The insanity of the drug war and the tough on crime goons

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

First thing that came to my mind was "stupid" .. but that doesn't quite capture the essence .. make that stench .. of how mindless your post really is.

I thought, I wonder if this neanderthal realizes just how many women are, and have been, in positions of power he will never achieve, or could possibly operate in. I wonder if he realizes how many women are way beyond his intellectual capacity. But I realized that kind of rational thinking in itself is far beyond his own intellectual capacity. He's operating on the decidely "me man" moron level. Does he have any proof that women break down and cry when confronted with problems? After all, there are COUNTLESS women doctors, lawyers, Senators, military commanders, police officers, and a litany of professionals that would certainly provide lots of evidence to back up his claim.

But evidence is not something those operating on the moron level require.

"Pro-thought?" .. oh hell no.

Pro-moron .. that captures his post much better than a simple "stupid."

"Cheese" .. a "hip hop" term?

"Cheese" as a term for money has been around since the sixties, long before hip hop's existence. Perhaps that's what he paid the "ho's" .. be they male or female, in his own life.

Certainly someone who exhibits such disdain for women must have a fascination/love for men.

AssHatZombie .. how appropriate.

Your post is quite devoid of any intellectual merit. There are general differences between men and woman, in many areas of behavior, and tendency. I know in your anti-critical thought worldview, generalizations are not allowed. This is why you're such an idiotic moron.

 

[blackascoal]

Your post is quite devoid of any intellectual merit. There are general differences between men and woman, in many areas of behavior, and tendency. I know in your anti-critical thought worldview, generalizations are not allowed. This is why you're such an idiotic moron.

General differences?

Critical thought?



One stark difference in behavior and tendency that immediately comes to mind is that too often some men engage in penisology. This is most often a trait of scary insecure men who are afraid of most everything. They hide their cowardice and fear behind pseudo-machoism and a false sense of bravdo. They're only comfortable among other scary men who look and act like them.

It's real easy to pick out these scary, often girly-men, because they not only fear women, immigrants, and people of color, they also fear their own homo-erotic tendencies. Their fear is not based on reality, facts, logic, evidence, or common sense .. it's just fear.

For instance, can you provide facts, logic, or evidence that women in positions of power and authority break down and cry when faced with problems. There are COUNTLESS numbers of women in such a position so if what you claim has any valdidty at all surely you can provide lots of examples.

If you can't, then surely you must have looked up the word "intellectual" in the dictionary to find out how to spell it because there is nothing intellectual whatsoever about a claim that you cannot backup with evidence.

There's no need for long drawn out argument about this at all. Either you can back up what you've said or you're simply a scared little man seeking the comfort of other scared little men.

No need to argue, simply provide the evidence.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

General differences?

Critical thought?



One stark difference in behavior and tendency that immediately comes to mind is that too often some men engage in penisology. This is most often a trait of scary insecure men who are afraid of most everything. They hide their cowardice and fear behind pseudo-machoism and a false sense of bravdo. They're only comfortable among other scary men who look and act like them.

It's real easy to pick out these scary, often girly-men, because they not only fear women, immigrants, and people of color, they also fear their own homo-erotic tendencies. Their fear is not based on reality, facts, logic, evidence, or common sense .. it's just fear.

For instance, can you provide facts, logic, or evidence that women in positions of power and authority break down and cry when faced with problems. There are COUNTLESS numbers of women in such a position so if what you claim has any valdidty at all surely you can provide lots of examples.

If you can't, then surely you must have looked up the word "intellectual" in the dictionary to find out how to spell it because there is nothing intellectual whatsoever about a claim that you cannot backup with evidence.

There's no need for long drawn out argument about this at all. Either you can back up what you've said or you're simply a scared little man seeking the comfort of other scared little men.

No need to argue, simply provide the evidence.

http://www.emotionalprocessing.org.uk/EP & Gender/Emotional expression in men & women.htm

There is some evidence to support the idea that men prefer a problem-focused, rather than emotion-focused approach to stressful situations they encounter (Ptacek, Smith & Dodge, 1984; Ben-Zur & Zeidner, 1996; Twenge, 1997). Research also suggests that men express less anxious and depressed feelings than women do (Allen & Haccoun, 1976; Dosser, Balswick & Halverson, 1983; Brody & Hall, 1993).

basically, men handle reals problems better. women are good at soothing intra group squabbles through a soothing demeanor and refusing to engage the argument at hand. "It doesn;t matter, shake hands and play nice" and in a family that's generally a good strategy, but on the world scene it's quite ignorant, and a stupid 'one size fits all' approach.

 

[Cancel7]

"One stark difference in behavior and tendency that immediately comes to mind is that too often some men engage in penisology. This is most often a trait of scary insecure men who are afraid of most everything. They hide their cowardice and fear behind pseudo-machoism and a false sense of bravdo. They're only comfortable among other scary men who look and act like them."

I love this. This finally explains Tucker Carlson. He has been on this castration frenzy ever since Hillary Clinton entered the presidential race. He's actually talked, on air, about how he finds her "castrating" that he'd be afraid to be around her, and that he "crosses his legs" every time he sees her. I've been dumbstruck by his antics, but now I understand.

Penisology.

 

[blackascoal]

http://www.emotionalprocessing.org.uk/EP & Gender/Emotional expression in men & women.htm

basically, men handle reals problems better. women are good at soothing intra group squabbles through a soothing demeanor and refusing to engage the argument at hand. "It doesn;t matter, shake hands and play nice" and in a family that's generally a good strategy, but on the world scene it's quite ignorant, and a stupid 'one size fits all' approach.

I was hoping you could provide real life examples .. but even with the psychology, none of that equates to .. "Women, for the most, cry and get bitchy when confronted with problems." That assertion is flat out false and that is what enraged me.

Additionally, your belief that "shake hands and play nice doesn't work on the world stage" is also false. The "macho bravodo lead with my six-gun cowboyism" of the Bush Administration was on the brink of possible nuclear confrontation with North Korea. But once the cowboys were removed from leading the negotiations, the "shake hands and play nice" level headed thinkers came in an solved the problem within a relative matter of minutes. Now NK is/has shut down its reactor and the world can breathe a sigh of relief.

Women have demonstrated that they are every bit as capable of intellectually dealing with crises as men are.

After all, intellectualism doesn't require muscles .. or a six-gun.

 

[Damocles]

Penisology.

Hmmmm... Not interested.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

I was hoping you could provide real life examples .. but even with the psychology, none of that equates to .. "Women, for the most, cry and get bitchy when confronted with problems." That assertion is flat out false and that is what enraged me.

Additionally, your belief that "shake hands and play nice doesn't work on the world stage" is also false. The "macho bravodo lead with my six-gun cowboyism" of the Bush Administration was on the brink of possible nuclear confrontation with North Korea. But once the cowboys were removed from leading the negotiations, the "shake hands and play nice" level headed thinkers came in an solved the problem within a relative matter of minutes. Now NK is/has shut down its reactor and the world can breathe a sigh of relief.

Women have demonstrated that they are every bit as capable of intellectuallydealing with crises as men are.

After all, intellectualism doesn't require muscles .. or a six-gun.

Real life examples would have been anecdotal. If you yourself don't have anecdotal evidence of women being emotional and irrational, I assert you're the one who's only engaged in homosexuality.



'Shake hands a play' nice assumes there are no real or important differences, but there are:governing philosophy, notion of human rights, notions of religious freedom, etc. White washing actual issues in a broad brush of feminine goo is irrational, irresponsible, juvenile, and brainless.

 

[Cancel5]

Real life examples would have been anecdotal. If you yourself don't have anecdotal evidence of women being emotional and irrational, I assert you're the one who's only engaged in homosexuality.



'Shake hands a play' nice assumes there are no real or important differences, but there are:governing philosophy, notion of human rights, notions of religious freedom, etc. White washing actual issues in a broad brush of feminine goo is irrational, irresponsible, juvenile, and brainless.

Don't date much do you Zombie, or I should say, no second dates...

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

For children, crying is a means of expression, since their ability to express themselves verbally is limited (Eun-pyo, 2002). However, adults cry as well. They cry as a direct response from the heart and as a way of manipulating others’ emotions. The literature on crying, although still relatively small, provides some evidence for sex differences. It appears that women have a greater propensity to cry (Lombardo, Crester, Lombardo & Mathis, 1983; Williams & Morris, 1996), cry more often (Frey 1983; Ross & Mirowsky, 1984; Williams & Morris, 1996) and also experience more intense crying (Bindra, 1972; Williams, 1982; Lombardo, Crester, Lombardo & Mathis 1983; Williams and Morris, 1996) than their male counterparts. Michael Gurian (2003) proposed that, on average, women’s tear glands are 60% larger than men’s. One evolutionary explanation for male and female differences in crying (Pease & Pease, 2002) is that if a man demonstrates emotions around other men, they would appear weak and become an easy target for others to attack him. Thus, men are rarely seen crying in public. On the contrary, women showing emotion to others, particularly other women, is seen as a sign of trust. A number of evolutionary explanations have been suggested for crying.
(Link to Chapter Tears - Purposeless or Adaptive?)

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

Don't date much do you Zombie, or I should say, no second dates...

Actually most women prefer a man who is a man, not a neutered self-hating pussy.

 

[Cancel5]

Actually most women prefer a man who is a man, not a neutered self-hating pussy.

You really don't know women, do you...may I suggest you watch the Mel Gibson movie, "What Women Want"

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

You really don't know women, do you...may I suggest you watch the Mel Gibson movie, "What Women Want"

So women like neutered self hating pussies? Not the women I know.


Perhaps you're reading the characterizations of me rather than what I say. You're ill-informed and not qualified to speak on the matter.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

http://www.emotionalprocessing.org.uk/EP & Gender/Emotional expression in men & women.htm



basically, men handle reals problems better. women are good at soothing intra group squabbles through a soothing demeanor and refusing to engage the argument at hand. "It doesn;t matter, shake hands and play nice" and in a family that's generally a good strategy, but on the world scene it's quite ignorant, and a stupid 'one size fits all' approach.

The only difference between a member of your family and an enemy is the fact that the enemy and yourself are exhibiting a complete sense of apathy towards one another. Maybe if we would recongnize that it DOESN'T matter, it isn't worth death, and you should just shake hands and play nice, the world would be a much better place.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Real life examples would have been anecdotal. If you yourself don't have anecdotal evidence of women being emotional and irrational, I assert you're the one who's only engaged in homosexuality.



'Shake hands a play' nice assumes there are no real or important differences, but there are:governing philosophy, notion of human rights, notions of religious freedom, etc. White washing actual issues in a broad brush of feminine goo is irrational, irresponsible, juvenile, and brainless.

Please, the philosophy that we should just go and kill all those people is the same as the philosophy from which those people spring.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

Please, the philosophy that we should just go and kill all those people is the same as the philosophy from which those people spring.

I'm not advocating "killing all thos people" you queef. I'm saying there are legitimate differences and attitudes towards HOW THE WORLD SHOULD BE that are legitimate to fight about and insist upon at times, and that unity for unity's sake is pointless and even detrimental if it means accepting immoral or otherwise unacceptable behavior.

 

[blackascoal]

Real life examples would have been anecdotal. If you yourself don't have anecdotal evidence of women being emotional and irrational, I assert you're the one who's only engaged in homosexuality.

'Shake hands a play' nice assumes there are no real or important differences, but there are:governing philosophy, notion of human rights, notions of religious freedom, etc. White washing actual issues in a broad brush of feminine goo is irrational, irresponsible, juvenile, and brainless.

I'm not following your logic. I never stated nor do I believe that women are emotionally irrational .. you do. So please explain why I should give you examples of what you believe.

I gave you one example of how an unaggressive approach has resulted in a desired outcome. Instead of repeating the same generalized unsubstantiated goo of nonsense, how about focusing on the example I gave you and tell me where ANY PART of that issue was whitewashed.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

Regardless, the real stupidity is classifying Mary Jane in with the other thugs.

 

[Topspin]

fools in the UK have a pharma sponsered report saying it contributes to physchosis.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

No need to argue, simply provide the evidence.

http://www.emotionalprocessing.org.uk/EP & Gender/Emotional expression in men & women.htm

Quote:
There is some evidence to support the idea that men prefer a problem-focused, rather than emotion-focused approach to stressful situations they encounter (Ptacek, Smith & Dodge, 1984; Ben-Zur & Zeidner, 1996; Twenge, 1997). Research also suggests that men express less anxious and depressed feelings than women do (Allen & Haccoun, 1976; Dosser, Balswick & Halverson, 1983; Brody & Hall, 1993).

from same

For children, crying is a means of expression, since their ability to express themselves verbally is limited (Eun-pyo, 2002). However, adults cry as well. They cry as a direct response from the heart and as a way of manipulating others’ emotions. The literature on crying, although still relatively small, provides some evidence for sex differences. It appears that women have a greater propensity to cry (Lombardo, Crester, Lombardo & Mathis, 1983; Williams & Morris, 1996), cry more often (Frey 1983; Ross & Mirowsky, 1984; Williams & Morris, 1996) and also experience more intense crying (Bindra, 1972; Williams, 1982; Lombardo, Crester, Lombardo & Mathis 1983; Williams and Morris, 1996) than their male counterparts. Michael Gurian (2003) proposed that, on average, women’s tear glands are 60% larger than men’s. One evolutionary explanation for male and female differences in crying (Pease & Pease, 2002) is that if a man demonstrates emotions around other men, they would appear weak and become an easy target for others to attack him. Thus, men are rarely seen crying in public. On the contrary, women showing emotion to others, particularly other women, is seen as a sign of trust. A number of evolutionary explanations have been suggested for crying.
(Link to Chapter Tears - Purposeless or Adaptive?)

I stomped you into the dirt, blackie.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

I'm not following your logic. I never stated nor do I believe that women are emotionally irrational .. you do. So please explain why I should give you examples of what you believe.

I gave you one example of how an unaggressive approach has resulted in a desired outcome. Instead of repeating the same generalized unsubstantiated goo of nonsense, how about focusing on the example I gave you and tell me where ANY PART of that issue was whitewashed.

Reducing the difference to aggressive vs/ unagressive is really too simplistic. It's rational versus emotional. And emotional works best at home. In the world, we are really NOT all one big human family, hence rationality is preferable.