O.J.'s kids are doing fine with him, and that is pretty extreme. I don't know why so many manginas assume the desire to kill your ex-wife who is conspiring to destroy you means you will harm your kids.
32 comments
The ubermensch who runs this blog recently put up an entry about this site, decrying us for putting down his "awesome commentator," Anonymous Age 64. In the comments section, he has the nerve to dismiss a "strawman" argument for one of his readers, right after posting this:
"You'd tell her off too? Sorry, I know that's patently false. I'm not talking about a single blog, I'm talking about the movement known as feminism. What if a woman advocated killing/castrating men? She'd be lauded and would become a household name, what about if a frankly repulsive creature said All men are rapists? She would be applauded and be offered a position with the New York Times."
Takes pot and kettle to a whole new level, doesn't it?
First, for assuming that men with good sense are woman-like, I'd like to say "Bite me, asshat."
Second, neither you nor anyone else has shown that Nicole was "conspiring to destroy" O.J..
Last, the fact that O.J. was willing to kill his wife and Ron Goldman shows that he has an extremely bad temper and extremely bad judgement. He shouldn't be allowed to have control of a tepid glass of water, much less children.
Actually, this guy doesn´t understand that OJ Simpson was absolved. If evidence were found, there would be no conspiracy theory around. And what conspiracy?, that he rebuilt her life with another man?, same as OJ with another woman.
I don't know why, but this reminds me of a joke. O J'S daughter looks at her watch and says to her date "oh no it's three A M I should have been home two hours ago. Her date says "Jeez your dad'll kill you" She says "Yeah, and he'll get away with it too"
Just for the record, folks, O.J. was not "absolved." He was found "Not Guilty" -- which means that the court could not convict him beyond a reasonable doubt with the evidence as presented. That does not necessarily equal exoneration.
~David D.G.
Look, I'll never meet the woman that turned you into this thing that you are now, but she doesn't represent the whole gender. Seriously, get off the woman-hater thing before you inspire someone to do something about you.
The ubermensch who runs this blog recently put up an entry about this site, decrying us for putting down his "awesome commentator," Anonymous Age 64. In the comments section, he has the nerve to dismiss a "strawman" argument for one of his readers, right after posting this:
"You'd tell her off too? Sorry, I know that's patently false. I'm not talking about a single blog, I'm talking about the movement known as feminism. What if a woman advocated killing/castrating men? She'd be lauded and would become a household name, what about if a frankly repulsive creature said All men are rapists? She would be applauded and be offered a position with the New York Times."
Takes pot and kettle to a whole new level, doesn't it?
I don't know. I've read some feminist blogs and some make Pete and his ilk look like respectfull moderates compared to the stuf those "ladies" are exorting.
I know of at least one case of men killing advocating feminist raised to household name. Valerie Solanas and her S.C.U.M. manifesto posted and quoted all over feminist blogs.
I am a feminest which means that I believe that there should be equal rights for men and women. Which does not mean "Women can badmouth men all they want, but it is unfair for men to badmouth women". If you spend more time denouncing the opposite sex than trying to understand them, that is NOT equality to me.
So while I understand where this guy is coming from, not ALL women are evil just like not ALL men are just looking for their next rape victim.
Both extreme men and extreme women need to back the f**k up a bit before either sex will make any progress towards understanding the other.
<Rant ended. Have a nice day! >
...Because the desire (not to mention the act) of killing one person indicates a serious lack of compassion, judgment, or a moral compass? Because it suggests a predilection toward violence that could be acted upon again in future? Because children are uniquely vulnerable to mistreatment by their caregivers, being generally smaller and more trusting?
If exercising a bit of logic, common sense, and concern for people too small to defend themselves makes one a "mangina," then bring it on.
Burning Stake , yeah, I've been commenting on the FSTDT thread he started up, with basically that sentiment. I can understand being angered by the extremist crazy (hell, I'm here, right?) but the answer isn't to lodge yourself at the other end of the spectrum and yell back.
Well, that´s exactly the point. Only that our favourite fundie grandpa is taking for granted that society is forgiving OJ Simpson because, ok, he killed his wife, but she was a bitch. No sir. He was a wife-beater, one, and he´s free BECAUSE THERE WASN´T ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO CONVICT HIM. And he had another lover when all this happened.
Thinks O.J. is a good father.
Doesn't see the connection between those who commit double-homicide and babysitters.
Thinks the kids of a man who killed his ex and her friend with a big-assed knife, nearly cutting her head off, are "doing fine".
Posts anonymously.
Posts on Pete Patriarch's blog.
Sounds like a fucking winner.
HE conspired to destroy HER. Just because she was tired of being the wife of an abusive, bad-tempered lout doesn't mean that she was "conspiring to destroy him."
Yes, I'm sure O.J.'s kids are doing fine. Just like Orestes and Electra were fine with Clytemnestra and her new husband, Aegisthus, after Agamemnon was murdered. Do you know how that story ended?
Get a life.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.