|
Post by fauxmaha on Oct 3, 2018 17:20:01 GMT -5
Regarding "[women being] the experts on what they think", it's weird how its assumed that even using that phrase isn't considered nonsensical.
"What women think"? What makes anyone believe that you can categorize people along those lines and reach conclusions about what they think?
Hell, look at us. Bunch of men, more or less 50's to 70's, more or less living in the American Midwest.
Read this thread and ask yourself how absurd it would be to speak in generalities such as "what men think".
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Oct 3, 2018 17:54:29 GMT -5
Try reframing it as a statistical observation, with assumptions (unconscious or not) about the population being described.
Of course, in everyday conversation, few of us bother to frame our assertions so carefully. And some among us inevitably don't really reflect on the distribution of traits across a population and let go with men/women/whovever-are-like-that statements. But, you know, people are like that.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Oct 3, 2018 18:00:12 GMT -5
That's the sort of talk that gets the President of Harvard fired.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Oct 3, 2018 18:12:56 GMT -5
I assume we're all familiar with the story of Tandberg and the cooking sherry at IJ? No need to repeat it. Hey! What happens in Vinton stays in Vinton, Mr. Glass House.
|
|
|
Post by Chesapeake on Oct 3, 2018 19:02:30 GMT -5
He is on record with the opinion that sitting presidents should not be investigated or indicted. He was nominated for the SCOTUS by a president whose administration is under investigation, with multiple felony indictments, confessions and convictions. His behavior as an adolescent is small change. Maybe he would recuse himself for conflict of interest if the issue of presidential indictability should ever come up.
|
|
|
Post by Chesapeake on Oct 3, 2018 19:03:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Fingerplucked on Oct 3, 2018 19:53:42 GMT -5
Regarding "[women being] the experts on what they think", it's weird how its assumed that even using that phrase isn't considered nonsensical. "What women think"? What makes anyone believe that you can categorize people along those lines and reach conclusions about what they think? Hell, look at us. Bunch of men, more or less 50's to 70's, more or less living in the American Midwest. Read this thread and ask yourself how absurd it would be to speak in generalities such as "what men think". You should work on being more open minded. Men think bacon tastes good. Men think tits are good. Men think more money in their pocket is good. Men think blondes may have more fun, but brunettes are pretty fun too, as are redheads. Men think Victoria’s Secret models are sexy. There are thousands of “men think” statements you could make and statistically be on pretty solid ground.
|
|
|
Post by TKennedy on Oct 3, 2018 20:29:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Oct 3, 2018 20:42:05 GMT -5
Regarding "[women being] the experts on what they think", it's weird how its assumed that even using that phrase isn't considered nonsensical. "What women think"? What makes anyone believe that you can categorize people along those lines and reach conclusions about what they think? Hell, look at us. Bunch of men, more or less 50's to 70's, more or less living in the American Midwest. Read this thread and ask yourself how absurd it would be to speak in generalities such as "what men think". You should work on being more open minded. Men think bacon tastes good. Men think tits are good. Men think more money in their pocket is good. Men think blondes may have more fun, but brunettes are pretty fun too, as are redheads. Men think Victoria’s Secret models are sexy. There are thousands of “men think” statements you could make and statistically be on pretty solid ground. Women think bacon tastes good. Women think tits are good. Women think more money in their pocket is good. Women think blondes may have more fun, but brunettes are pretty fun too, as are redheads. Women think Victoria’s Secret models are sexy.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Oct 4, 2018 6:26:31 GMT -5
Well, it's Thursday and we still don't have any bombshell evidence that Kavanaugh did what was alleged. Any Republican who votes against him is out of a job next election so I suspect he gets in. It was a Democrat smear campaign to start with and it still is. Nothing to see here. Move on. Trump may get another chance before 2020 and the next one will be worse from the Democrat's viewpoint.
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Oct 4, 2018 6:36:12 GMT -5
I like bacon, think tits are good, that more money in my pocket is good (perhaps better), as a gray-haired old guy don't mind any color hair, and think VS models have something going for them.
Uh..., am I a man or a woman?
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Oct 4, 2018 6:42:23 GMT -5
"as a gray-haired old guy"
I suspect that gives you away.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Oct 4, 2018 9:09:09 GMT -5
... Uh..., am I a man or a woman? I don't know, but there has never been a better time to have that question.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Oct 4, 2018 9:23:02 GMT -5
If you don't know, I'm not going to mansplain it to you.
|
|
|
Post by Shannon on Oct 4, 2018 10:51:44 GMT -5
Give me a break, we all did stuff we didn’t remember under the influence at that age. (Except maybe Russ ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) ) For the record, I was never under the influence at that age, or any other, and the FBI is welcome to investigate that claim if they wish. I can say the same for a whole boatload of my friends from my high school and college days. We can try to excuse youthful misbehavior all we want, but the truth is that all behavior has consequences and even college boys should be bright enough to understand that. I understood it, and you can be dang sure my kids understand it. You can also be dang sure my boys know how to treat women with respect. Also, for the record, despite my generally conservative stance on most things political and moral, I think the Kavanaugh nomination smells a little too funny to be a good one. Surely even Trump's people could find a candidate that is acceptable to them who doesn't have a bunch of personal baggage. (I'm not naive enough to think the Dems wouldn't try to scuttle any nomination the Trump folks offer, but I have to think they could come up with someone who isn't such an easy target.)
|
|
|
Post by timfarney on Oct 4, 2018 10:57:55 GMT -5
He is on record with the opinion that sitting presidents should not be investigated or indicted. He was nominated for the SCOTUS by a president whose administration is under investigation, with multiple felony indictments, confessions and convictions. His behavior as an adolescent is small change. Maybe he would recuse himself for conflict of interest if the issue of presidential indictability should ever come up. Boy, would that piss off Trump.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Oct 4, 2018 11:03:29 GMT -5
Give me a break, we all did stuff we didn’t remember under the influence at that age. (Except maybe Russ ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) ) For the record, I was never under the influence at that age, or any other, and the FBI is welcome to investigate that claim if they wish. I can say the same for a whole boatload of my friends from my high school and college days. We can try to excuse youthful misbehavior all we want, but the truth is that all behavior has consequences and even college boys should be bright enough to understand that. I understood it, and you can be dang sure my kids understand it. You can also be dang sure my boys know how to treat women with respect. Also, for the record, despite my generally conservative stance on most things political and moral, I think the Kavanaugh nomination smells a little too funny to be a good one. Surely even Trump's people could find a candidate that is acceptable to them who doesn't have a bunch of personal baggage. (I'm not naive enough to think the Dems wouldn't try to scuttle any nomination the Trump folks offer, but I have to think they could come up with someone who isn't such an easy target.) It isn't personal baggage. The woman lied about him. It's going to be real tough to find anyone they wouldn't be willing to lie about.
|
|
|
Post by timfarney on Oct 4, 2018 11:12:56 GMT -5
Well, it's Thursday and we still don't have any bombshell evidence that Kavanaugh did what was alleged. Any Republican who votes against him is out of a job next election so I suspect he gets in. It was a Democrat smear campaign to start with and it still is. Nothing to see here. Move on. Trump may get another chance before 2020 and the next one will be worse from the Democrat's viewpoint. It’s Thursday and we still haven’t had an investigation worthy of the word. A one week investigation into a possible attempted rape was so limited that it concluded in three days. Evidence, bombshell or otherwise, will not be coming.
|
|
|
Post by fauxmaha on Oct 4, 2018 11:14:25 GMT -5
I think this one is as good as over. In the final analysis, I think it comes down to "don't show up with a knife to a gunfight, and don't show up with a gun to a Mitch McConnell fight".
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Oct 4, 2018 11:20:53 GMT -5
Well, it's Thursday and we still don't have any bombshell evidence that Kavanaugh did what was alleged. Any Republican who votes against him is out of a job next election so I suspect he gets in. It was a Democrat smear campaign to start with and it still is. Nothing to see here. Move on. Trump may get another chance before 2020 and the next one will be worse from the Democrat's viewpoint. It’s Thursday and we still haven’t had an investigation worthy of the word. A one week investigation into a possible attempted rape was so limited that it concluded in three days. Evidence, bombshell or otherwise, will not be coming. It probably would have been helpful if she could remember any verifiable fact other than her name.
|
|