Brittney Feared

“I don’t need to read a book what I can experience for myself out in the real world” – me

You don’t bother me at all.
You amuse me greatly. Arrogantly ignorant and proud of it.
The sheer idiocy of thinking that in the 70-80 years you have on this planet you can “experience” enough to eliminate the need for books, is quite hilarious.
Examine your thinking critically, and see what happens.

I don’t think there is no need for books. I just think its really stupid to come on to a BASKETBALL website and over analyze to death the writings of karl marx and nietzsche in hopes to sway someone’s opinion. Do you really think people think brittney looks like less of a man after all that you and matt posted? I think everyone involved forgot what they were even arguing about in the first place. My ‘ignorance’ and thinking is a result of my life experiences throughout my 28 years. Its going to take more than a quick post on SLAM to sway my deep rooted personal beliefs. I consistently challenge and mock you not because i don’t agree with you (I disagree with most of the time but I occasionally agree with some things) but because I think you’re doing it in the wrong forums. Use this site as a place to talk about basketball and take jabs at each other/the players. Because if you feel you’re posts on THIS sight are going to inspire or change anyone, you’re wrong.

Diesel
When exactly was the meeting held where it was decided that the only topics of conversation permitted on this site were about basketball and making fun of players and each other?
Was there a handout?
Why do you find it entertaining to ridicule strangers anonymously?
Do you ridicule strangers in person?
90 percent of my comments are about basketball.
You’re trying to control the other 10 percent, but that’s really not going to happen.
The truth is, I do change folks. Ask the cats who interact with me regularly on this site. Jukai, Bryan, Moose, Eboy, Myles, and all the others who have debated issues with me.
I make them think about what they’re writing before they write it. I make them rethink their entrenched positions, and consider them from another perspective.
And they do the same with me.
You challenge and mock me because I refuse to allow you to behave the way you want without making my opinion known.
You would prefer if I shut up and stayed in my place.
That is really, REALLY not going to happen.
But continue to play your role. The only way you could be a more perfect foil would be if I made you up as an alias.

Diesel: Not to call a spade a spade, but you’re beginning an argument with Allenp off topic, which is exactly what you just threw a sh*t fit about.

Diesel
You really, REALLY need to embrace facts.
For example, what percentage of white voters actually voted for Barack Obama?
All predictions were that it would be 44 percent, and the actual numbers were right around there.
So, I didn’t major in math, but I’m willing to wager that 44 percent is not a “majority” in any country in the world. But, maybe your superior grasp of logic and reasoning can show me the truth.
So, how exactly did a “majority” white people vote for Obama?
Also, white folks make up roughly 65 percent of the population here in America. That means that 35 percent of the population is non-white, correct?
So, if Obama had overwhelmining support among blacks, who make up 12-13 percent of the pop, very solid support among latinos, who make up 13 percent of the pop, and fairly good support among all other minorities, why would he need the “majority” of white people to win anything?
Actually DO THE MATH SON.
See, this is why books and reading are important. You can actually learn things if you read stuff that challenges your arrogantly incorrect worldview.
Bill Clinton didn’t get the “majority” of white people to vote for him. And he was still elected. You don’t need the “majority” you just need enough white voters to combine with your support among other groups.
Which is what Democrats have been doing since the Republicans unvieled the Southern Strategy as an off-shoot of the civil rights movement.
Reading is fundamental.

Once again you’ve taken a small portion of my argument and over analyzed it to hell. My point is that the article that you linked to…its entire argument is rooted in the belief that “It is impossible that anybody has objectively considered John McCain and Sarah Palin and decided that they are more qualified to run this country than Barack Obama and Joe Biden” WHY THE F*CK is that a given? Please tell me what obama did in his 4 years in illinois that would make him more qualified then mccain and his 30 years? I’m from illinois and I’ll answer it for you…obama did absolutely nothing in his time in illinois…instead he was prepping for his run for the presidency from the second after he gave his speech at the democratic convention. What I’m asking you..and what I’ve always tried to point out to you, is to ask yourself if its racist for a majority of the black population to vote for Obama based soley on the color of his skin? In illinois the news crews were out in downtown chicago when obama won…they were in a predominently black community which was celebrating. They came up to a young black male and asked him why he voted for obama..which one of his views did he agree with.. and he looked like a deer caught in headlights. he had no idea. because the only reason he voted for obama was because he’s black. Isn’t that racist?…not even considering mccain because he’s white? Practice what you preach is what I’m akways trying to get through to you.

Some people seem to have a God complex.

I’ve been around all types of women.And I mean ALL TYPES OF WOMEN. And I’m sure some people on SLAM can vouch for this: She isn’t THE MOST “manly” looking girl on the block, let me tell it.

Mama there goes that man

The caption on the picture that is the point of this thread was about the Brittney Griner’s game. It noted that despite the fact that she punched a woman recently, she’s probably the most talented and dominant women’s player in a generation.
Yet, 80 percent to 90 percent of the comments were about how she looks. I have yet to find a comment that attempts to dissect her game, or her impact.
If cats don’t see the sexism and disrespect in that, then they don’t want to see it. You all prefer ignorance, probably ’cause it’s easier. Spending 100 comments making fun of the looks of a random stranger is utterly ridiculous on a “basketball” website.
Jukai
Sorry if you were insulted, that wasn’t my intention. The intention was to point out that people actually were complaining that Barack Obama was “too smart.”
When did being intelligent become a drawback? How does it make sense to want to elect somebody to serve as the political leader of a complex and diverse country like America who ISN’T smart? Why did it make sense for people to attack Obama as an “egghead”?
Doesn’t that strike you as a patently ridiculous stance to take? Basically people were saying that even though they weren’t qualified to be president of the United States, they wanted to elect a candidate that was just like them. That’s freaking asinine, in my opinion. If I can’t do a job, why would I hire somebody who is just as qualified as I am?
The crux of my argument in that post was that when I compared Barack Obama and Joe Biden to McCain/Palin it was impossible for me to see how anyone could believe the Republican duo were the Democratic duo’s intellectual equal. Thus, there must be a different criteria being applied, and I offered an opinion on why that criteria was being used. I only applied that opinion to a segment of the population, but I think it was justified.
I could go into a longer discussion on the topic, but I won’t.

A lot of people in the world have this insatiable need to feel like they’re right about something. Why? Is it that important? Does it help one’s man/womanhood? Does one wake up the next morning feeling that they did a good deed for society because they merely felt like they were right about something?

Allenp: I get the gist of the article. Sarah Palin really solidified the deal for me. To this day, I still don’t understand how any true American could genuinely think Sarah Palin should run any portion of our government. She had so many skeletons in her closet, they were uncountable, they tripled her IQ level. But, more importantly, it showed that McCain put ‘politics first’ and pretty much showed me the old McCain I used to admire was dead, lost in a party who knew how to run a great campaign but not a country.
But was Obama the clear superior over McCain before their VPs were picked? Ehhhh…

Allenp: What you’re considering a ‘movement’ I’d consider ‘status quo’
I just don’t see how you’re applying it to the discussions here. Unless you’re getting aggravated at the people telling everyone to stay on topic and not discuss philosophers and sexism on a boring-ass Sunday.

We do see things differently. This isn’t about some tea party member on the street arguing against healthcare when he doesn’t know one thing about the bill… this was just a random grouping of arguments, mostly for me, over relatively odd issues.
I was arguing with Matt over how he uses metaphysics as a buffet
I was arguing with Mauritz over a semantics error on my part
And I dun even really know what I’m discussing with you
But I don’t get what you’re talking about with this anti-intellectual movement. Are you angry with Diesel? Diesel had some good points but they were ushered between bad generalizations and awkward phrasings. I don’t think he was being intelligently dishonest or intelligently ignorant.
I think you’re taking this a bit too far because you don’t agree with his half-truths.

Oh, and “half-truths” are lies.

Allen: the half-truth issue was how he expressed the massive experience difference between McCain/Obama and overlooked the experience difference between Biden/Palin. Even in his previous post, he took jab at Biden’s lack of ‘common sense’ which is really more about Biden being more honest and less political… but not a MENTION of Sarah Palin, who I consider to be the dumbest person to ever run for such a high office. And yes, I remember Dan Quayle.

Funny thing is I actually voted for Obama, but I was undecided for a long time. I just don’t like being told that if I didn’t, then I’m an idiot because Obama was clearly more intelligent and therefore the only choice.

Matt: that’s just… okay, I’m not going to use ‘untrue’ because maybe this subject is certainly not my specialty, BUT, to my knowledge, coverture was not solely focused on a female’s appearance… the focus of coverture had to do with a woman’s power and wealth through her family. I’m sure a woman’s appearance played a role in any arranged transaction, but coverture, in the sense you’re describing legally, was about power and wealth. I’ve given this a brief google search and I can’t really find anything about appearance.
And empirical knowledge had been around during the time of the Greeks, so your last statement I can say is untrue with 100% certainty.
And you still haven’t acknowledged that, while you keep trying to prove that every rebuttal I use is a ‘biased classification,’ you’re using a ‘biased classification’ in the word sexism.
Look, I’ll stop picking at your iffy-logic and go back to the main premise: I made a semantics error by saying “all women have similar anatomical features” and that is untrue. Griner is living proof that it is untrue. But women all HAVE similar features, and many of them are non-societal, and many of them, Griner lacks. So, while Allenp made a good point about the underlying sexism that ‘female ballers can’t play so if she’s good, she must be male,’ I think what you’re trying to prove is, for a lack of a better term, horse sh*t.
Good day.

Youall have too much free time

And why would I use my personal experiences to make a point to you, or anyone else?
My personal experiences differ vastly from yours, and Jukai’s and the vast majority of the cats who post on SLAM.
So, I used easily verfiable information that can show you how what I’m saying has been backed up by numerous studies and statistics.
You’re asking me to depend on anecdotes, which you can’t even verify, instead of giving you information you can verify on your own.
Yet, I’m pretty certain that if I spoke mainly from my personal experiences, which typically back up the research, there would be someone who would tell me I can’t use anecdotes to make sweeping statements of fact.
It’s a lose/lose situation.
Finally, my very first comment on this thread noted that I believe this young lady’s “masculine” appearance has affected how people viewed her punch. I’ve also repeatedly said that it’s quite ridiculous to make these sort of hateful comments about a stranger. I didn’t introduce sexism or racism to the discussion, I just commented on the posts of others.
The main problem is that folks don’t want anyone interrupting their fun. Which in this case involved making “man jokes” about a young woman. Any attempt to point out the problem with this practice, which is was Matt did early on, was met with scorn and refusal to consider your actions.
That’s fine. People gonna’ do what they want.
And so am I.

Diesel
No, I didn’t say white people wouldn’t vote for Obama.
That’s a ridiculous comment, since he would have never won the Democratic primary if that was the case.
Nor did I say white people won’t hire black people.
I’m black and just about every job I’ve gotten has been working for white folks.
Again, you have crafted a strawman argument, to buttress your points. It’s really quite sad.
If you have a question about what I think, ask me. If you don’t care what I think, then don’t put words in my mouth.
Saying that 44 percent is a “majority” is not a matter of perception. It’s an outright lie, that vastly skews reality.
I never said “why wasn’t it higher.”
I said “That’s not a majority.”
You created an argument, created comments from me in that argument, and then proceeded to try to dismantle my fictional comments.
There is no need to “infer” what I meant, I said what I meant.
But, keep on doing you.

No disrespect ~ But soon as he Obama won a lot of white called a black radio station . Some were mad, some were hoping it would bring us together, but people should not fear, because he is both races and all black guys love white women .

Okay Matt, how do I fail when a) your entire post was about ‘coverture’ which has nothing to do with this Time and again science article… which then has nothing to do with “British Empiricism” and b) British Empiricism -I’m positive- began in the 17th century, and coverture in terms of a legal sense began at the start of the 19th century (according to wikipedia).
So, don’t tell me I fail when you really don’t seem to have any idea of what you’re talking about. Look up these topics and be positive you’re not making a fool out of yourself.
I know, I’m still picking at your logic and not addressing the main point, but your logic is hideously flawed. I’m sure the Time and Again science article has some validity to it, after all, rich men are going to get their trophy wives, you are right. What you really should be focusing on is what masculinity has meant over the years, since I am referring to Brittney as looking very manly.
Or, just stop making up these bizarre, flawed arguments and just tell me you’re not alright with me making fun of Griner. Whatever.