevada-a-black-belt-gets-bashed-by-feminists-after-suggesting-women-learn-self-defense/page-4?hl=husband#entry959731

 

 

I put in plenty of qualifiers along with that statement- but I'll stand by it and play the bad guy if you like.

 

I find it really odd though when I see people flipping out over observed reality.  As I've pointed out, I have A LOT of mechanical experience- I've been doing mechanical work for my entire adult life.  Hell I was taking apart toys and/or modifying them starting at 4 or 5 years old- mechanical thingys are a lifelong obsession for me.  

 

I know what's involved in mechanical work- and I know who DOES mechanical work- I've given you statistics to support that.  By and large, women don't do mechanical work.  Once again I'll state (and once again you'll ignore) that yes there are exceptions- I've no doubt there are women out there who would surpass even MY OWN god-like mechanical aptitude.  But such creatures are so exceedingly rare that I've never encountered one and I don't expect I ever will.  For that matter I've never encountered a single woman who's demonstrated the mechanical aptitude that even your average male hillbilly demonstrates regularly.  In all my years of manufacturing, repair, truck driving, and engineering- I've met NOT ONE woman in person who would even fix her own car (though Ravenstar would make two such women I've met via the internet).

 

Now maybe this is all some massive woman-hating conspiracy by which men just won't LET women take on nasty, hot, dirty, and dangerous jobs.  Seems odd to me though that I've seen so LITTLE interest in such things from the fairer sex.  Combine this near total absence of females in the mechanical trades with what we're learning about sexual dimorphism in brain development... and I don't think I'm making an extraordinary claim at all.  I'm just spelling out what I've experienced pretty much every day of my life.  Sorry if that don't mesh with your ideology.  

 

So here's my challenge for feminists:  If women truly are interested in mechanical stuff and are truly good at that kind of thing... prove it.  Go get a job fixing trucks.  Hauling tractors.  Designing aircraft mechanical systems.  When ya'll have a flat tire- fix it.  Don't call some husband/boyfriend/wrecker driver to do it.  Man up and take care of the problem.

 

Unless/until troglodytes like myself see that with their own eyes... we're not likely to take these ideological browbeatings seriously.  And if you think I'M sexist... well I can only conclude that you're remarkably sheltered.  Every mechanical job I had from age 18 to age 34 was a goddamn sausage-fest... and this was not an educated or politically correct crowd.  I'm talking about men from the trailer parks and ghettos of America- I've spent plenty of time in both neighborhoods.  I could tell you stories of sexism from these guys that make ME nauseous just to think about.  If ya'll can't relate to ME (educated, pro-choice, fairly liberal politically)- then ya'll have ZERO chance interfacing with the reality that's out there.

[ContraBardus]

 

Just a lurker here-- but I had to post...

Could this thread just end please? The knee-jerk overkill reaction to feminism is putting me off to this whole board! The only enlightenment I have gained is realization that atheism doesn't cure misogyny in it's most basic forms. Split hairs all you want, but my grandmother could not vote when she turned 18. One of my aunts was raped at 16 years and said nothing until she was in her 70s because she knew she would have been blamed for it. Whether you like it or not, feminism, as with civil rights activism, have good and valid reasons for their existence. 

The thread was dead for 3 days, now it looks live you've unfortunately revived it.

 

 

Maybe, sometimes people just take a couple days off before coming back to the argument.

 

At any rate, I'd point out that there is no one forcing anyone to actually read this thread. If the topic is an issue that causes discomfort or offends, it's probably a good idea to simply not read or participate in this thread. There are plenty of other active threads to read on the forums.

 

One of the functions of this forum is for skepticism and debate of various ideas. This one is particularly relevant because it does tie directly into religious life and beliefs. Many Christian churches preach about gender roles and female submission. There are reasons outside of religion involved as well, but the two are often directly connected.

 

That said, some people are too sensitive and are reading into the posts of others far more than is reasonable in this thread. There's a fair bit of statement twisting and Ad Hom tossing going on as well. That's why I stopped posting, not because I thought I was wrong, or that someone presented an argument I couldn't counter. It's simply because it isn't really a debate anymore and has become a rather juvenile argument instead.

 

These kinds of threads often get out of hand because there are people on these forums more concerned winning the argument than being correct. It's human nature I suppose, but it's also not productive and certainly doesn't qualify as a reasonable debate. This thread has pretty much reached the point where people are simply contradicting each other out of of simple stubbornness rather than trying to prove a point or convince others of the validity of their position.

 

[JadedAtheist]

These kinds of threads often get out of hand because there are people on these forums more concerned winning the argument than being correct.

 

Fucking lolled. I've been on this forum officially for 4 years, and lurking on/off for another year or so on top of that - do you know how many times I've seen someone go 'No, you're right. I was wrong about issue X and you're right"? 0 Times. Which basically matches the same rate I've seen that happen in person.

[ContraBardus]

 

These kinds of threads often get out of hand because there are people on these forums more concerned winning the argument than being correct.

 

Fucking lolled. I've been on this forum officially for 4 years, and lurking on/off for another year or so on top of that - do you know how many times I've seen someone go 'No, you're right. I was wrong about issue X and you're right"? 0 Times. Which basically matches the same rate I've seen that happen in person.

 

 

Sssssh! I was trying to imply that certain individuals in particular are largely at fault without naming them. Don't expose my clever dodge of responsibility for my accusations and eliminate my plausible deniability regarding it. Even though I'm 100% right about that, it's more trouble than it's worth to directly state it so I'm being a weasel and avoiding a direct accusation.

 

 

 

In all seriousness though, one does not have to directly admit error or defeat to have a reasonable debate, even indirectly admitting such things can easily be avoided if one is skilled enough. There are lots of ways to get around admitting error without resorting to an Ad Hom tossing juvenile argument, some more subtle than others. I'd explain how, but if I do this post will come back to haunt me later, so I won't. "Never give a sucker an even break or smarten up a chump," and all that.

 

Even then, such admissions do happen on very rare occasions. It's only happened maybe three or four times in the several years I've been here, but I know for a fact I've admitted error in threads on this forum when evidence was provided that clearly showed that I was wrong about something.

 

Honestly, I like winning a debate, but I like being correct more. It's nice that they often go together, but if I have to choose one or the other, I'd rather be correct and lose a debate than wrong and win while remaining ignorant or spreading ignorance.

 

I also like not being serious and making fun of people and irritating them when they get aggressive and belligerent. Call it a weakness, but this is the internet and people using the internet should be used to that short of thing by now. If someone can't handle it, they really shouldn't be participating in open areas of the forum and should either grow some thicker skin or frequent one of the areas where there are more formal rules and debate is regulated. Some might find me a little irritating at times, but I stay within the rules of where I'm posting.