Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Feb 21^st, 2014 at 3:18pm:


I sense much bitterness with misgonystic, vengeful and racist overtones. It must have been bad, whatever it was.

Winston Smith wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2014 at 12:46am:


Got anything to offer other than the same old feminist line of vitriol instead of discussion?

Any disagreement with the feminst line is 'woman-hating', any rejection of their tenets is 'revenge' on the poor dears, and how you derive racist from it is beyond me.  I never mentioned race.

Can't tell the poor dears they're wrong or you are a bad man; can't say they are doing often dreadful things to many without being called nasty to the poor dears; and I'll have a dollar each way on number seven in the ninth at Ascot.

Your response is a perfect example of the puerile and schoolyard antics of 'feminists' worldwide.

I support WOMEN in having a fair go - I do not, and never will, support feminism.  And, excuse me, but I will point out when and where 'feminists' and their like are wrong, as is my right.

Should you ever wish to discuss issues on their merits instead of the usual and out-worn mud-slinging - feel free.

                                                                                                            

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2014 at 1:10am:


It isn't your place to tell them that. They will find their own way.

Winston Smith wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2014 at 1:34am:


Sorry to step out of line and voice my objection to their latest rant and selfish move, mein Fuhrer!

A laugh a minute!  If they wish to continue to dispute realities such as 'wage gaps' which don't exist, and persist in lies and propaganda to prop up never-ending campaigns over utter bulldust - and they wish to do so on a genuinely equal basis - then they must be prepared, just like everyone else, to deal with the criticisms and disagreement of other.

Sorry 'bout that!  I have zero obligation to accept the approved feminist line and every right to criticise it - and feminists and the likes of you will not silence me.

Deal with it like adults or get off the train.

Winston Smith wrote on Feb 21^st, 2014 at 12:27pm:


Sure.

Appeal to personal experience:

Quote:


Guilt by association:

Quote:


Quote:



Personal yarns might be popular amongst the sisterhood and "progressive" bloggers, but if you want to be taken seriously references and evidence need to be used. Notice there's not one reference in the rant? First year undergraduates are taught to aim for objectivity, write and analyse in the third person, remove yourself from the argument, and just present the evidence in the research. Ford does not do this; she is thoroughly immersed in her rant. Imagine a scientist trying to publish results on what he/she was "feeling", rather than observed experiment.

The guilt by association fallacy is the same argument the racists, and ironically the sexists she is against, use. The old racist arguments of the 17th, 18th, and early 19th century revolved around witnessing a few people of a particular race act in a certain way, then extrapolating these acts to the whole race. Ford does the same. She picks out a few crimes or phenomena of men, then claims that all men who do not act out against them are just as bad as they. Of course, though, she wouldn't be aware that she's utilising argumentative strategies that the very people she is against once used. In feminists circles, righteous indignation trumps all. Logic, reason, evidence is secondary to their totalitarianism.

The_Barnacle wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2014 at 12:03pm:


Not at all. But "progressive" feminists are supposed to be above stereotyping and generalisations based on race and sex/gender, yet they will use the same argumentation methods to push their agenda.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2014 at 12:45pm:


Yes - their education and outstanding personal people skills etc are supposed to elevate them above the ways of the peons they are seeking to set right in their evil ways.

Just being blunt there.