There Are No Girls On the Internet ft. Durf

[F0RC3]

Lucifer, that ban is clearly unwarranted. Quit being offended by an opinion and actually present an argument.

You completely lack an argument, and honestly banning him just shows your inability to argue against him. It's like saying, take the victory.

From what I can tell Durf is talking about averages or the overall norms of females and males. He isn't dealing with absolutes, there is room for variation. (of course I'm just assuming what Durf thought based on what he wrote)

"But honestly, you don't have the psychological disposition of a female. Which is what made me question your gender in the first place. Either your bad at acting, or you're a very manly female (sexy xD).", This right here shows that he doesn't think females only have one type of personality, simply by looking at the last sentence. However you would definitely be going against the norm for women.

As regards to that video. It is honestly quite clear as to why like a girl would be an insult. Like a girl, usually isn't attributed to women themselves. Rather it is used as an insult against men to insult their masculinity. Like a girl in most situations refers to situations of strength. Boys put simply, are built to perform physical tasks (runnings, fighting, lifting, etc) better than woman on average. Hence why sports are generally separated for males and females. Doing things like a girl, is more of an insult to the majority of men than it is to the majority of women.

And Liz, it would be appropriate to say that males or females act a certain way. The world works with generalizations. People separate things (including people) into groups. I would definitely say that you don't act like the typical woman on the internet.

[Lucifer]

Choosing not to argue is not evidence of a lack of argument. That you assume so is a logical fallacy. I choose not to argue for my own reasons.


Durf isn't talking about averages or anything like that. He's arguing from a base of stereotypes. That video challenges them, and he spent a lot of time debunking that.

In my appeal to emotion, I'll point out that my wife and my younger daughter both saw the video and read his response. That they both thought any ban less than permanent was lenient says something. You, as a male, are not in a position to judge this situation. You've seen the world through your male privileged eyes. You think you have a position.

You do not.

Every single woman who reads the tripe that Durf wrotes has been triggered. Some may be contemplating suicide. You just don't understand how extreme the situation really is.

And I don't care.

I can't link the current attacks to Durf by IP address, nor can I link them to anybody else on these forums. But I can say that the current attacks show something about somebody. If they are Durf, they justify the ban (which, as I pointed out, was only one single day).

Ironically, Liz, the person who has been the most outspoken about Durf's sexism, usually conforms to her bans (she's gone through several usernames because she tried to overcome the bans), and she, the Ultimate Armagetron Troll, has never done anything like this.

[Lucifer]

Looking at new posts since last visit, I think I'll just leave it alone for now.

If this is the world you want, you can have it.

[F0RC3]

Choosing not to argue is not evidence of a lack of argument. That you assume so is a logical fallacy. I choose not to argue for my own reasons.


Durf isn't talking about averages or anything like that. He's arguing from a base of stereotypes. That video challenges them, and he spent a lot of time debunking that.

In my appeal to emotion, I'll point out that my wife and my younger daughter both saw the video and read his response. That they both thought any ban less than permanent was lenient says something. You, as a male, are not in a position to judge this situation. You've seen the world through your male privileged eyes. You think you have a position.

You do not.

Every single woman who reads the tripe that Durf wrotes has been triggered. Some may be contemplating suicide. You just don't understand how extreme the situation really is.

And I don't care.

I can't link the current attacks to Durf by IP address, nor can I link them to anybody else on these forums. But I can say that the current attacks show something about somebody. If they are Durf, they justify the ban (which, as I pointed out, was only one single day).

Ironically, Liz, the person who has been the most outspoken about Durf's sexism, usually conforms to her bans (she's gone through several usernames because she tried to overcome the bans), and she, the Ultimate Armagetron Troll, has never done anything like this.

You are right, not arguing doesn't mean that you lose an argument. However banning a person for no apparent reason when he is arguing for his opinion? Definitely shows signs that you would rather end the conversation rather than argue, If you even can present an argument? I mean you have spent quite a bit of time, present an argument for your opinion (Rather than banning someone for theirs).

While this isn't always true, stereotypes can be based off of the average. Also to me, it doesn't just seem like he is talking solely about stereotypes in all of his posts. He even shows that part of what he was talking about isn't stereotyping. Something you don't seem to refute.

This is no insult to your wife or your daughter, but what do they have to do with your ability to mod? If they want to participate in the discussion, have them make an account and particpate or simply post through your account. But that doesn't mean they should be able to influence your power based on their opinions, solely because they are your family. Why should their opinions be held higher than others? Simply because they are woman? Now that is sexist.

You are right the person who is spamming the forums definitely deserves a ban, but that doesn't mean that durf deserved his ban.

Anything like this? Argue her opinion? Yeah she probably hasn't, because she gives too few shits and would rather get other people to argue with few words and laugh her ass off.

Also if someone is contemplating suicide from the words that durf said, a random person online who is only expressing his opinion. You need to get them help. There is clearly something wrong with them, and they need help. Almost Anyone contemplating suicide needs help.

[Lucifer]

I didn't see this one, due to all the spam.

You are right, not arguing doesn't mean that you lose an argument. However banning a person for no apparent reason when he is arguing for his opinion? Definitely shows signs that you would rather end the conversation rather than argue, If you even can present an argument? I mean you have spent quite a bit of time, present an argument for your opinion (Rather than banning someone for theirs).

I can present an argument. I've spent a great deal of my life making this argument. Now, when I have moderator powers, I choose not to make the argument. I choose to enforce reality.

While this isn't always true, stereotypes can be based off of the average. Also to me, it doesn't just seem like he is talking solely about stereotypes in all of his posts. He even shows that part of what he was talking about isn't stereotyping. Something you don't seem to refute.

Except I did refute. He made a specific claim that men are better suited to be doctors, I linked a specific study that showed that women are sexually harassed at much higher rates than men. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that women are much more likely to drop out of the program than men because of that, because I followed it up linking an article talking about scientists and field work, and the same issue.

I refuted his claim thoroughly.

This is no insult to your wife or your daughter, but what do they have to do with your ability to mod? If they want to participate in the discussion, have them make an account and particpate or simply post through your account. But that doesn't mean they should be able to influence your power based on their opinions, solely because they are your family. Why should their opinions be held higher than others? Simply because they are woman? Now that is sexist.

No, it's because I love them, I value their opinions, and I recognize that they have lived life as women, and that therefore I do not have a common frame of reference.

The sooner you realize that women experience the world very differently from men, the better.

You are right the person who is spamming the forums definitely deserves a ban, but that doesn't mean that durf deserved his ban.

Unless it's Durf.

Also if someone is contemplating suicide from the words that durf said, a random person online who is only expressing his opinion. You need to get them help. There is clearly something wrong with them, and they need help. Almost Anyone contemplating suicide needs help.

Tell that to Robin Williams. I checked my older daughter into a mental hospital for suicidal ideation the very same that that the news broke out about Robin Williams.

As a point of reference.

[chang]

All Liz's fault.

edit:why my sik interweb meymey's no work?

[sinewav]

Enjoy your ban, Durf.

I hate to say it bro, but you are totally out of line. I know you have an agenda, and that's great, we all need something to believe in, but it doesn't belong here. Maybe you need to unhinge yourself a little bit and step back.

[Lucifer]

Enjoy your ban, Durf.

I hate to say it bro, but you are totally out of line. I know you have an agenda, and that's great, we all need something to believe in, but it doesn't belong here. Maybe you need to unhinge yourself a little bit and step back.

If Z-man or Tank Program agrees with you, then I'll step down, walk away, and never look back.

My "agenda" is what it's always been: Freedom for all. Dignity for all. Etc.

There's nothing new here.

Next time we see each other in a bar, don't talk talk to me. I don't know you, after all.

[chang]

My "agenda" is what it's always been: Freedom for all. Dignity for all. Etc.

[Lucifer]

My "agenda" is what it's always been: Freedom for all. Dignity for all. Etc.

but ban durf because you don't agree with him, therefore he cannot actually give his part of what happen..?

He GAVE HIS PART. He presented his part, and it's all right there to see. Well, most of it. The abusive shit was over a thread that I locked, that has no relation to any of this conversation.

He GAVE HIS PART. He presented his case, completely and fully. He was as out and open as you can imagine.

There's no oppression going on. We've given ONE DAY BANS as a slap on the wrist, we've done it as jokes, and here it happens to Durf when he's being a sexist pig and suddenly THAT'S AN ISSUE?

The truth is shown here. Vogue will point it out, she knows what's up. The truth is clear.

Men > Women

That's the truth. It's as bare as it's going to get.

[Gazelle]

Men > Women

That's the truth.

Ban him!


BRING IN THE JUDGE!

[chang]

Men > Women

[Lucifer]

Wow. Really? Someone dares to question your male superiority, and then this?

Wow.

Do any of you own any testicles? Whether they were part of you when you were born or not is irrelevant. Do any of you own any?

[Soul]

Do any of you own any?

Ownership of male genitals?

Sexist.

[DrunkDuck]

Yea ban people who actually does something for this community. Hilarious!!!!

#FreeDurf