Dear Yabby,

Aren't you capable of responding to women
apart from being abusive, condescending and
patronising?

I am starting to suspect that your attacks on
Fractelle are more due to fear than misogyny.

Your attitudes are simply immature. Fair enough
in a teenager, they have a chance of growing out
of it, but in an adult, its simply sad.

Foxy:"Aren't you capable of responding to women
apart from being abusive, condescending and
patronising?"

Not when the women are being bitchy, condescending and patronising as a matter of course.

It doesn't matter what I or Yabby might say, we'll be characterised sooner or later, fairly or unfairly, by one of the women posters as "aggressive", "misogynist", "bullying" (especially if we ask questions), or some other of the thousands of epithets that women use to mean "I feel uncomfortable and it's YOUR fault".

Women work on the implicit understanding that men exist to enable them to do what they want. The quid pro quo of "you work hard and I'll work hard and the family will do fine" has gone. In its place is "you work hard and I'll get a nice job and I'll be fine, even if I decide you're not worth keeping".

Men have grasped this point and are increasingly reluctant to enter into the one-sided bargain it implies

I haven't noticed that the women who've participated in this thread have been "bitchy, condescending and patronising as a matter of course". A few of the men's comments have been, though.

Poor, sad, frustrated chaps.

CJ Morgan:"yapayapyapyap"

Oh dear, that Pomeranian's all excited again.

Add insulting to bitchy, condescending and patronising.

I always know that Antiwomen has reached the limit of his intellectual capacity when he trots out his puerile dog metaphor. Unfortunately, this occurs frequently because of the inherent limitations that aspect of his unhappy person.

Why else would his only response to having his misogyny pointed out be to call me a "Pomeranian"? The only type of person that Anti hates more than women is men who don't.

Have a great weekend, old chap. I'll be away with my kids, lover and most of our extended families.

What will you be doing, besides whining about women and crying into your beer?

Fractelle, posted Thursday, 30 April 2009 at 5:06:52 PM:

"Anyway, I do notice that you have declined, thus far, to take the brain test."

Forrest Gumpp, posted Thursday, 30 April 2009 at 12:14:30 PM:

"Having secured a very high score on that page of the little test (to which Fractelle gave a link) in which one had to identify all the items which had been moved when compared to a remembered display, ..."

It seems Fractelle is missing more than I had thought in some of the posts to this thread. I wonder whether she reads posts or just skims? By my reckoning, my post was made nearly four hours before Fractelle 'noticed' that I had 'declined' to take the brain test. I have a good mind to call her on the finger length challenge she issued in her post of Friday, 1 May 2009 at 9:41:30 AM, but mindful of my own earlier 'note to self' to take Fraccers absolutely literally in certain contexts, I observe that her undertaking to show her's (finger length results, that is) if other's show theirs may only be confined to CJMorgan. Does the challenge extend to me?

Fractelle, on Thursday, 30 April 2009 at 5:06:52 PM:

".. I did not intentionally try to play with the stats - why should I? I know full well that there are those he seek to denigrate me any way they can."

I didn't really think you did. I only belatedly thought it may have been a test of sorts. Taking my tongue out of my cheek for a moment, don't feel too put out by the 'unquotated' search term results for either term you entered. I suspect they merely reflect the presence of the words in any page so listed. If you actually opened the pages indexed you would probably find a real result more like your first one. See Frac 149:4. As for the other sentence, I am not convinced that is a relevant sequitur in relation to me.

Now, about that finger length challenge .....?