Women want to be treated equally.....

[WinterBorn]

I have used neither.

dear, that is all you have.

Really? What irrelevant topic have I introduced? And what have I exaggerated or distorted?

And please be specific.

this whole thread, dear.

Every single word? lol

Like I said, be specific.

you lost all of our arguments; you resorted to fallacy for each and every one of them.

So you should be able to easily copy and post examples of at least a few, right?

But I see that you don't do that. You simply make baseless accusations.

 

[danielpalos]

dear, you have nothing but fallacy to work with. you need more than that.

You like trying to sound intelligent, but you seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the words you use.

You have used the phrase "cognitive dissonance" numerous time in describing me. But I do not have a conflict of dissimilar beliefs, and nothing I have said suggests that I do.

You have used the term "red herring". But I have not introduced another topic in order to lead you away from the original topic. In fact, I have tried to get you back to the original topic numerous times.

You have said my arguments are "strawman arguments". That would mean I have exaggerated or distorted something you said. I have challenged you several times to show where I have done so, and yet you refuse.

It seems to me that you just like to sound intelligent and have used these terms to avoid the discussion. Because you certainly seem unwilling to explain them.

nothing but diversion, dear?

If talking about "cognitive dissonance", "red herring", and "strawman arguments" would be considered a diversion, the guilt is yours. You brought them up. I am defending baseless accusation from someone too cowardly to do anything more than throw out vague insults and pretend.

it is your red herring dear; i am simply claiming, prevailing market based wages under any form of capitalism.

In order for it to be a red herring, I would have had to introduce a separate and distracting topic. I haven't. Your excuses are pathetic.

dear, you did; about equality. women really don't want it. or they would just come up to us and honestly tell us they want to fornicate us into relationships, because their gender studies claim they can't handle the uncommitted sex of being used by all of the other ones.

 

[danielpalos]

dear, that is all you have.

Really? What irrelevant topic have I introduced? And what have I exaggerated or distorted?

And please be specific.

this whole thread, dear.

Every single word? lol

Like I said, be specific.

you lost all of our arguments; you resorted to fallacy for each and every one of them.

So you should be able to easily copy and post examples of at least a few, right?

But I see that you don't do that. You simply make baseless accusations.

And, dear; how many Numidian parties to compare and contrast the law of large numbers, with women's, Mandingo parties.

 

[WinterBorn]

You like trying to sound intelligent, but you seem to be unable to grasp the meaning of the words you use.

You have used the phrase "cognitive dissonance" numerous time in describing me. But I do not have a conflict of dissimilar beliefs, and nothing I have said suggests that I do.

You have used the term "red herring". But I have not introduced another topic in order to lead you away from the original topic. In fact, I have tried to get you back to the original topic numerous times.

You have said my arguments are "strawman arguments". That would mean I have exaggerated or distorted something you said. I have challenged you several times to show where I have done so, and yet you refuse.

It seems to me that you just like to sound intelligent and have used these terms to avoid the discussion. Because you certainly seem unwilling to explain them.

nothing but diversion, dear?

If talking about "cognitive dissonance", "red herring", and "strawman arguments" would be considered a diversion, the guilt is yours. You brought them up. I am defending baseless accusation from someone too cowardly to do anything more than throw out vague insults and pretend.

it is your red herring dear; i am simply claiming, prevailing market based wages under any form of capitalism.

In order for it to be a red herring, I would have had to introduce a separate and distracting topic. I haven't. Your excuses are pathetic.

dear, you did; about equality. women really don't want it. or they would just come up to us and honestly tell us they want to fornicate us into relationships, because their gender studies claim they can't handle the uncommitted sex of being used by all of the other ones.

Your sad obsession with women offering themselves to you to be used is laughable.

I used no red herring argument when we talked about this. I simply expressed my disgust at your desire to manipulate women wanting equality into women offering themselves to men to be used. That is NOT equality. As I pointed out several times, there are plenty of women for whom offering themselves to be used would be harmful to them (whether it be their relationships, mental health, or abhorrence of sex with men). You seem unconcerned with the equality of those women. So it is very obvious that you are not interested in equality but in manipulating women for your own desires.

Nothing I said on this topic was a red herring or a strawman.

Plenty of men are not interested in being used sexually too.

 

[WinterBorn]

Really? What irrelevant topic have I introduced? And what have I exaggerated or distorted?

And please be specific.

this whole thread, dear.

Every single word? lol

Like I said, be specific.

you lost all of our arguments; you resorted to fallacy for each and every one of them.

So you should be able to easily copy and post examples of at least a few, right?

But I see that you don't do that. You simply make baseless accusations.

And, dear; how many Numidian parties to compare and contrast the law of large numbers, with women's, Mandingo parties.

I see that you still cannot provide examples of what you accuse me of doing. And given that I asked a direct question, your answer is a pretty excellent example of a red herring. Hypocrisy.

 

[danielpalos]

nothing but diversion, dear?

If talking about "cognitive dissonance", "red herring", and "strawman arguments" would be considered a diversion, the guilt is yours. You brought them up. I am defending baseless accusation from someone too cowardly to do anything more than throw out vague insults and pretend.

it is your red herring dear; i am simply claiming, prevailing market based wages under any form of capitalism.

In order for it to be a red herring, I would have had to introduce a separate and distracting topic. I haven't. Your excuses are pathetic.

dear, you did; about equality. women really don't want it. or they would just come up to us and honestly tell us they want to fornicate us into relationships, because their gender studies claim they can't handle the uncommitted sex of being used by all of the other ones.

Your sad obsession with women offering themselves to you to be used is laughable.

I used no red herring argument when we talked about this. I simply expressed my disgust at your desire to manipulate women wanting equality into women offering themselves to men to be used. That is NOT equality. As I pointed out several times, there are plenty of women for whom offering themselves to be used would be harmful to them (whether it be their relationships, mental health, or abhorrence of sex with men). You seem unconcerned with the equality of those women. So it is very obvious that you are not interested in equality but in manipulating women for your own desires.

Nothing I said on this topic was a red herring or a strawman.

Plenty of men are not interested in being used sexually too.

dear; it is about the equality of coming up to us and simply stating they want something. they can do it for some things in the porn sector but not in the non-porn sector as any form equal work for equal pay, regardless of sector of the economy?

 

[danielpalos]

this whole thread, dear.

Every single word? lol

Like I said, be specific.

you lost all of our arguments; you resorted to fallacy for each and every one of them.

So you should be able to easily copy and post examples of at least a few, right?

But I see that you don't do that. You simply make baseless accusations.

And, dear; how many Numidian parties to compare and contrast the law of large numbers, with women's, Mandingo parties.

I see that you still cannot provide examples of what you accuse me of doing. And given that I asked a direct question, your answer is a pretty excellent example of a red herring. Hypocrisy.

I really don't care about your fallacies. How many Numidian parties have you gotten as a sexual favor when compared to women's, Mandingo parties; as any form of social equality?

 

[WinterBorn]

If talking about "cognitive dissonance", "red herring", and "strawman arguments" would be considered a diversion, the guilt is yours. You brought them up. I am defending baseless accusation from someone too cowardly to do anything more than throw out vague insults and pretend.

it is your red herring dear; i am simply claiming, prevailing market based wages under any form of capitalism.

In order for it to be a red herring, I would have had to introduce a separate and distracting topic. I haven't. Your excuses are pathetic.

dear, you did; about equality. women really don't want it. or they would just come up to us and honestly tell us they want to fornicate us into relationships, because their gender studies claim they can't handle the uncommitted sex of being used by all of the other ones.

Your sad obsession with women offering themselves to you to be used is laughable.

I used no red herring argument when we talked about this. I simply expressed my disgust at your desire to manipulate women wanting equality into women offering themselves to men to be used. That is NOT equality. As I pointed out several times, there are plenty of women for whom offering themselves to be used would be harmful to them (whether it be their relationships, mental health, or abhorrence of sex with men). You seem unconcerned with the equality of those women. So it is very obvious that you are not interested in equality but in manipulating women for your own desires.

Nothing I said on this topic was a red herring or a strawman.

Plenty of men are not interested in being used sexually too.

dear; it is about the equality of coming up to us and simply stating they want something. they can do it for some things in the porn sector but not in the non-porn sector as any form equal work for equal pay, regardless of sector of the economy?

Dear Daniel, let me help you to understand something. I know this is a difficult concept, but porn is not reality. If a woman asks for sex in a porn movie, it is part of the script and not part of who she actually is.

I have no problem with people (men or women) being open to ask for the things they want. But your original statement was not about asking for things in general. It was about walking up to men and asking to be used. That is requiring them to submit to being used in order to gain equality. And that is blatant manipulation of the basest kind.

 

[WinterBorn]

Every single word? lol

Like I said, be specific.

you lost all of our arguments; you resorted to fallacy for each and every one of them.

So you should be able to easily copy and post examples of at least a few, right?

But I see that you don't do that. You simply make baseless accusations.

And, dear; how many Numidian parties to compare and contrast the law of large numbers, with women's, Mandingo parties.

I see that you still cannot provide examples of what you accuse me of doing. And given that I asked a direct question, your answer is a pretty excellent example of a red herring. Hypocrisy.

I really don't care about your fallacies. How many Numidian parties have you gotten as a sexual favor when compared to women's, Mandingo parties; as any form of social equality?

Not a fallacy that your question is a red herring. It is not relevant to the topic at hand.

 

[danielpalos]

it is your red herring dear; i am simply claiming, prevailing market based wages under any form of capitalism.

In order for it to be a red herring, I would have had to introduce a separate and distracting topic. I haven't. Your excuses are pathetic.

dear, you did; about equality. women really don't want it. or they would just come up to us and honestly tell us they want to fornicate us into relationships, because their gender studies claim they can't handle the uncommitted sex of being used by all of the other ones.

Your sad obsession with women offering themselves to you to be used is laughable.

I used no red herring argument when we talked about this. I simply expressed my disgust at your desire to manipulate women wanting equality into women offering themselves to men to be used. That is NOT equality. As I pointed out several times, there are plenty of women for whom offering themselves to be used would be harmful to them (whether it be their relationships, mental health, or abhorrence of sex with men). You seem unconcerned with the equality of those women. So it is very obvious that you are not interested in equality but in manipulating women for your own desires.

Nothing I said on this topic was a red herring or a strawman.

Plenty of men are not interested in being used sexually too.

dear; it is about the equality of coming up to us and simply stating they want something. they can do it for some things in the porn sector but not in the non-porn sector as any form equal work for equal pay, regardless of sector of the economy?

Dear Daniel, let me help you to understand something. I know this is a difficult concept, but porn is not reality. If a woman asks for sex in a porn movie, it is part of the script and not part of who she actually is.

I have no problem with people (men or women) being open to ask for the things they want. But your original statement was not about asking for things in general. It was about walking up to men and asking to be used. That is requiring them to submit to being used in order to gain equality. And that is blatant manipulation of the basest kind.

dear, porn is as real as acting; as a job. the porn sector is real under our form of Capitalism. do you not have any Faith in Capitalism?

 

[danielpalos]

you lost all of our arguments; you resorted to fallacy for each and every one of them.

So you should be able to easily copy and post examples of at least a few, right?

But I see that you don't do that. You simply make baseless accusations.

And, dear; how many Numidian parties to compare and contrast the law of large numbers, with women's, Mandingo parties.

I see that you still cannot provide examples of what you accuse me of doing. And given that I asked a direct question, your answer is a pretty excellent example of a red herring. Hypocrisy.

I really don't care about your fallacies. How many Numidian parties have you gotten as a sexual favor when compared to women's, Mandingo parties; as any form of social equality?

Not a fallacy that your question is a red herring. It is not relevant to the topic at hand.

nothing but diversion; i got it. dear, it is my question and line of reasoning about equality.

 

[WinterBorn]

In order for it to be a red herring, I would have had to introduce a separate and distracting topic. I haven't. Your excuses are pathetic.

dear, you did; about equality. women really don't want it. or they would just come up to us and honestly tell us they want to fornicate us into relationships, because their gender studies claim they can't handle the uncommitted sex of being used by all of the other ones.

Your sad obsession with women offering themselves to you to be used is laughable.

I used no red herring argument when we talked about this. I simply expressed my disgust at your desire to manipulate women wanting equality into women offering themselves to men to be used. That is NOT equality. As I pointed out several times, there are plenty of women for whom offering themselves to be used would be harmful to them (whether it be their relationships, mental health, or abhorrence of sex with men). You seem unconcerned with the equality of those women. So it is very obvious that you are not interested in equality but in manipulating women for your own desires.

Nothing I said on this topic was a red herring or a strawman.

Plenty of men are not interested in being used sexually too.

dear; it is about the equality of coming up to us and simply stating they want something. they can do it for some things in the porn sector but not in the non-porn sector as any form equal work for equal pay, regardless of sector of the economy?

Dear Daniel, let me help you to understand something. I know this is a difficult concept, but porn is not reality. If a woman asks for sex in a porn movie, it is part of the script and not part of who she actually is.

I have no problem with people (men or women) being open to ask for the things they want. But your original statement was not about asking for things in general. It was about walking up to men and asking to be used. That is requiring them to submit to being used in order to gain equality. And that is blatant manipulation of the basest kind.

dear, porn is as real as acting; as a job. the porn sector is real under our form of Capitalism. do you not have any Faith in Capitalism?

"...as real as acting..."?? LMAO! So porn is as real as pretending to be someone else. Wow.

 

[danielpalos]

dear, you did; about equality. women really don't want it. or they would just come up to us and honestly tell us they want to fornicate us into relationships, because their gender studies claim they can't handle the uncommitted sex of being used by all of the other ones.

Your sad obsession with women offering themselves to you to be used is laughable.

I used no red herring argument when we talked about this. I simply expressed my disgust at your desire to manipulate women wanting equality into women offering themselves to men to be used. That is NOT equality. As I pointed out several times, there are plenty of women for whom offering themselves to be used would be harmful to them (whether it be their relationships, mental health, or abhorrence of sex with men). You seem unconcerned with the equality of those women. So it is very obvious that you are not interested in equality but in manipulating women for your own desires.

Nothing I said on this topic was a red herring or a strawman.

Plenty of men are not interested in being used sexually too.

dear; it is about the equality of coming up to us and simply stating they want something. they can do it for some things in the porn sector but not in the non-porn sector as any form equal work for equal pay, regardless of sector of the economy?

Dear Daniel, let me help you to understand something. I know this is a difficult concept, but porn is not reality. If a woman asks for sex in a porn movie, it is part of the script and not part of who she actually is.

I have no problem with people (men or women) being open to ask for the things they want. But your original statement was not about asking for things in general. It was about walking up to men and asking to be used. That is requiring them to submit to being used in order to gain equality. And that is blatant manipulation of the basest kind.

dear, porn is as real as acting; as a job. the porn sector is real under our form of Capitalism. do you not have any Faith in Capitalism?

"...as real as acting..."?? LMAO! So porn is as real as pretending to be someone else. Wow.

Performance Art; why not acquire and possess, a clue and a Cause, instead of just being a shill.

 

[WinterBorn]

So you should be able to easily copy and post examples of at least a few, right?

But I see that you don't do that. You simply make baseless accusations.

And, dear; how many Numidian parties to compare and contrast the law of large numbers, with women's, Mandingo parties.

I see that you still cannot provide examples of what you accuse me of doing. And given that I asked a direct question, your answer is a pretty excellent example of a red herring. Hypocrisy.

I really don't care about your fallacies. How many Numidian parties have you gotten as a sexual favor when compared to women's, Mandingo parties; as any form of social equality?

Not a fallacy that your question is a red herring. It is not relevant to the topic at hand.

nothing but diversion; i got it. dear, it is my question and line of reasoning about equality.

I find it amusing that you refuse to answer my questions, but want me to answer yours.

And no, it is a red herring. It is not about your desires for women to ask to be used in order to show they are serious about equality.

How many of one sex party versus how many of another sex party is not relevant. As it is not relevant and you keep pressing it, the term "red herring" fits quite well.

 

[WinterBorn]

Your sad obsession with women offering themselves to you to be used is laughable.

I used no red herring argument when we talked about this. I simply expressed my disgust at your desire to manipulate women wanting equality into women offering themselves to men to be used. That is NOT equality. As I pointed out several times, there are plenty of women for whom offering themselves to be used would be harmful to them (whether it be their relationships, mental health, or abhorrence of sex with men). You seem unconcerned with the equality of those women. So it is very obvious that you are not interested in equality but in manipulating women for your own desires.

Nothing I said on this topic was a red herring or a strawman.

Plenty of men are not interested in being used sexually too.

dear; it is about the equality of coming up to us and simply stating they want something. they can do it for some things in the porn sector but not in the non-porn sector as any form equal work for equal pay, regardless of sector of the economy?

Dear Daniel, let me help you to understand something. I know this is a difficult concept, but porn is not reality. If a woman asks for sex in a porn movie, it is part of the script and not part of who she actually is.

I have no problem with people (men or women) being open to ask for the things they want. But your original statement was not about asking for things in general. It was about walking up to men and asking to be used. That is requiring them to submit to being used in order to gain equality. And that is blatant manipulation of the basest kind.

dear, porn is as real as acting; as a job. the porn sector is real under our form of Capitalism. do you not have any Faith in Capitalism?

"...as real as acting..."?? LMAO! So porn is as real as pretending to be someone else. Wow.

Performance Art; why not acquire and possess, a clue and a Cause, instead of just being a shill.

I am a shill for equality. I have not problem with that. In fact, I am quite proud of it.

As for your definition of "performance art", it is still not reality and the actions of the women in that realm of "art" is not a standard by which our society operates. And it still does not justify requiring women to submit to being used in order to gain equality.

I see you still have not addressed the numerous women (in relationships, lesbian, celibate by choice ect) for whom that submission would be harmful. Their equality is not important?

 

[danielpalos]

And, dear; how many Numidian parties to compare and contrast the law of large numbers, with women's, Mandingo parties.

I see that you still cannot provide examples of what you accuse me of doing. And given that I asked a direct question, your answer is a pretty excellent example of a red herring. Hypocrisy.

I really don't care about your fallacies. How many Numidian parties have you gotten as a sexual favor when compared to women's, Mandingo parties; as any form of social equality?

Not a fallacy that your question is a red herring. It is not relevant to the topic at hand.

nothing but diversion; i got it. dear, it is my question and line of reasoning about equality.

I find it amusing that you refuse to answer my questions, but want me to answer yours.

And no, it is a red herring. It is not about your desires for women to ask to be used in order to show they are serious about equality.

How many of one sex party versus how many of another sex party is not relevant. As it is not relevant and you keep pressing it, the term "red herring" fits quite well.

dear, i am resorting to market based metrics, not just anecdotes, like you. dear, it has to do with equality.

 

[danielpalos]

dear; it is about the equality of coming up to us and simply stating they want something. they can do it for some things in the porn sector but not in the non-porn sector as any form equal work for equal pay, regardless of sector of the economy?

Dear Daniel, let me help you to understand something. I know this is a difficult concept, but porn is not reality. If a woman asks for sex in a porn movie, it is part of the script and not part of who she actually is.

I have no problem with people (men or women) being open to ask for the things they want. But your original statement was not about asking for things in general. It was about walking up to men and asking to be used. That is requiring them to submit to being used in order to gain equality. And that is blatant manipulation of the basest kind.

dear, porn is as real as acting; as a job. the porn sector is real under our form of Capitalism. do you not have any Faith in Capitalism?

"...as real as acting..."?? LMAO! So porn is as real as pretending to be someone else. Wow.

Performance Art; why not acquire and possess, a clue and a Cause, instead of just being a shill.

I am a shill for equality. I have not problem with that. In fact, I am quite proud of it.

As for your definition of "performance art", it is still not reality and the actions of the women in that realm of "art" is not a standard by which our society operates. And it still does not justify requiring women to submit to being used in order to gain equality.

I see you still have not addressed the numerous women (in relationships, lesbian, celibate by choice ect) for whom that submission would be harmful. Their equality is not important?

no dear; you are just proud of your fallacy of false Cause; you are not a shill for equality.

 

[WinterBorn]

I see that you still cannot provide examples of what you accuse me of doing. And given that I asked a direct question, your answer is a pretty excellent example of a red herring. Hypocrisy.

I really don't care about your fallacies. How many Numidian parties have you gotten as a sexual favor when compared to women's, Mandingo parties; as any form of social equality?

Not a fallacy that your question is a red herring. It is not relevant to the topic at hand.

nothing but diversion; i got it. dear, it is my question and line of reasoning about equality.

I find it amusing that you refuse to answer my questions, but want me to answer yours.

And no, it is a red herring. It is not about your desires for women to ask to be used in order to show they are serious about equality.

How many of one sex party versus how many of another sex party is not relevant. As it is not relevant and you keep pressing it, the term "red herring" fits quite well.

dear, i am resorting to market based metrics, not just anecdotes, like you. dear, it has to do with equality.

No it does not. It has to do with what people want and with history.

 

[WinterBorn]

Dear Daniel, let me help you to understand something. I know this is a difficult concept, but porn is not reality. If a woman asks for sex in a porn movie, it is part of the script and not part of who she actually is.

I have no problem with people (men or women) being open to ask for the things they want. But your original statement was not about asking for things in general. It was about walking up to men and asking to be used. That is requiring them to submit to being used in order to gain equality. And that is blatant manipulation of the basest kind.

dear, porn is as real as acting; as a job. the porn sector is real under our form of Capitalism. do you not have any Faith in Capitalism?

"...as real as acting..."?? LMAO! So porn is as real as pretending to be someone else. Wow.

Performance Art; why not acquire and possess, a clue and a Cause, instead of just being a shill.

I am a shill for equality. I have not problem with that. In fact, I am quite proud of it.

As for your definition of "performance art", it is still not reality and the actions of the women in that realm of "art" is not a standard by which our society operates. And it still does not justify requiring women to submit to being used in order to gain equality.

I see you still have not addressed the numerous women (in relationships, lesbian, celibate by choice ect) for whom that submission would be harmful. Their equality is not important?

no dear; you are just proud of your fallacy of false Cause; you are not a shill for equality.

Yes I am. Unlike you, I am for equality regardless of whether those people could do anything for me.

 

[danielpalos]

I really don't care about your fallacies. How many Numidian parties have you gotten as a sexual favor when compared to women's, Mandingo parties; as any form of social equality?

Not a fallacy that your question is a red herring. It is not relevant to the topic at hand.

nothing but diversion; i got it. dear, it is my question and line of reasoning about equality.

I find it amusing that you refuse to answer my questions, but want me to answer yours.

And no, it is a red herring. It is not about your desires for women to ask to be used in order to show they are serious about equality.

How many of one sex party versus how many of another sex party is not relevant. As it is not relevant and you keep pressing it, the term "red herring" fits quite well.

dear, i am resorting to market based metrics, not just anecdotes, like you. dear, it has to do with equality.

No it does not. It has to do with what people want and with history.

People don't claim to want equality; or do you just make up stuff for others and not call them red herrings or straw men arguments?