I didn't write any ad hominems either. I am speaking honestly--you're not intelligent enough to speak because you're not educated enough on this topic. You have poor reading comprehension skills, and you don't understand any of my references or the history of this movement. You can't even properly read simple statements I made.
You seem to have problems with women in general, so that's a you problem. That's why you think Dylan Mulvaney is not a clear example of the pure male narcissism which drives "trans." He's the epitome of it. And yeah sure, nobody ever debates, disagrees, or offers differing views and definition of "socialism" and "capitalism"--everyone agrees on everything completely because it's objective and this has been true for all of history. LOL. See, this is what I mean. You're not intelligent and educated enough to speak on this
Women and men were never "complementary" as stated in your ahistorical nonsense. Men always felt more comfortable when women were subservient, personal servants, barred from any financial or social independence, unable to have protection from violence in the home, etc. That's exploitation and subjugation, not being "complementary." Now that they can't get away with treating their wives like a punching bag/waitress, they rage while swiping all day on Tinder (Tinder is 76% male btw).
Like I said, you aren't educated to speak on this. I can't give you a history lesson here. Pointing out lack of education and knowledge isn't ad hominem. It's simply true. I don't care about your personal struggles or history. It's just facts.
I have been nothing but courteous, patient and painstakingly attentive to Kat's comments.
Not a single ad hom from me.
Criticising feminist ideology is NOT a personal attack, even if it does personally offend feminists (which is not my intention).
I didn't write any ad hominems either. I am speaking honestly--you're not intelligent enough to speak because you're not educated enough on this topic. You have poor reading comprehension skills, and you don't understand any of my references or the history of this movement. You can't even properly read simple statements I made.
You seem to have problems with women in general, so that's a you problem. That's why you think Dylan Mulvaney is not a clear example of the pure male narcissism which drives "trans." He's the epitome of it. And yeah sure, nobody ever debates, disagrees, or offers differing views and definition of "socialism" and "capitalism"--everyone agrees on everything completely because it's objective and this has been true for all of history. LOL. See, this is what I mean. You're not intelligent and educated enough to speak on this
Women and men were never "complementary" as stated in your ahistorical nonsense. Men always felt more comfortable when women were subservient, personal servants, barred from any financial or social independence, unable to have protection from violence in the home, etc. That's exploitation and subjugation, not being "complementary." Now that they can't get away with treating their wives like a punching bag/waitress, they rage while swiping all day on Tinder (Tinder is 76% male btw).
Like I said, you aren't educated to speak on this. I can't give you a history lesson here. Pointing out lack of education and knowledge isn't ad hominem. It's simply true. I don't care about your personal struggles or history. It's just facts.