So its about winning then huh. Well here's the loosing blow, I hang out at my neighbor's house and her oldest son is a bully and guess what he does to his brother who is younger and weaker. He kicks him in the balls or punches him there, I've seen it......oh what's that? Adolescents don't count either? What about college hazing? They hit freshmen in the nads. But wait hitting isn't squeezing....now I forget, is it supposed to be just squishing them, cutting them or the penis off OR is it supposed to be kicking? So rape is over-dramatized eh? Like its not a big deal if the woman felt horrendous pain and psycholoical torture for being victimized and it RIUNs her sex life...you didn't even reply to that post. I thought the point of this discussion was not for you to win...weren't you just saying you haven't see evidence on men injuring another person's genitals out of irrationality? I can't imagine every man who had kicked another in the nuts to get off on the excuse of having mental health problems. How come every time somebody provides and answer you tack on another condition? Maybe only men are capable of such irrationality.
i didn't change any conditions. you fail to understand what an 'analogous situation' means. and as such it's completely pointless to argue when the other party doesn't even have the basic common sense. go back to grade school. PS. your response is another example of female irrationality: failing to understand the basics of a situation and upon not getting what you want you turn nasty. typical female behavior.
LMAO, Do you know what I want? Funny how you interpret questions as emotional, its all in your male head. For all you know I could be a man. Your over-generalizations about women are typical male irrationality. Q: men aren't capable of: A, crushing another mans balls in revenge (during irrational male fight) B, mutilating another mans privates (ex: cutting off their dick) C, or mutilating (via cutting or blows) to a female's genitalia? D, none of the above, please explain. Men harm womens parts as well as other mens parts..so yeah, they are capable. Rationality has nothing to do with gender...both sexes are capable of experiencing a full ranges of emotions and logic. Men can care for small children, women can work on cars....there are other things that are only exceptions in our SOCIETY not in us as humans.
I prefer crushing heads https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PM5_dgKDsrc"]Kids In The Hall - Head Crusher: Rival - YouTube
I disagree. Debate on. I do enjoy the hashing out of things online. If it were not so, or not allowed, I'd consider it a big waste of time. It's the only place where you can have a fair fight, assuming each party has equal verbal skills, which is probably not the case in every online debate. It's like two attorneys going at it. It doesn't matter as much which one is right, as much as which one is the more skillful debater. For me, I think it's useless trying to prove which sex typically displays more severe irrationality, and which is more damaging, male irrationality or female. I do see how females at times can take things a bit further than males, being that there is an added factor with females, having been on the short end of the stick, traditionally. This gives the female, generally speaking, more internal motivation to "get even" with a male adversary. The male may not have experienced this inequality, and therefore his anger is not accentuated by the extra "unfairnesses" that the female may have experienced. Of course, the above example is simply a generalization. Each individual male, each individual female are not the same as another, and there are males that have been mistreated and kicked to the curb, and females that have seen nothing but luxurious treatment. So, to arrive at some kind of "conclusion" concerning whether "the female" or "the male" may have more of a propensity toward irrational and injurious behavior is aimless. But I do also notice that females seem to more frequently feel justified in their own part in escalating toward violence, as they typically feel the more wronged in any male-female confrontation (The woman more commonly adopts the role of "victim", and therefore has the right to initiate a "defense", which may become more aggressive than initially intended, due to irrational rage, and the history of the male/female interaction and role in society). The mere fact that a "male" is confronting them about anything in particular can be the factor that sets them off. And realize also that in some cultures males are dominated by females (In fact, this may be more common than is widely understood, considering all the ways in which people may dominate one another, socially, financially, emotionally, etc.). This is seemingly common amongst Phillipinas and Phillipinos, for instance, from what I've observed. (But it's merely an observation, not entirely conclusive.) But in all, there is no way that a mere generalization can uncover the truth in this matter. Why be concerned with which gender is most commonly "irrational"? The exceptions are also potentially harmful, and to be avoided. Irrational is as irrational does, male or female. I think both the female viewpoint and the male viewpoint in this discussion can be taken too far, to the detriment of both sides. Personally, I'm a male, and have been abused by women, at times to the point of violence done to my person. But I also have been abusive, in times of irrational anger, when a normally quiet and withdrawn personality can turn "Incredible Hulk". This can happen due to feelings of "unfairness" or inequality on both sides. I've found one thing to be true: The first step toward becoming abusive is to consider yourself a victim. It creates a deep-seated seed of resentment, which eventually may erupt into a volcano of emotion, feelings that have been previously bottled up, due to social prohibitions on open confrontation. I find it more useful to get it out than to bottle it up, because if it remains bottled, it will eventually erupt, with worse consequences than if it had come out sooner. In so many cultures and societies, the male/female interaction is inhibited, stultified, regulated and restricted, so that men and women never really get a chance to hash it all out until they get married, and then it all comes out. In those situations, it's always helpful to bring in a third party, to keep a balanced, unbiased perspective, and keep both players playing by the rules, if there are rules to begin with. But alas, some do not have that kind of freedom.
Well said arthur itis, anyone can be irrational regardless of gander....or race, age...etc. And yeah poor guy!
I just finished a novel by Robert Olmstead called "Coal Black Horse", in which a young girl (15 years old) drove a pitchfork thru her rapist's testicles as he was kneeling on the ground. Not satisfied, she removed the pitchfork and skewered him again and hung from the handle to make sure the tines went all the way thru and into the ground...... Lord what a painful image. The man lived to come after her rescuer. Guess Mr. Olmstead didn't know that it might have killed the bastard!
i fucking laught so much, futurama is fucking awesome. I remember this episode i and my father watched this episode many times. Zap and kif invites lela emy to an half date and they crush on a planet where only mega woman are living ,and man dont exist. So zap kif and fry-(an friend came to rescue them.) were punished by death by snu snu-sex and in the end they all got crushed penises.