Thanks ladies. 65% of women favor stricter gun laws; only 44% of men do

[green73]

While gun control legislation is a politically risky vote for red state Democrats, it’s also an issue that could hurt the GOP’s efforts to attract female voters.

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that 65 percent of women favor stronger gun laws, compared to 44 percent of men. That’s consistent with previous polling; a recent Quinnipiac University poll showed 61 percent of women and 45 percent of men in favor stricter gun laws.

Richard Feldman, Independent Firearms Association president and former NRA lobbyist, said that the gender gap on gun laws is a long-standing one, and that much of it has to do with who owns guns.

“The gender gap is real, but when you look at the gun owners and the non-gun-owners, that differential is going to drop substantially,” he said.

cont
http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/explaining-the-gender-gap-on-gun-control-20130412

[green73]

Maybe this is why women once weren't allowed to vote? *ducks*

[Nirvikalpa]

Your attitude is surely aimed at changing that statistic...

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Damn 19th amendment.

[amy31416]

I've seen this issue even in republican women. My mom was a staunch GOPer, but was scared to death of guns and wouldn't "let" us have one when we were kids (my dad was bent on buying my brother a rifle.) It was, ironically, my liberal uncle who taught me some of the basics of shooting, but they lived too far away for me to get much more than just the basics.

And it's not just my mother who was like that, I can think of four other self-described conservative females who cringe at the notion of guns. I wonder how much their fathers are to blame for it when they only want to teach their sons about guns....

[green73]

Your attitude is surely aimed at changing that statistic...


What attitude would that be? Playful? Prone to giving our female members a little ribbing?

[Nirvikalpa]

Thanks for further encouraging the gender gap, instead of recognizing individuals - the media would be so proud of you.

[green73]

Thanks for further encouraging the gender gap, instead of recognizing individuals - the media would be so proud of you.

You're welcome.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Thanks for further encouraging the gender gap, instead of recognizing individuals - the media would be so proud of you.

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/18060985.jpg

Seems "I don't need a husband to take care of me" has become "take care of me government!"

Obama's Julia ad (http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-05-11/opinions/35455415_1_single-women-unmarried-women-women-favor) makes so much sense now.

[Nirvikalpa]

I've seen this issue even in republican women. My mom was a staunch GOPer, but was scared to death of guns and wouldn't "let" us have one when we were kids (my dad was bent on buying my brother a rifle.) It was, ironically, my liberal uncle who taught me some of the basics of shooting, but they lived too far away for me to get much more than just the basics.

And it's not just my mother who was like that, I can think of four other self-described conservative females who cringe at the notion of guns. I wonder how much their fathers are to blame for it when they only want to teach their sons about guns....

A valid point that needs to be brought up. I have seen it a lot, especially while I was at college in PA - brothers and sisters where the boy would be taken out hunting at an early age by the father, and the daughter would just sit home.

Want to change the statistic? Mothers and fathers, take your daughters to a shooting range. Take them to an appleseed project gathering.

[ninepointfive]

most people against guns have no idea what they do. They think of Rambo movies or something similar.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqsLYEEYMr0

[Nirvikalpa]

Ron Paul Forums: Where the only posts about women are if they like big penes', that women should stop wearing bras, and that women are to blame for new gun control laws.

Ah, I see.

[KingNothing]

Women, generally, embrace more government. Statistics continually prove this to be true. Again, generally, they like government more than men do. That isn't a blanket statement. There are certainly individual women who hate government, and laws, and bans, and regulation. But, in general, as a gender they view government more favorably than men do.

I don't know what we can do about that.

[Nirvikalpa]

Ron Paul Forums: Where the only posts about women are if they like big penes', that women should stop wearing bras, and that women are to blame for new gun control laws.

Ah, I see.

EVEN FUNNIER, they're all threads started by the OP!

[ninepointfive]

Ron Paul Forums: Where the only posts about women are if they like big penes', that women should stop wearing bras, and that women are to blame for new gun control laws.

Ah, I see.



Stupidity has no gender bias. case in point:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zNZczIgVXjg

[CaseyJones]

guys don't piss off the ladies, one in three are armed

[amy31416]

Nikki's right about taking your daughters to an Appleseed event or out hunting. In high school, students could take the day off for the first day of buck season, and it was never the girls who were missing from class.

People fear what they don't know, especially scary-looking things that can kill and make loud noises.

Perhaps the single fellows here could find some anti-gun female, romance 'em and take them to the range. :)

[ninepointfive]

Perhaps the single fellows here could find some anti-gun female, romance 'em and take them to the range. :)

Sounds good

[green73]

guys don't piss off the ladies, one in three are armed

I'm making more women want gun control! Oh god, what have I done?!

[Anti Federalist]

A valid point that needs to be brought up. I have seen it a lot, especially while I was at college in PA - brothers and sisters where the boy would be taken out hunting at an early age by the father, and the daughter would just sit home.

Want to change the statistic? Mothers and fathers, take your daughters to a shooting range. Take them to an appleseed project gathering.

I've raised three daughters.

I've done that with all three.

All three own guns and are "pro gun rights".

That said, there is a definite and quantifiable voting gap between men and women on issues of liberty.

[Nirvikalpa]

Sounds good

My (very liberal) best friend was just taken to the gun range by her very conservative, pro-gun, firefighter fiance - after many weeks of arguing about it, as he wanted to have a gun in their new apartment. She ended up really enjoying it, and signed up for some safety classes so she could apply for a permit herself - and he just purchased a firearm for their apartment.

I told them about the Appleseed Project, and they're looking to do one in upstate NY soon.

[MRK]

Nikki's right about taking your daughters to an Appleseed event or out hunting. In high school, students could take the day off for the first day of buck season, and it was never the girls who were missing from class.

People fear what they don't know, especially scary-looking things that can kill and make loud noises.

Perhaps the single fellows here could find some anti-gun female, romance 'em and take them to the range. :)

That sounds like a good idea. Except I can't bear full-blown statist women anymore. All the women I've been with in the past few years have more experience with firearms than I do! I will however accept donations to encourage me to woo statists. PM for Paypal address.

[Nirvikalpa]

I've raised three daughters.

I've done that with all three.

All three own guns and are "pro gun rights".

That said, there is a definite and quantifiable voting gap between men and women on issues of liberty.

And feeding the stereotype certainly isn't helping, that I know and can attest for.

[green73]

Ron Paul Forums: Where the only posts about women are if they like big penes', that women should stop wearing bras, and that women are to blame for new gun control laws.

Ah, I see.

Funny threads shall not be tolerated!

[AGRP]

A valid point that needs to be brought up. I have seen it a lot, especially while I was at college in PA - brothers and sisters where the boy would be taken out hunting at an early age by the father, and the daughter would just sit home.

Want to change the statistic? Mothers and fathers, take your daughters to a shooting range. Take them to an appleseed project gathering.


Ron Paul Forums: Where the only posts about women are if they like big penes', that women should stop wearing bras, and that women are to blame for new gun control laws.

Ah, I see.

I dont understand the attitude of animosity. Men and women tend to think differently. Thats just the way it is.

[green73]

I dont understand the attitude of animosity. Men and women tend to think differently. Thats just the way it is.


How dare you!

[Nirvikalpa]

Green, where did I ever say you were making more women want gun control laws with your post?

I am pointing out the hypocrisy of libertarians being "anti-collectivism," and then you posting this and ignoring individuals. It's a media hit piece that directly divides the sexes - and your sarcastic title "thanks ladies," doesn't exactly help, either.

Believe what you want, and I will believe I want about you :)

----

If I didn't believe in majority of the positions held by a man (Ron Paul), I wouldn't be here. So I guess if men and women do truly think differently, I am a fool. :D

[Original_Intent]

Ron Paul Forums: Where the only posts about women are if they like big penes', that women should stop wearing bras, and that women are to blame for new gun control laws.

Ah, I see.

Certainly every person deserves to be measured by their individual merit or lack thereof, not because of any group that they can be lumped in with. The women who are in the liberty fight are simply amazing and deserve our thanks and our admiration.

On the other side of the coin, I don't think we need to toe the politically correct line to the point that we can't say something like the OP says. As a group, politically protected classes such as women and minorities have done irreparable damage to our country. Granted, most have done so due to being manipulated by a bunch of greedy, power hungry white men (with some token women and minorities admitted to the club).

I'm not a racist or a misogynist. But I deeply feel that women were given the right to vote because said greedy white men knew that they could then get any law passed if it was for the children, and the welfare state and move towards socialism would have either been impossible or would have taken decades longer without it.

Am I saying women should not have the right to vote? No! I am just pointing out the facts which I think are not contestable - why it was done and the result of doing it.

Anyway, tat probably didn't help, and my gut tells me I have probably managed to offend most of the wonderful women here. If so, my heartfelt and sincere apologies. I don't blame the women or minorities, and I certainly don't believe in collectivism. What I do believe is that those in power know how to move the majority, they know what buttons to push, and women and minorities AS A GROUP were handy tools that were used in achieving their objectives. In many ways, this makes the individuals in those groups that saw through the deception all the more admirable.

[amy31416]

Isn't it a couple of dudes who are pushing the latest gun control law? One of them an alleged conservative?

Huh. Not sure what to make of that.

[green73]

Green, where did I ever say you were making more women want gun control laws with your post?

I am pointing out the hypocrisy of libertarians being "anti-collectivism," and then you posting this and ignoring individuals. It's a media hit piece that directly divides the sexes - and your sarcastic title "thanks ladies," doesn't exactly help, either.

Believe what you want, and I will believe I want about you :)

That's an interesting take on collectivism. Thanks.

It would really hurt me if you didn't like me. Please like me.

Finally, you really need to lighten up. The post was made lightheartedly.

[amy31416]

Isn't it a couple of dudes who are pushing the latest gun control law? One of them an alleged conservative?

Huh. Not sure what to make of that.

[green73]

Isn't it a couple of dudes who are pushing the latest gun control law? One of them an alleged conservative?

Huh. Not sure what to make of that.

Now you are bringing evil politicians into it. They are not like the average citizen. (I know, I'm such a collectivist!).

[Nirvikalpa]

Isn't it a couple of dudes who are pushing the latest gun control law? One of them an alleged conservative?

Huh. Not sure what to make of that.

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/523998_491833980870772_640267211_n.jpg

[otherone]

Genteel ladies have causes...
http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4668879515746352&pid=15.1

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Isn't it a couple of dudes who are pushing the latest gun control law? One of them an alleged conservative?

Huh. Not sure what to make of that.

Seems 18 out of the 20 women in the U.S. Senate voted to end the filibuster of gun control. The two that didn't are Deb Fischer and Lisa Murkowski.

[amy31416]

I've raised three daughters.

I've done that with all three.

All three own guns and are "pro gun rights".

That said, there is a definite and quantifiable voting gap between men and women on issues of liberty.

So...you think that most other dads were like you in raising their daughters? You don't think many, many more were like my own in only focusing on their son when it came time to teach about guns and go on hunting/shooting trips?

My experience and observation would say that you're an exception, possibly even an outlier--especially in the Northeastern part of the US.

Not to mention that this is very superficial reasoning when there are so many other factors--one of them being the many men in our gov't who passed laws to make men less and less relevant in a family. Men who want to emasculate other men...but who do it through laws and social engineering.

[Original_Intent]

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/523998_491833980870772_640267211_n.jpg

Ha ha, threadwinner! Not entirely fair or accurate as to get that ratio you have to look at Republicans only, but still, very skillful.

I wonder if we took the entire Senate, and saw what proportion of women vs. men supported the filibuster what our picture would look like?

[sailingaway]

These polls are absolute BS. Immigration too. They don't ask what makes a difference to people then they put it in the bill as if it doesn't matter. Such as, ask women 'do you think a doctor should without telling a patient be able to put someone on a list so they can't get a gun for whatever reason they have even if they are just anti gun themselves?' and I would hope the vast majority of ANY one would say no. But they don't ask that, and they put it in the bill.

They sometimes take polls to find out where people are, but when it is AFTER they have the bill up, imho it is ONLY to get the answer they want to push their agenda, and they ask the sampling and questions necessary to get the answer they want.

Call me cynical.

[amy31416]

Genteel ladies have causes...
http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4668879515746352&pid=15.1

So do men.

Women didn't have the vote yet when the Federal Reserve Act was created and passed. Good job fellas--thanks for that!

[ninepointfive]

Women didn't have the vote yet when the Federal Reserve Act was created and passed. Good job fellas--thanks for that!

anytime ;-)

just found this. Let's settle it once and for all!
http://i.imgur.com/XVgVx.png

[sailingaway]

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/523998_491833980870772_640267211_n.jpg

:)

[KingNothing]

Green, where did I ever say you were making more women want gun control laws with your post?

I am pointing out the hypocrisy of libertarians being "anti-collectivism," and then you posting this and ignoring individuals. It's a media hit piece that directly divides the sexes - and your sarcastic title "thanks ladies," doesn't exactly help, either.

Believe what you want, and I will believe I want about you :)

----

If I didn't believe in majority of the positions held by a man (Ron Paul), I wouldn't be here. So I guess if men and women do truly think differently, I am a fool. :D


This post just made me groan. Women.

[Grubb556]

As a joke
http://static.quickmeme.com/media/social/qm.gif

http://static.quickmeme.com/media/social/qm.gif

[amy31416]

Ha ha, threadwinner! Not entirely fair or accurate as to get that ratio you have to look at Republicans only, but still, very skillful.

I wonder if we took the entire Senate, and saw what proportion of women vs. men supported the filibuster what our picture would look like?

I think it's good to look at the whole picture, you're right and do have a point. Another thing I'd like to take a look at is how many female presidents actually signed off on any federal gun control regulations.

[AuH20]

Where is Annie Oakley when you need her?????????? What's strange is that women generally appear obsessed with abortion, but have no problem condemning an inanimate tool like a gun or rifle.

[Original_Intent]

So do men.

Women didn't have the vote yet when the Federal Reserve Act was created and passed. Good job fellas--thanks for that!

Decent comparison. Men can be suckered just as much as women. They do tend to get suckered in different ways, though. Men actually supported the Federal Reserve Act trying to protect their own interests, pun intended, they just got sold a bill of goods. Women are much more likely to get suckered into a cause for compassionate reasons that they see as being helpful to others. Again that is a collectivist statement of the group as a whole, there are outstanding and many exceptions. Women are more likely to be the "moral, do-gooder tyrants" that C.S. Lewis referred to.

They are both wrong. I think you will be much more likely to see a man support a subsidy that he himself benefits from, and a woman more likely to acknowledge that is not fair and is a form of theft. But I think women are much more likely to play Robin Hood and support bad things if they perceive it as charitable, helping the underprivileged etc. and my experience has been it is VERY difficult to move them from that position to understand that respecting property rights has to trump a "good cause".

[ninepointfive]

We could settle all of this with a friendly game of truth or dare.

[shane77m]

http://www.mortdelol.eu/wp-content/uploads/tdomf/1453/kitchen.jpg

[amy31416]

Decent comparison. Men can be suckered just as much as women. They do tend to get suckered in different ways, though. Men actually supported the Federal Reserve Act trying to protect their own interests, pun intended, they just got sold a bill of goods. Women are much more likely to get suckered into a cause for compassionate reasons that they see as being helpful to others. Again that is a collectivist statement of the group as a whole, there are outstanding and many exceptions. Women are more likely to be the "moral, do-gooder tyrants" that C.S. Lewis referred to.

They are both wrong. I think you will be much more likely to see a man support a subsidy that he himself benefits from, and a woman more likely to acknowledge that is not fair and is a form of theft. But I think women are much more likely to play Robin Hood and support bad things if they perceive it as charitable, helping the underprivileged etc. and my experience has been it is VERY difficult to move them from that position to understand that respecting property rights has to trump a "good cause".

I think that's one of the most fair posts in these "blame game" threads.

In my ultimate opinion, everyone who's paid a cent of taxes to prop all of this up is to blame, and that means all of us. Male/female, left/right or otherwise.

[KingNothing]

Decent comparison. Men can be suckered just as much as women. They do tend to get suckered in different ways, though. Men actually supported the Federal Reserve Act trying to protect their own interests, pun intended, they just got sold a bill of goods. Women are much more likely to get suckered into a cause for compassionate reasons that they see as being helpful to others. Again that is a collectivist statement of the group as a whole, there are outstanding and many exceptions. Women are more likely to be the "moral, do-gooder tyrants" that C.S. Lewis referred to.

They are both wrong. I think you will be much more likely to see a man support a subsidy that he himself benefits from, and a woman more likely to acknowledge that is not fair and is a form of theft. But I think women are much more likely to play Robin Hood and support bad things if they perceive it as charitable, helping the underprivileged etc. and my experience has been it is VERY difficult to move them from that position to understand that respecting property rights has to trump a "good cause".


In other words, bitches are silly and illogical. Agree completely.

[Czolgosz]

Maybe this is why women once weren't allowed to vote? *ducks*

lol

[amy31416]

anytime ;-)

just found this. Let's settle it once and for all!
http://i.imgur.com/XVgVx.png

Pffffft. I hear Gloria Steinem is quite the gamer, she'll hand you your ass after she's done with it.

(Yeah, I just grossed myself out.)

[kcchiefs6465]

Isn't it a couple of dudes who are pushing the latest gun control law? One of them an alleged conservative?

Huh. Not sure what to make of that.


https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/523998_491833980870772_640267211_n.jpg

To be fair though, Lindsey Graham is a woman at heart.

[green73]

So do men.

Women didn't have the vote yet when the Federal Reserve Act was created and passed. Good job fellas--thanks for that!


Stop dividing the sexes, you collectivist! xx

[KingNothing]

To be fair though, Lindsey Graham is a woman at heart.

Girl Name is horrific at his job. I can't believe that such a terrible Republican is holding such a safe seat. There's no excuse for that.

[amy31416]

Stop dividing the sexes, you collectivist! xx

Dammit! I thought that was the point of this thread. :mad: I wish I were more logical.

[Uriel999]

Collectivists the whole lot of ya!

[PursuePeace]

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/523998_491833980870772_640267211_n.jpg


:D :D

[green73]

Girl Name is horrific at his job. I can't believe that such a terrible Republican is holding such a safe seat. There's no excuse for that.

He's a happy buttboy for the MIC.

[green73]

Dammit! I thought that was the point of this thread. :mad: I wish I were more logical.


The point was to get some healthy sparring leading eventually to cyber mud wrestling.

[itshappening]

Girl Name is horrific at his job. I can't believe that such a terrible Republican is holding such a safe seat. There's no excuse for that.

'Conservative' in SC = military Keynesism. Graham is a military Keynesist.

Therefore they love him.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

All I know is: women fully got the vote in 1920. After 131 years of relatively small government since the Constitution going into effect, the size of the federal government quickly ballooned. We got the New Deal in the 1930s and the Great Society in the 1960s, and so on and so on to today's ridiculousness.

[amy31416]

The point was to get some healthy sparring leading eventually to cyber mud wrestling.

So far, I think 9.5 should be thrown into the wrestling ring. With you.

Enjoy! :D

[ninepointfive]

So far, I think 9.5 should be thrown into the wrestling ring. With you.

Enjoy! :D

Mindfuck: Green73 is a really hot woman.

[amy31416]

All I know is: women fully got the vote in 1920. After 131 years of relatively small government since the Constitution going into effect, the size of the federal government quickly ballooned. We got the New Deal in the 1930s and the Great Society in the 1960s, and so on and so on to today's ridiculousness.

1. You were the dummies who gave us the vote.
2. No women ultimately passed any legislation.
3. Very few women were in government until recently.
4. The New Deal was completely conceived by and passed by men as far as I know.
5. Men also gave us the central bank, and never has a woman been the head of the Federal Reserve.
6. It was still mostly men in gov't during the "Great Society" in the 1960's.

Historically, it's men who are in charge in the gov't, and they are the ones who wage war, incarcerate, torture and keep people in submission.

[amy31416]

Mindfuck: Green73 is a really hot woman.

Keep dreaming, sweetheart. ;)

[ninepointfive]

I once had hipster male friends who at some points were more effeminate than women.

and the point here is, it's people! people are bad. it's not women.

[talkingpointes]

I don't know any women that dislike guns or discourage ownership of them. Oddly enough I might know more women with guns than guys. But then again I don't think I have any friends with anti-gun views - or they haven't chosen to speak up.

[AuH20]

Women seemingly influence everything nowadays. The balance must be restored. No more manscaping, musical ******ry or general emasculation! ROFL

[July]

It's a pattern. This is just how the state leverages power. Whenever a group/movement decides it wants to be too independent and challenges the state or status quo, that group is offered privilege/favor in exchange, and eventually turned around to dependency upon the state. Just like individual states are controlled through redistribution of federal money and grants, industry is controlled through subsidies and corporate welfare and foreign countries are controlled with foreign aid. Individuals and dissenting political groups are also controlled the same way. Women are in this position now because we once wanted more freedom and threatened the status quo, IMO. You see the same thing with other minorities and political movements.

[alucard13mmfmj]

Sounds like good news for rapists... *sigh*

Women will complain about safety and would want more police.. More police = more thugs and more money spent. Good Game.

Pepper Spray, Tasers and especially rape whistles and vomitting, do not really deter rapist.

[AuH20]

Real feminists would be proponents for gun ownership. Not the other way around. Secondly, you would think women would want a weapon that evens the scale, in terms of a possible physical confrontation with a criminal male.

[talkingpointes]

Real feminists would be proponents for gun ownership. Not the other way around. Secondly, you would think women would want a weapon that evens the scale, in terms of a possible physical confrontation with a criminal male.

Think of which sex probably gets more of the propaganda becuase they spend more time at home. These women probably just fear guns. This is a retarded article and is divisive - at best.

[familydog]

Real feminists would be proponents for gun ownership. Not the other way around. Secondly, you would think women would want a weapon that evens the scale, in terms of a possible physical confrontation with a criminal male.

"Think" is the key word. The problem is that girls aren't encouraged to think. Only boys are encouraged to think and be assertive. Dismantle traditional gender roles and you see this problem dissipate.

[ninepointfive]

"Think" is the key word. The problem is that girls aren't encouraged to think. Only boys are encouraged to think and be assertive. Dismantle traditional gender roles and you see this problem dissipate.

i dunno about that - it seems women are encouraged to think in today's society, and men are supposed to just watch sports on tv.

[familydog]

i dunno about that - it seems women are encouraged to think in today's society, and men are supposed to just watch sports on tv.

That's a fair point. Think independently may be a more appropriate word usage.

[Christian Liberty]

All I know is: women fully got the vote in 1920. After 131 years of relatively small government since the Constitution going into effect, the size of the federal government quickly ballooned. We got the New Deal in the 1930s and the Great Society in the 1960s, and so on and so on to today's ridiculousness.
How many women voted for Abraham Lincoln or Woodrow Wilson?

[Constitutional Paulicy]

LOL at this thread. Thanks everyone it been entertaining!!!! :D:D

[heavenlyboy34]

Dammit! I thought that was the point of this thread.:mad: I wish I were more logical.

I wish you were more logical too.

[heavenlyboy34]

Sounds like good news for rapists... *sigh*

Women will complain about safety and would want more police.. More police = more thugs and more money spent. Good Game.

Pepper Spray, Tasers and especially rape whistles and vomitting, do not really deter rapist.
Plus, the police have been rapists on occasion themselves. There are one or two vids posted (bt AF, IIRC) on RPFs of cops taking a "search" to the extreme and poking around in women's naughty bits. :P :mad: (which would be called rape if a mundane did it)

[Vessol]

65%=/=100% of women.

[KingNothing]

65%=/=100% of women.

No, but it is close enough to generalize the sillier gender.

[talkingpointes]

We can't compare in silliness. If we were so smart why are we not only first in line but the only ones in line when it comes to sacrificing ourselves for nothing.

[ClydeCoulter]

My daughter got to shoot a 7.62x39, .22mag bolt, 9mm pistol and 22TCM pistol while here recently. She went home and bought a 1911 FS 45ACP (to go with her 12ga shotgun), mine weren't big enough :D

[kcchiefs6465]

My daughter got to shoot a 7.62x39, .22mag bolt, 9mm pistol and 22TCM pistol while here recently. She went home and bought a 1911 FS 45ACP (to go with her 12ga shotgun), mine weren't big enough :D
You have a .22 TCM?

[ClydeCoulter]

You have a .22 TCM?

:D (with the 9mm barrel combo) If you're ever in my neck of the woods, I'll let you give it a try (I stocked up on some of the ammo before it went up), but you'll probably want ear protection because it is one loud load.

[Seraphim]

No, that's not true.

If a guy goes around sreaming that women are the reason for all the tyrants then I'd back you up...but this is a legit issue holding the liberty movement back.

The women vote can't be dominated by tyrants...and it overwhelmingly is. Pointing that out creates discussion to overcome that.

Amy had a good idea; woo these women to a shooting range.



And feeding the stereotype certainly isn't helping, that I know and can attest for.

[jj-]

Finally, you really need to lighten up. The post was made lightheartedly.

I thought it was done with the intention of making Nirvikalpa reply.

[jj-]

So...you think that most other dads were like you in raising their daughters?

No. It's men's fault.

[jj-]

Meet my Daughter

http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/img/photos/2012/08/10/0e/18/Celia-Savage_1393505a_1.jpg

[MRK]

Amy had a good idea; woo these women to a shooting range.

I am now taking donations via PM to woo statist women in an effort to convert them into liberty lovers. Post here with a description of the potential candidate's statist qualities for consideration.

[MRK]

There's got to be a statist meetup group of some kind where I can start at. Any suggestions of likely social groups?

[MRK]

Donations will be used for drinks, taxi rides, hotel rooms, theater performance tickets, beach parking meters, florists, ammunition crates, rifle range time, and prepper food kits - chocolate variety.

[kcchiefs6465]

Donations will be used for drinks, taxi rides, hotel rooms, theater performance tickets, beach parking meters, florists, ammunition crates, rifle range time, and prepper food kits - chocolate variety.
Do you accept BTC?

[Wooden Indian]

Meet my Daughter

http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/img/photos/2012/08/10/0e/18/Celia-Savage_1393505a_1.jpg

Yes please. :)

[green73]

"Think" is the key word. The problem is that girls aren't encouraged to think. Only boys are encouraged to think and be assertive. Dismantle traditional gender roles and you see this problem dissipate.

None of the sheep are encouraged to think. The ability to think is precisely what the Prussian school system we have is designed to destroy.

[green73]

Meet my Daughter

I knew your were an old bastard.

[AlexAmore]

Ok brainstorming session!

*We need to brainwash women into becoming our little liberty-minded minion solders*

Theory: Getting enough women to shoot a gun at a range will trigger (see what I did there?) a shift in their political beliefs in favor of liberty.

Proposal: We sponsor and create big events at gun ranges in major liberal cities marketed at young liberal women. It's like ladies night but at a gun range. Women shoot free, with free food, beverages, and entertainment. If you have a picture of yourself with Barack Obama you get a free gun...ya know fun goofy stuff like that.

This ought to lower the fear factor of the women going to the range during this event...as it could be intimidating for them in general

[jj-]

Alex, what about PAYING women to take the courses? Do we have a billionaire?

[RickyJ]

Your attitude is surely aimed at changing that statistic...


What would you say to change that statistic?

[LibertyEagle]

Thanks ladies. 65% of women favor stricter gun laws; only 44% of men do

If you think this issue is related to the sex of an individual, why aren't you taking responsibility for the 44% of men that are anti-gun and taking action to do something about it?

[AlexAmore]

Alex, what about PAYING women to take the courses? Do we have a billionaire?

Well the way the events would work is through sponsorship. So food, beverages, entertainment would all be sponsored. We would have banners with business names and logos of our sponsors. We might have instructors wearing shirts with sponsors on them and so on. The list of ways to monetize an event are endless. For our big sponsors we could mention them in all our marketing for the event (radio, mailings...etc). Probably could even ask the gun manufacturers for the sponsorship.

The trick is you ask for the sponsorship first, get the money from them, THEN create the event with THAT money. So you don't need any capital to get this started. You write out a plan and all the benefits the sponsor will receive with various tiers like Gold, Silver, and Bronze.

I know a thing or two about event planning so that's why I thought of this. But yeah paying women to shoot might not be a bad idea. I think gift certificates from sponsors would solve that and boom no out of pocket expense now.

[WM_in_MO]

I'm madder at the 44% of males.

[Tod]

And feeding the stereotype certainly isn't helping, that I know and can attest for.

How was AF "feeding" the stereotype? Isn't the first step in resolving a problem (that there is a statistical verifiable bias against liberty by women) admitting and recognizing that there is a problem so that a solution can be devised?


How does an alcoholic get their life squared away without first recognizing their addiction to alcohol?

[green73]

Meet my Daughter

http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/img/photos/2012/08/10/0e/18/Celia-Savage_1393505a_1.jpg

LPG?
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/06/01/article-2153229-13669D98000005DC-777_634x365.jpg

http://whitewatch.info/2012/06/08/i-love-mass-destruction-meet-the-glamorous-gun-toting-college-student-arrested-on-explosives-firearms-and-drugs-charges.aspx?view=linear

[RickyJ]

There is an easy way to fix this problem, just stop letting women vote.

[BAllen]

All I know is: women fully got the vote in 1920. After 131 years of relatively small government since the Constitution going into effect, the size of the federal government quickly ballooned. We got the New Deal in the 1930s and the Great Society in the 1960s, and so on and so on to today's ridiculousness.

Slam dunk! Game over.

[Origanalist]

Meet my Daughter

http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/img/photos/2012/08/10/0e/18/Celia-Savage_1393505a_1.jpg

Strong girl.

[moostraks]

Ya know what's funny (strange not haha) is that many of ya'll seem to be equally as single minded as those you oppose. I don't have to become a gun lover to respect another person's right to own them. FWIW it happens to be against the spiritual belief system of some folks. That doesn't mean they go complaining to government to restrict ownership of them...

[Christian Liberty]

There is an easy way to fix this problem, just stop letting women vote.

I wonder what percentage of libertarian women would voluntarily accept this if it had a chance of working.

I don't think that's a solution though, it would just mean more neocons getting elected. The best thing about the Democrats is that they prevent the Republicans from taking total power (And vice versa.) Its not a real difference, but they still fight each other as if there were...

[Czolgosz]

End voting.

[libertygrl]

There is an easy way to fix this problem, just stop letting women vote.

Oh, really? You and what army Mr. Fascist?

While we're at it, why not blacks and Jews as well?

While I think this poll is just a small example, I do believe it exposes ignorance about our 2nd amendment rights (which isn't only exclusive in women) but also, our biological differences as well.

What people are missing here, is that childern were murdered at S. Hook. Our maternal instinct is to protect - not by the use of more weapons and possibly violence - but by taking away the weapons. We've been conditioned that only men can protect us. Men on the other hand are hunter/gatherers. Men want to kill to protect. When we were kids (for those of us not raised in the southern/mid western states), women are told that guns are dangerous.

Before I discovered Ron Paul I was anti-gun until I became educated about the history of past totalitarian societies and our constitution. I can safely say that MOST Americans of both sexes are ignorant of our constitution thanks to our educational system and our propaganda media.


Prejudice against people from groups different than their own is linked to aggression for men and fear for women, suggests new research led by Michigan State University scholars.

The researchers report that, throughout history, men have been the primary aggressors against different groups as well as the primary victims of group-based aggression and discrimination.

"There is evidence going back thousands of years of bands of men getting together and attacking other bands of men, eliminating them and keeping the women as the spoils of war," said Carlos David Navarrete, evolutionary psychologist at MSU.

As modern examples, Navarrete noted the wars in Central Africa and the Balkans that were marred by rape and genocide.

Navarrete co-authored the study with MSU researcher Melissa McDonald and Mark Van Vugt of the University of Amsterdam and the University of Oxford. The research appears in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, a London-based research journal.

The researchers analyzed current academic literature on war and conflict and found that the standard social science theory did not explain the sex differences in aggressive or discriminatory behavior between groups. They offered a novel theory that integrates psychology with ecology and evolutionary biology. Their "male warrior hypothesis" explains how a deep evolutionary history of group conflict may have provided the backdrop for natural selection to shape the social psychologies and behaviors of men and women in fundamentally distinct ways.

Essentially, men are more likely to start wars and to defend their own group, sometimes in very risky and self-sacrificial ways. Attacking other groups represents an opportunity to offset these costs by gaining access to mates, territory, resources and increased status.

The authors complement these findings with results from lab experiments showing that men are more prejudiced toward other groups.

Women, meanwhile, live under the threat of sexual coercion by foreign aggressors, and are apt to display a "tend-and-befriend response" toward members of their own group, while maintaining a fear of strangers in order to protect themselves and their offspring.

"Although these sex-specific responses may have been adaptive in ancestral times," said McDonald, the lead author of the study, "they have likely lost this adaptive value in our modern society, and now act only to needlessly perpetuate discrimination and conflict among groups.

Navarrete added that the behavior is seen in humans' closest relative, the chimpanzee. "Just like humans, they'll attack and kill the males of other groups. They'll also attack females -- not to the point of killing them, but more to get them to join their group," he said.

Since the behaviors are common among both humans and chimps, they are likely to have existed in our common ancestor millions of years ago, Navarrete said.

"This would have provided eons of time for the deepest workings of our minds to have been fundamentally shaped by these cruel realities," he said. "Coming to grips with this history and how it still affects us in modern times may be an important step into improving the problems caused by our darker predispositions."


h ttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120124113053.htm

[klamath]

Too illustrate how stupid it is to inflame the war of the sexes with threads like this.....


Men and women were at odds over the question. Among men, 42% said they would support U.S. military action against Iran, 40% said they would not, 18% did not have an opinion. Women countered with 41% opposing U.S. military action against Iran, 28% said they would support it, 29% offered no opinion.
Thanks gentlemen.
Where on one point the average women's vote may go against many beliefs here, on the other side the average men's vote will go against us in another area....

[Anti Federalist]

And feeding the stereotype certainly isn't helping, that I know and can attest for.

Ignoring the clear and obvious isn't going to help either.

[nobody's_hero]

Wait, wait. 44% of men do?

Fuck me sideways. Folks that's almost half. Yeah yeah the women vote is not surprising 65% blah blah blah guns are bad. But 44% of men?

Okay, all women leave this thread. The men have to have a talk about how to save this country.

[MelissaWV]

Thanks gentlemen: nearly 100 percent of those in power during gun grabs throughout history have been men.

As others have pointed out, you might want to read past your own gloating and into the numbers. You might want to read the original questions, the responses, and the breakdown, not to mention the conditions under which the information was gathered.

[I<3Liberty]

I think it's largely because of the rhetoric being used to promote the stricter gun laws post Sandy hook tragedy. There's so many emotion-based arguments that (generally speaking) easily persuade people that are easily persuaded by these emotional arguments like many liberals, some women, young children (I bet most kids would support stricter gun laws, as well.)

Personally, I hate emotion-based arguments and get annoyed when people focus on stricter gun laws. Look at Chicago -- they have some of the strictest laws, yet many gun-related crimes.

What we need is more focus on mental well-being, improved access to mental health services, and research on mental illness.

[HigherVision]

Ron Paul Forums: Where the only posts about women are if they like big penes', that women should stop wearing bras, and that women are to blame for new gun control laws.

Ah, I see.

How about denouncing all the female statists out there instead of male libertarians for once? It's never their own fault for supporting big government, it's that men haven't done a good enough job in convincing them not to.

By the way I like big pens too, they help me write better.

[HigherVision]

Ya know what's funny (strange not haha) is that many of ya'll seem to be equally as single minded as those you oppose. I don't have to become a gun lover to respect another person's right to own them

But it does help.

[liberty2897]

Saw this somewhere on this forum... This is one of the best arguments I've heard on gun control. Not only a female, but a young one at that.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_-N9_tnWBo

Quit feeding the stereotypes (even if its just in fun)... and things might get better. Females are just as apt at seeing the logical fallacy in the gun control argument as men if presented the truth. The 60/40 spit probably just indicates that more women are exposed to the fake news than men.

[donnay]

What's even more alarming to me is the 44% of the men that agreed. :eek:

[HigherVision]

Saw this somewhere on this forum... This is one of the best arguments I've heard on gun control. Not only a female, but a young one at that.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_-N9_tnWBo

Quit feeding the stereotypes (even if its just in fun)... and things might get better. Females are just as apt at seeing the logical fallacy in the gun control argument as men if presented the truth. The 60/40 spit probably just indicates that more women are exposed to the fake news than men.

This attitude that I'm supposed to be all impressed that you have a video of someone against gun control who's female is what's fueling the problem. If it were a man in the video no one would care, maybe they would if his commentary was particularly thoughtful but it would be judged on that. Not on the fact that he was a man giving the speech. But whenever a woman does something we're supposed to be like extra-impressed, but why? This societal privilege granted to women is likely the precise reason why more women aren't libertarians. They don't want to give it up!

[TheTexan]

Are women naturally more submissive than men? Considering all the different cultures across the globe that are male dominated, it does seem to be the case.

[Anti Federalist]

End voting.

/thread.

Since when did my liberty become contingent on the outcome of a popular voting plebiscite?

[heavenlyboy34]

/thread.

Since when did my liberty become contingent on the outcome of a popular voting plebiscite?


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti Federalist again. :( I believe that happened ~1790.

[liberty2897]

This attitude that I'm supposed to be all impressed that you have a video of someone against gun control who's female is what's fueling the problem. If it were a man in the video no one would care, maybe they would if his commentary was particularly thoughtful but it would be judged on that. Not on the fact that he was a man giving the speech. But whenever a woman does something we're supposed to be like extra-impressed, but why? This societal privilege granted to women is likely the precise reason why more women aren't libertarians. They don't want to give it up!

I understand the point you are trying to make, but I don't think that attitude is helping the cause of liberty. Yes men and women are different, but polls pitting male and female against each other on issues that can be resolved with simple logic (and people falling for it) are the problem. The reason I posted that video was because it is a great argument first and foremost. I also posted it because of the age and gender in reference to the topic. If I offended, oh well... just trying to do what I think is right. None of the women I know are pro-gun control, so maybe I don't have an unbiased sampling of experience.

[MelissaWV]

This attitude that I'm supposed to be all impressed that you have a video of someone against gun control who's female is what's fueling the problem. If it were a man in the video no one would care, maybe they would if his commentary was particularly thoughtful but it would be judged on that. Not on the fact that he was a man giving the speech. But whenever a woman does something we're supposed to be like extra-impressed, but why? This societal privilege granted to women is likely the precise reason why more women aren't libertarians. They don't want to give it up!

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?410719-Fat-naked-woman-goes-on-rampage-in-German-gym

I await your protest as to why her gender plays any part in this, especially when she is still less fat than several notable male politicians we discuss on these forums.

[PaulConventionWV]

Thanks for further encouraging the gender gap, instead of recognizing individuals - the media would be so proud of you.

Buzzkill.

[PaulConventionWV]

Green, where did I ever say you were making more women want gun control laws with your post?

I am pointing out the hypocrisy of libertarians being "anti-collectivism," and then you posting this and ignoring individuals. It's a media hit piece that directly divides the sexes - and your sarcastic title "thanks ladies," doesn't exactly help, either.

Believe what you want, and I will believe I want about you :)

----

If I didn't believe in majority of the positions held by a man (Ron Paul), I wouldn't be here. So I guess if men and women do truly think differently, I am a fool. :D

So... no more statistics. There is no difference in the way men and women think. Thou shalt not measure the attitudes of the population and separate them into categories!

[PaulConventionWV]

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/523998_491833980870772_640267211_n.jpg

Most people who are in Congress are men, so that's pretty easy to explain. If there was an equal amount of men and women, I bet there would be more woman advocates than men.

[liberty2897]

So... no more statistics. There is no difference in the way men and women think. Thou shalt not measure the attitudes of the population and separate them into categories!

http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728

It has 4.5 out of 5 stars... so it MUST be a good book.

[MelissaWV]

So... no more statistics. There is no difference in the way men and women think. Thou shalt not measure the attitudes of the population and separate them into categories!

...via faulty and ridiculous interpretations of data.

What would be the purpose of my posting that most rapists are men, most evil world leaders are men, most child molesters are men, a very large percentage of the world's prison population is male, etc.? If I started threads on all of these subjects, I wonder if you would defend them as statistics, or if you would wonder why on earth I started that collection of threads. I wonder how that perception might be colored by my putting "Thanks, guys!" in front of it?

* * *

ETA: Cool. You pre-answered my question by making excuses for Congress having more men than women.

[libertygrl]

This attitude that I'm supposed to be all impressed that you have a video of someone against gun control who's female is what's fueling the problem. If it were a man in the video no one would care, maybe they would if his commentary was particularly thoughtful but it would be judged on that. Not on the fact that he was a man giving the speech. But whenever a woman does something we're supposed to be like extra-impressed, but why? This societal privilege granted to women is likely the precise reason why more women aren't libertarians. They don't want to give it up!

OH PA-LEEEEZZZ. Why are you supposed to be extra impressed by a women doing something like this? Well, clearly YOU wouldn't be. But maybe it's because men like you put ALL women into a box as if we are all the same, rather than treat us like individuals. So when someone shows you an example of a women acting independently to prove you wrong, you still criticize it.

And you know something, maybe if some men out there (and take note of the word "some") would actually BE A MAN and take some responsibility in providing for the children you are fathering, there wouldn't be as many women on welfare.

When I first joined these forums back in '07, I thought I would be engaging with people that were different. That Libertarians were supposedly against the notion of collectivism and more for the individual. Instead, when certain subjects come up, I find the typical blame game of an entire group of people. When there was a discussion about social security, people here blamed the senior citizens. When there was a discussion about the radical Pastor Terry Jones burning the Quran, people here blamed everyone who happens to believe in God . And now when the issue of gun control comes up, all women get blamed. So basically, these forums only welcome young white athiest males, who hate women and senior citizens. Am I leaving anyone else out? Quite frankly, I find this attitude infantile, ignorant, and repulsive.

The fact of the matter is, every citizen bares some responsibility as to why we are losing our freedoms today. So all this divisiveness has to stop. Instead of blaming one another we should all help in educating people instead of insulting them. It may be a cliche but it's true - united we stand divided we fall.

[Petar]

Transvestites are even worse than regular woman because they also have penises.

[angelatc]

This attitude that I'm supposed to be all impressed that you have a video of someone against gun control who's female is what's fueling the problem. If it were a man in the video no one would care, maybe they would if his commentary was particularly thoughtful but it would be judged on that. Not on the fact that he was a man giving the speech. But whenever a woman does something we're supposed to be like extra-impressed, but why? This societal privilege granted to women is likely the precise reason why more women aren't libertarians. They don't want to give it up!

Maybe more women aren't libertarians because LP males tend to be assholes.

[Origanalist]

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/2195930368/h552F4F8C/

[heavenlyboy34]

Maybe more women aren't libertarians because LP males tend to be assholes.

The LP has little to do with libertarianism in general. Unfortunate that such an un-libertarian party uses the L-word to describe itself. :P

[PaulConventionWV]

"Think" is the key word. The problem is that girls aren't encouraged to think. Only boys are encouraged to think and be assertive. Dismantle traditional gender roles and you see this problem dissipate.

Dismantling traditional gender roles has nothing to do with it. Gender roles are traditional for a reason. Throughout history, they have been the most reasonable way in which society operates. Have you ever heard Walter Block speak about this? He explains it quite clearly. There is no social hierarchy that enslaves women.

[MelissaWV]

Dismantling traditional gender roles has nothing to do with it. Gender roles are traditional for a reason. Throughout history, they have been the most reasonable way in which society operates. Have you ever heard Walter Block speak about this? He explains it quite clearly. There is no social hierarchy that enslaves women.

Well so long as it's the most reasonable thing to be an unthinking babymaker, statistically speaking.

[PaulConventionWV]

Well so long as it's the most reasonable thing to be an unthinking babymaker, statistically speaking.

Like it or not, that's the way it's been. You can think, but I don't see what's wrong with being a babymaker.

That's just the way society's been arranged since there was society.

[PaulConventionWV]

As usual, women can't take a joke. Women object to this post. More posts about how women can't take a joke. Women still can't take a joke. The cycle goes on.

[Anti Federalist]

I dunno, to make the point that men are, by their nature, more prone to violence.

Because, ummm, erm, they are?

People are different, they are not one polyglot, faceless, sexless blob that all act and think and respond the same way.

Although the global planners are certainly working towards that end.



...via faulty and ridiculous interpretations of data.

What would be the purpose of my posting that most rapists are men, most evil world leaders are men, most child molesters are men, a very large percentage of the world's prison population is male, etc.? If I started threads on all of these subjects, I wonder if you would defend them as statistics, or if you would wonder why on earth I started that collection of threads. I wonder how that perception might be colored by my putting "Thanks, guys!" in front of it?

* * *

ETA: Cool. You pre-answered my question by making excuses for Congress having more men than women.

[MelissaWV]

I dunno, to make the point that men are, by their nature, more prone to violence.

Because, ummm, erm, they are?

People are different, they are not one polyglot, faceless, sexless blob that all act and think and respond the same way.

Although the global planners are certainly working towards that end.

Putting the preface on it, and posting it in this forum, would imply that I thought the guys here were somehow a part of that big blob that gets no better just because you split it into its pink and blue parts.

[PaulConventionWV]

A neg rep for that, Melissa? You're taking this way too seriously.

[MelissaWV]

As usual, women can't take a joke. Women object to this post. More posts about how women can't take a joke. Women still can't take a joke. The cycle goes on.

Oh my stars! I am not the least bit sure why you are surprised. Is "surprised" the right word? It has two syllables (of course, "syllables" has three, but I made sure to get that one right by asking a male friend first). I can't take a joke :( Now I think I have made one of my male superiors (I asked about that word, too) mad. I fail at girl-ness.

I meant to hit +rep! Oh I am so dumb I hit the wrong dot. Teehee!

[PaulConventionWV]

Oh my stars! I am not the least bit sure why you are surprised. Is "surprised" the right word? It has two syllables (of course, "syllables" has three, but I made sure to get that one right by asking a male friend first). I can't take a joke :( Now I think I have made one of my male superiors (I asked about that word, too) mad. I fail at girl-ness.

I meant to hit +rep! Oh I am so dumb I hit the wrong dot. Teehee!

In case you haven't noticed, I'm not taking this a tenth as seriously as you are. Feminists are funny.

[heavenlyboy34]

I dunno, to make the point that men are, by their nature, more prone to violence.

Because, ummm, erm, they are?

People are different, they are not one polyglot, faceless, sexless blob that all act and think and respond the same way.

Although the global planners are certainly working towards that end.
http://cdn.motinetwork.net/demotivationalposters.net/image/demotivational-poster/0912/that-word-inigo-montoya-word-think-means-princess-bride-mand-demotivational-poster-1260739585.jpg
pol·y·glot [pol-ee-glot] Show IPA
adjective1.able to speak or write several languages; multilingual.

2.containing, composed of, or written in several languages: apolyglot Bible.


noun3.a mixture (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mixture) or confusion of languages.

4.a person who speaks, writes, or reads a number of languages.

5.a book, especially a Bible, containing the same text in severallanguages.

[MelissaWV]

HB - Actually I do believe that's what he meant.

PCWV :rolleyes: Yeah. I'm taking it so seriously that I'm whining about a neg rep as if it means something. I mean that would be a total sissy move on my part. Wouldn't it.

[PaulConventionWV]

HB - Actually I do believe that's what he meant.

PCWV :rolleyes: Yeah. I'm taking it so seriously that I'm whining about a neg rep as if it means something. I mean that would be a total sissy move on my part. Wouldn't it.

lol

I'm totally sorry for pointing out how society has thrived for thousands of years.

[heavenlyboy34]

HB - Actually I do believe that's what he meant.

PCWV :rolleyes: Yeah. I'm taking it so seriously that I'm whining about a neg rep as if it means something. I mean that would be a total sissy move on my part. Wouldn't it.
If so, the context doesn't make it seem like that's what me meant. :/ I believe he was searching for a word along the lines of "amorphous".

[Anti Federalist]

http://cdn.motinetwork.net/demotivationalposters.net/image/demotivational-poster/0912/that-word-inigo-montoya-word-think-means-princess-bride-mand-demotivational-poster-1260739585.jpg
pol·y·glot [pol-ee-glot] Show IPA
adjective1.able to speak or write several languages; multilingual.

2.containing, composed of, or written in several languages: apolyglot Bible.


noun3.a mixture (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mixture) or confusion of languages.

4.a person who speaks, writes, or reads a number of languages.

5.a book, especially a Bible, containing the same text in severallanguages.




That is what I meant, a babbling mixture of confusing languages, all sound and fury signifying nothing.

Apologies, I'm tired and in a shitty mood, so perhaps I should have used more discerning language.

Definition of AMORPHOUS
a : having no definite form : shapeless
b : being without definite character or nature : unclassifiable <an amorphous segment of society>
c : lacking organization or unity

[heavenlyboy34]

That is what I meant, a babbling mixture of confusing languages, all sound and fury signifying nothing.

Apologies, I'm tired and in a shitty mood, so perhaps I should have used more discerning language.

Definition of AMORPHOUS
a : having no definite form : shapeless
b : being without definite character or nature : unclassifiable <an amorphous segment of society>
c : lacking organization or unity
Thou art forgiven. I was going to +rep you, but I can't. :(


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti Federalist again.

[liberty2897]

Yes, men and women are different. One has a penis and one has a vagina. To imply that we are different when it comes to arriving at logical conclusions when presented with evidence on an issue is insulting. Yes, I've heard the old republican saying that men are more logical and women are more emotional. That is stereotyping and should be stamped out by lovers of individual freedom. Gender is more than a black and white separation between us. Some men are more effeminate than others and some women are more masculine than others. In reality there is a wide spectrum of personalities and views that make us all up. How can someone proclaim to be liberty-minded and put everyone in these gender-based categorical boxes is beyond me. Go ahead and call me a liberal / globalist / collectivist... I'll be a party of one. I don't give a shit.

[TheTexan]

Yes, men and women are different. One has a penis and one has a vagina. To imply that we are different when it comes to arriving at logical conclusions when presented with evidence on an issue is insulting. Yes, I've heard the old republican saying that men are more logical and women are more emotional. That is stereotyping and should be stamped out by lovers of individual freedom.


I disagree. Men and women are not the same. As MelissaWV accurately pointed out, men on average are much more aggressive, and more likely to reach solutions to problems that involve violence. That's just one of several ways how men and women are different, but it is also one of the clearest.

[LibertyEagle]

This attitude that I'm supposed to be all impressed that you have a video of someone against gun control who's female is what's fueling the problem. If it were a man in the video no one would care, maybe they would if his commentary was particularly thoughtful but it would be judged on that. Not on the fact that he was a man giving the speech. But whenever a woman does something we're supposed to be like extra-impressed, but why? This societal privilege granted to women is likely the precise reason why more women aren't libertarians. They don't want to give it up!

Interesting attitude you have there, given that all of the wars thus far have been started by men. Not to mention that the largely male-dominated Congress who have trashed our Constitution.

Not very impressive there, Higher Vision. Now, why don't you get off of this sexist bullshit. Some of you guys wonder why there aren't more women in this movement. Have you ever considered that it is attitudes like were displayed in this thread that drive women away? Not to mention the fact that when someone suggests how to reach more women, some here get their trousers in a twist and go back to their keyboard "warrioring".

[jtstellar]

I disagree. Men and women are not the same. As MelissaWV accurately pointed out, men on average are much more aggressive, and more likely to reach solutions to problems that involve violence. That's just one of several ways how men and women are different, but it is also one of the clearest.

it is also one of the most irrelevant. mankind must have eliminated god knows how many strands of genetic compositions by now. you have to think that nature some of you perceive as evil is a part of something much larger that actually helps the survival of the species, not just to fight wars, but an integral part of curiosity, adventure and exploration as well that lead to scientific discoveries that has allowed the globe to become what some see as 'overpopulated'. this means male genes actually save lives, by giving more people food to eat. disagree all you want. women are less supportive of liberty, that's a fact. men are also the forefront of genetic natural selection. sperms will always be an oversupply. the amount of children a woman can give birth to over a lifetime will always be limited as it poses enormous strains on the body. therefore in an easily understandable scarcity concept, natural selection always occurs in men and men more resourceful tend to have more children than those that aren't. disqualified males also get naturally selected out of society much faster than females. women are lagging indicators.

[PaulConventionWV]

Yes, men and women are different. One has a penis and one has a vagina. To imply that we are different when it comes to arriving at logical conclusions when presented with evidence on an issue is insulting. Yes, I've heard the old republican saying that men are more logical and women are more emotional. That is stereotyping and should be stamped out by lovers of individual freedom. Gender is more than a black and white separation between us. Some men are more effeminate than others and some women are more masculine than others. In reality there is a wide spectrum of personalities and views that make us all up. How can someone proclaim to be liberty-minded and put everyone in these gender-based categorical boxes is beyond me. Go ahead and call me a liberal / globalist / collectivist... I'll be a party of one. I don't give a shit.

Men and women are different. To ignore this is to ignore reality. Sorry if that chaps your hide.

[AGRP]

Interesting attitude you have there, given that all of the wars thus far have been started by men. Not to mention that the largely male-dominated Congress who have trashed our Constitution.

Not very impressive there, Higher Vision. Now, why don't you get off of this sexist bullshit. Some of you guys wonder why there aren't more women in this movement. Have you ever considered that it is attitudes like were displayed in this thread that drive women away? Not to mention the fact that when someone suggests how to reach more women, some here get their trousers in a twist and go back to their keyboard "warrioring".

Theres plenty of greedy women who demand bigger homes, nicer clothes, plastic surgery, more shopping money, and bigger diamonds from the men you speak of. Newt got flack from his thousands of dollars in debt to Tiffanys for "his" diamond fetish. You dont think Martha Washington wanted something? http://marthawashington.us/

[liberty2897]

Men and women are different. To ignore this is to ignore reality. Sorry if that chaps your hide.

Funny how you (and others) have implied that I find no difference between men and women, when you clearly (and others) quoted me where I started off with: "men and women are different". Are you implying that when it comes to logic and "smarts" that men are superior? Are you saying that women are superior? What exactly is the difference that you see (aside from the obvious)?

[klamath]

it is also one of the most irrelevant. mankind must have eliminated god knows how many strands of genetic compositions by now. you have to think that nature some of you perceive as evil is a part of something much larger that actually helps the survival of the species, not just to fight wars, but an integral part of curiosity, adventure and exploration as well that lead to scientific discoveries that has allowed the globe to become what some see as 'overpopulated'. this means male genes actually save lives, by giving more people food to eat. disagree all you want. women are less supportive of liberty, that's a fact. but if it wasn't for women tempering effect on man's violent aggressive nature we probable would have killed ourselves off. There is a balance between the sexes and I am damned glad of it.

[jtstellar]

i don't get what some women are doing here defending against the fact that women who support the liberty movement are an minority even among the Y gen age group. the exit polls in 2012 primaries for ron paul showed this, where women favored overwhelmingly the better looking mitt romney, as had polls consistently shown in the past, as well as the poll at reason magazine they wrote an article about, in which the trust for mass media showed something between 10 to 20% for males i forget the exact number, and females around 33%. is it true not all females are anti-liberty? is anyone claiming otherwise? no. so the handful of female supporters we have on this board are trying to prove what? that some women support liberty and not all men support liberty? it's like they're scared we would feel all women are traitors against liberty. calm down ladies, nobody is claiming 100% of you are like that. why the commotion? and as long as there are some women in this movement, all hope is not lost on humanity, at least not from a genetic point of view, therefore it's all O.K. so again, why are some women arguing when everything is fact and there is nothing to argue against? you females despise that much being in the top 90% intellectual percentile of your own gender for the fact that you are already here? strange. because if up to me, i would like that.

[PaulConventionWV]

Funny how you (and others) have implied that I find no difference between men and women, when you clearly (and others) quoted me where I started off with: "men and women are different". Are you implying that when it comes to logic and "smarts" that men are superior? Are you saying that women are superior? What exactly is the difference that you see (aside from the obvious)?

I'm saying everyone's getting their panties in a bunch over PC garbage about reinforcing gender roles. Who cares?

[MelissaWV]

i don't get what some women are doing here defending against the fact that women who support the liberty movement are an minority even among the Y gen age group. the exit polls in 2012 primaries for ron paul showed this, where women favored overwhelmingly the better looking mitt romney, as had polls consistently shown in the past, as well as the poll at reason magazine they wrote an article about, in which the trust for mass media showed something between 10 to 20% for males i forget the exact number, and females around 33%. it is true not all females are anti-liberty? is anyone claiming otherwise? no. so the handful of female supporters we have on this board are trying to prove what? that some women support liberty and not all men support liberty? it's like they're scared we would feel all women are traitors against liberty. calm down ladies, nobody is claiming 100% of you are like that. why the commotion? and as long as there are some women in this movement, all hope is not lost on humanity, at least not from a genetic point of view, therefore it's all O.K. so again, why are some women arguing when everything is fact and there is nothing to argue against?

It's merely natural that women are dumb and anti-liberty. That isn't a conclusion drawn purely from this thread. It is what's said anytime a poll comes out that has a result with a gender skew towards women being "anti-liberty."

Incidentally, women much more common when I go to events in person. Hell, women are not some kind of sad minority in chat, even. The "commotion" that you hear is some of us rolling our eyes at yet another thread that says it would solve so much if women just didn't vote, or maybe just kept to "traditional gender roles" because they are obviously natural and good, or went for Romney because he was better-looking (by your standard? whose?). Guess what! Given that Ron lost, and Romney was the nominee, it would appear that the majority of GOP guys went for Romney, too! Is it because they're gay for him? lol Nahhhh it must be for a logical reason.

[MelissaWV]

And if there was nothing wrong with what was being said, I wonder why PCWV went back and edited his post to imply I have something against women who have children lol

I have made peace with it to a large extent. It's just that so many of you are the Continental.

[Dianne]

Yeah, if the same fools believe the little kid in North Korea getting ready to nuke America... brilliant to take all the arms away from their kids ... Problem with America, is 75% eating too much processed Monsanto food... one too many POP TARTS ...

[PaulConventionWV]

And if there was nothing wrong with what was being said, I wonder why PCWV went back and edited his post to imply I have something against women who have children lol

I have made peace with it to a large extent. It's just that so many of you are the Continental.

You did sort of hint at it by saying baby maker as if it was a bad thing, so I just pointed out how I didn't see it as a bad thing.

But you're right, my mom "pretends" to be proud of me for acknowledging that women have children (what?)

[PaulConventionWV]

It's merely natural that women are dumb and anti-liberty. That isn't a conclusion drawn purely from this thread. It is what's said anytime a poll comes out that has a result with a gender skew towards women being "anti-liberty."

Incidentally, women much more common when I go to events in person. Hell, women are not some kind of sad minority in chat, even. The "commotion" that you hear is some of us rolling our eyes at yet another thread that says it would solve so much if women just didn't vote, or maybe just kept to "traditional gender roles" because they are obviously natural and good, or went for Romney because he was better-looking (by your standard? whose?). Guess what! Given that Ron lost, and Romney was the nominee, it would appear that the majority of GOP guys went for Romney, too! Is it because they're gay for him? lol Nahhhh it must be for a logical reason.

In all seriousness, I'm sure everyone here acknowledges that women can be convinced to support liberty. There's no biological difference between the sexes that makes women unable to appreciate freedom. Everyone making sexist jokes does so in jest.

The only thing I have a problem with is the suggestion that traditional gender roles are a bad thing. They've only been around for thousands of years and developed because of natural differences between the sexes. There's no social tyranny. This idea is the spawn of those who want the government to jump in and fix it. If you don't want to be a "traditional" woman, there's nobody forcing you.

[MelissaWV]

You did sort of hint at it by saying baby maker as if it was a bad thing, so I just pointed out how I didn't see it as a bad thing.

But you're right, my mom "pretends" to be proud of me for acknowledging that women have children (what?)

Yeah, except that isn't what I said, which is why your changing it changes the entire exchange. I did not say "babymaker" was a bad thing. I said that this being the only assigned role, that a woman be an unthinking babymaker, was a bad thing.

As for every sexist joke being made in jest, I think you are giving your fellows far more credit than they deserve, or else they are joking 100% of the time...

[Anti Federalist]

Oh and all the bitching about snarky comments about not allowing women to vote.

Cry me a fucking river.

I suffer daily under a mountain of regulations, that non compliance with will cause my arrest, that I have no vote over and no representation in the crafting or implementation of such regulation.

[TheGrinch]

I once had hipster male friends who at some points were more effeminate than women.

and the point here is, it's people! people are bad. it's not women.
We used to have a game about the servers next door to my work, hipster or gay?

Turns our they were all gay and actually a lot cooler than most hipsters.

[MelissaWV]

Oh and all the bitching about snarky comments about not allowing women to vote.

Cry me a fucking river.

I suffer daily under a mountain of regulations, that non compliance with will cause my arrest, that I have no vote over and no representation in the crafting or implementation of such regulation.

You really are on a "everyone is talking about me" track, in this and other threads. Honestly, I even pointed out that my comments did not solely originate in this thread, and still this reappears. You took something else to heart in another post.

I get the feeling that, tonight, I could say "You take the good you take the bad..." and you would say "I don't fucking have to take your facts of life, woman!"

***

But yes, women can't take a joke, and everyone's just joking, yes PC?

[Petar]

Say what you want about women, but they definitely kick men's asses as far as facetious arguing skills are concerned.

EDIT: actually either sex can do that equally well.

I just know that I sometimes like to tease women about shit like this solely to get a rise out of them.

[James Madison]

Adam weighs in...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCp1Bs5glos

[moostraks]

But it does help.

Only with a certain segment. Which is why I bothered to respond. I don't have to love guns or see them as a need for my personal protection to respect the rights of others to own them. I have to understand the principal of why others owning them is beneficial to liberty for all of us. If you focus on the one method you will snag a few fish, broaden the scope you will catch more. Imo it is better to make the case for how secure the criminals will be in targeting people because criminals will have guns. The fact that by making things harder for reasonable people to have guns, you will end up with only the unreasonable having them because unreasonable people have the drive to carry out atrocities and will do it despite whatever efforts are taken to preempt the situation.

I don't even get how Sandy Hook become the rally call for this issue. The guy stole the guns from his mother didn't he? I am not really plugged into the msm argument on this but it seems that if that is the case how are they going to insure that those who get guns are going to keep them secured? Furthermore I have never understood the concept of a weapon for protection that is kept inaccessible and yet can be reached in a moment of panic for protection.

I am not overly keen on the idea of pushing ownership to people who think of guns as cool because they shoot at a range and it makes them feel cool and trendy. I would rather it be what those who rationally realize the responsibility and resulting situation are from using a gun as a response to a threat. I think when it is seen as cool and trendy rather than approached more seriously, you end up with idiots owning guns that just give them ammunition to call for more government controls.

[moostraks]

I think it's largely because of the rhetoric being used to promote the stricter gun laws post Sandy hook tragedy. There's so many emotion-based arguments that (generally speaking) easily persuade people that are easily persuaded by these emotional arguments like many liberals, some women, young children (I bet most kids would support stricter gun laws, as well.)

Personally, I hate emotion-based arguments and get annoyed when people focus on stricter gun laws. Look at Chicago -- they have some of the strictest laws, yet many gun-related crimes.

What we need is more focus on mental well-being, improved access to mental health services, and research on mental illness.

I think that the mental health aspect is the gravy to their emotion based argument. The last thing we need to do is the government more control to push a pseudo-science of care. They will place more people on lists based on subjective testing according to who responds within some "norm". Then they can cram even more drugs into the general populace that causes Sandy Hook type incidents. I do not want the government getting more involved in the mental health field by any stretch of the imagination...

[KingNothing]

If Sandy Hook could sway a voter's opinion, if one isolated incident of obscene horror is enough for a voter to justify strict laws on the 99-percent of people who will not act out that horrific scene, the person should not be a voter. Man, woman, white, black, Muslim, Jew, christian, Atheist. They should not vote if extremely rare events and the ensuing propaganda is enough to sway their stance on freedom.

[otherone]

They should not vote if extremely rare events and the ensuing propaganda is enough to sway their stance on freedom.

911 etal is why we have a republic instead of a democracy. Sadly, the reps who are supposed to be protecting our Rights are terrified of the mob.

[green73]

http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-ash3/c2.2.264.264/562356_549145661774181_285325749_n.jpg

https://www.google.com/search?q=democracy+the+god+that+failed

[MelissaWV]

I think that the mental health aspect is the gravy to their emotion based argument. The last thing we need to do is the government more control to push a pseudo-science of care. They will place more people on lists based on subjective testing according to who responds within some "norm". Then they can cram even more drugs into the general populace that causes Sandy Hook type incidents. I do not want the government getting more involved in the mental health field by any stretch of the imagination...

Not only that, but one has only to view the list of "mental illnesses" on any website that compiles such things to realize it really is just about everyone. It isn't because everyone's crazy. It's because almost everything is classified thusly. All you have to do is go to the "wrong" doctor and you are diagnosed in a way that will now put you on loads of lists for the sake of the children.

Me? I'm an insomniac. Yes, that's on the list.

[Origanalist]

Me? I'm an insomniac. Yes, that's on the list

Me too, plus a few other iacs I'm sure.

[MelissaWV]

Me too, plus a few other iacs I'm sure.


The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is the American Psychiatric Association's standard reference for psychiatry which includes over 400 different definitions of mental disorders.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mental_disorders_as_defined_by_the_DSM_and _ICD

And yes, I know these are "mental disorders" as opposed to "illnesses," but honestly you know they will all be fair game once the no-gun (no-fly, no-work) lists are being compiled.

[Origanalist]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mental_disorders_as_defined_by_the_DSM_and _ICD

And yes, I know these are "mental disorders" as opposed to "illnesses," but honestly you know they will all be fair game once the no-gun (no-fly, no-work) lists are being compiled.

Fair game? Well ya, and everybody above room temperature will fit in there. It's not too hard to see coming.

[Anti Federalist]

If Sandy Hook could sway a voter's opinion, if one isolated incident of obscene horror is enough for a voter to justify strict laws on the 99-percent of people who will not act out that horrific scene, the person should not be a voter. Man, woman, white, black, Muslim, Jew, christian, Atheist. They should not vote if extremely rare events and the ensuing propaganda is enough to sway their stance on freedom.

9/11

/thread

[Keith and stuff]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mental_disorders_as_defined_by_the_DSM_and _ICD

And yes, I know these are "mental disorders" as opposed to "illnesses," but honestly you know they will all be fair game once the no-gun (no-fly, no-work) lists are being compiled.

IMO, many of them are made up nonsense. I was so frustrated when I worked in mental health.

[Philhelm]

Me? I'm an insomniac. Yes, that's on the list.

Apparently, I am a narcissistic megalomaniac with delusions of grandeur.

[BlackTerrel]

I've raised three daughters.

I've done that with all three.

All three own guns and are "pro gun rights".

That said, there is a definite and quantifiable voting gap between men and women on issues of liberty.

Good on you for raising your daughters that way. +rep.

Haven't gone through 19 pages but these voter gaps won't ever go away completely. In the no shit comment category: men and women are different.

[amy31416]

All I have to say is that I heeded the advice of the many gentlemen on here who don't think I have the mental capacity to vote, and I got my ass back to the kitchen.

Perhaps some of you have heard the saying that you should never cook with a wine you won't drink? BULLSHIT!

I made some chicken marsala tonight that was to die for. I smelled and tasted that shitcrap wine and almost dumped it right down the kitchen sink--it was really bad. But damn, after about 15 minutes of deglazing and cooking it down with mushrooms--it was damned tasty. Still can not believe I liked it, even though I was repulsed by the smell of the alcohol cooking off.

Oh yeah--ban guns, you uncouth bastards.

[green73]

All I have to say is that I heeded the advice of the many gentlemen on here who don't think I have the mental capacity to vote, and I got my ass back to the kitchen.

Perhaps some of you have heard the saying that you should never cook with a wine you won't drink? BULLSHIT!

I made some chicken marsala tonight that was to die for. I smelled and tasted that shitcrap wine and almost dumped it right down the kitchen sink--it was really bad. But damn, after about 15 minutes of deglazing and cooking it down with mushrooms--it was damned tasty. Still can not believe I liked it, even though I was repulsed by the smell of the alcohol cooking off.

Oh yeah--ban guns, you uncouth bastards.

I sure hope kluge appreciates what he has. I'm hungry just reading that. Then again, I'm hungry reading most things you write.

[Origanalist]

Apparently, I am a narcissistic megalomaniac with delusions of grandeur.

Is that all? Pfffft.............