"I'm not a feminist, I believe in equality for everyone." ummmmmmmm yeah that's where you said it kthx
it's true. go look it up, and make sure your sources aren't gynocentric (and thus biased). you can smile all you want but you're wrong. children are mostly likely to be abused sexually/other by female relatives. in the lead are mothers. second are men who come into the family (step-fathers, boyfriends of single mothers, etc). last are biological fathers. "On the whole, children are somewhat more likely to be maltreated by female perpetrators than by males: "65 percent of the maltreated children had been maltreated by a female, whereas 54 percent had been maltreated by a male."27 This last statistic is unfair because it includes child neglect, in which mothers are named at rates that are absurd given that women accused of child neglect are almost always single mothers." children of single mothers are also more likely to experience neglect http://www.findcounseling.com/journal/child-abuse/abusers.html interesting to note also is that federal statistics on the matter support the claims in this article... while gynocentrists claim the exact opposite; that men are all the abusers and mothers never do anything wrong. smile, you're wrong!
here allow me to help you. "i'm not social conservative. i believe in strong moral and family values" understand? saying "i'm not feminist. i believe in equality." implies that feminism is not about equality. thx.
Smile, you're right! Since that article states it, I guess it's true in every case, and men NEVER abuse. Men are perfect beings and should always be served. Do you know that your entire view is biased?
Please don't thank me. I didn't do anything for you. I should be thanking YOU for enlightening me. Oh, I get it. You want me to say the first one. The one you made up.
don't put words in my mouth. i said that children are least likely to be abused by a biological father, not that it never happens. btw, the data in that article is from the american medical association. what have you got? you're basically saying the american medical association is wrong and you have nothing to back it up. good job! you've shown me up big time there! roflcopter
belief in something despite evidence and facts to the contrary = fanaticism. gynofanaticism. tsk tsk.
You believe everything you read? Or only stuff that fits into your biased way of thinking? I really wasn't trying to show you up m'dear. You're putting words in my mouth. I didn't say the AMA is wrong. That article probably has some truth to it.
yes, ignore all contrary input, ignore contrary facts, ignore contrary statistics from objective third party researchers, ignore federal data, ignore medical data, ignore it all and only pay attention to people who tell you what you want to believe with their phony data. i sense confirmation bias. lololol gynofanatic.
"nasa says a meteor will strike the earth and wipe out all land-based life." wandering soul: do you believe everything you read? pah, that's such a lie. nasa is so biased and you have a bias *dies from meteor impact* lollerblading
You're never going to convince anyone here that you're right. I know you're trying your damndest to. Why should anyone believe you over anyone else? I'm not ignoring any proofs. I'm just going to be ignoring you. I mean, I know you like attention, but sorry.... Just so you know, you're not an infallible source of information. You're just you, and these are just your opinions... they don't hold water here.
"I'm just going to be ignoring you." "Don't put words in my mouth, bitch." "These are just your opinions..." Typical responses to someone poking a hole in feminist/gynocentric thought-type: 1) attack them 2) attack their sources (lol@calling AMA bias) 3) call "facts" opinions (lol@saying AMA statistics are opinions) 4) ignore them you're so typical. facts =/= opinions, as much as you wish they are so you can dismiss them
1) attack them yes, i did attack you in my first few posts by calling you a bitch. but i'm right that everything you're saying is just opinion. is not taunting and laughing at someone an attack? you did that to me. 2) attack their sources (lol@calling AMA bias) I'm not attacking your source. I can't have an opinion? I do think AMA is biased. But that's my opinion, and none of your business unless I choose to tell you. 3) call "facts" opinions (lol@saying AMA statistics are opinions) Hmm. You seem to have misunderstood me. I wasn't saying that the statistics were opinions, i was saying that the propaganda you're spouting is your opinion. 4) ignore them I choose to ignore you because I think you're wrong. That's my right. you're so typical. facts =/= opinions, as much as you wish they are so you can dismiss them[/QUOTE] You did all of these things as well, but you're not willing to admit that.
there's a common rule in arguing: if you posit something, you have to back it up. you're saying the AMA is biased. i dispute it. you are wrong until you back it up. of course you will probably go on and on about not having to or some nonsense, but that's alright. sit there in your wrongness. difference between me and you: i'm not stating my opinion, and i back up what i say. i'm stating facts. the fact that most children are abused by women and not men is not my "opinion" (as much you desperately wish so you could dismiss it), it's a statistical fact backed up by the AMA *and* the FBI. and yes, you have every right to run away*cough* i mean ignore me, but that doesn't change that you are: wrong. wrong. wrong. btw good job ignoring me.
haha. you like messing with people don't you? we can see right through you. if you don't use a gentler approach, you're not gonna reach anyone with your message. you're going about it entirely the wrong way. sure i'm running away. you're fucking annoying!
bla bla bla sure thing, find any excuse to ignore facts. good job. go enjoy your confirmation bias and don't let the door hit ya.