Wolly B

Thanks for drawing my attention back to this forum.

I have reflected on RObert’s claim about double standards: “I think there is also a blindness to the degree of double standard in seemingly not noticing the nasty nature of Killarney's comments about male posters while calling out male aggression.”

I have only “called out” the nasty comments that were made about me. For example, when I was described as a “very dishonest and manipulative person”, I described this as a personal attack.

In this forum, Killarney has made comments addressed to others and me. She has also made comments about others and me. I have only responded to the comments she addressed to me, and made about me. I found her comments to me to be assertive, not aggressive. I have not responded to the comments she made to others or about others. It is not my place to do so.

Wolly B, you say the elephant in the room is the twisting of arguments. I think we all challenged the elephants when they popped their head in the room.

Sarah:
When you behave dishonestly several times and you try several times to manipulate people it is reasonable to call you a dishonest and manipulative person. It is not an attack it is an opinion about what type of person you are and if you do not agree with it then all you have to do is say so. Anything else is defensiveness.

In earlier posts I've reposted some of Killarneys comments, Sarah either choose not to consider comments like those directed at men as the kind of insult to be bothered with or is deliberatly ignoreing them. She has not stated which.

In Sarah's recent post at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17286#306207

"I have only “called out” the nasty comments that were made about me."
and "In this forum, Killarney has made comments addressed to others and me. She has also made comments about others and me. I have only responded to the comments she addressed to me, and made about me. I found her comments to me to be assertive, not aggressive. I have not responded to the comments she made to others or about others. It is not my place to do so."

Suseonline in the 4th post on this thread "Sarah you will get nothing but vitriolic rants about this subject on this male dominated forum." http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17286#305039

Killarney "These guys are veteran OLO veteran fraudsters, who twist the research and statistics beyond all recognition to suit their own self-pitying, women-despising agenda." and "But they are too entitled, too sanctimonious and too protected by their overwhelming numbers to ever face up to themselves. They operate in aggressive packs to ensure that women are too intimidated by their senseless hostility and too exhausted by their screwed-up reasoning to continue beating their proverbial heads against the proverbial brick wall." http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17286#305202

Part 1 of 2

R0bert

Part 2 of 2
My response to that and some of Suseonlines earlier posts "Killarney is one of OLO's most constantly determined posters when it comes to trying to shut down any recognition of issues impacting men that are not entirely of mens own doing. Suzie occasionally steps out of line and shows some understanding but is generally corrected by Killarney and falls back into line." http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17286#305243

Sarah calling out the insults to Killarney and Suseonline "RObert
You begin your recent post by insulting Killarney and Suseonline, then proceed to make 6 unsubstantiated claims. Do you have evidence to support these claims, or are they merely thought bubbles?" http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17286#305274

Sarah appears to be calling out my comments about Suseonline and Killarney which were not about Sarah. She also calls part of my comments thought bubbles on the basis of my not having provided substantiation of points I made despite providing no indication of having bothered to read earlier material I'd linked to and making a range of unsubstantiated claims herself in regard to a number of issues.

R0bert

RObert, here you are dragging up old posts to keep this thread alive so you can continue on your usual path of feminist bashing and all things female.

It is all a bit sad really.
Knock yourself out....

For anyone tempted to be taken in by Suseonline's comments please note my post was a direct response to claims made in Sarah's most recent post.

No attacks on all things female unless Suseonline considers deceit a female trait, I don't.

I make no claims to liking feminism, whilst some of the causes have been important most of modern feminism seems to be run based on extremely shallow and self serving analysis of western society that ignores any inconvenient truths and just plays to the arguments that seek to give middle class women more privilege than they already enjoy.

R0bert