Delano

Okay i think the point has been made. I don't need to say any more, Pioneer1 your words do indeed speak volumes.

I am paraphrasing Cynique

There can't be free will unless you are free to choose. Children have free will but we socialise it out of them. @Mel Hopkins is that a fair interpretation of your statement. Will check the link

Mel looking forward to the explanation of consciousness and free will

Can either @Troy or @Pioneer1 explain how a question becomes a position statement? Clearly anyone can answer but I wanted to hear the rationale from PaT (Pioneer and Troy ) Here's the definition. What would you say @Troy? The advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.

Don't be like that Troy. Pioneer is going home Disneyland Pioneer is fine, his skin and head are much thicker than mine. He can always let me know when he can't take it. But based on his Japanese lover story he can take it.

Can you show me where i made that statement? Context is important. I posted what feminist have to say about pornography both pro and con. I don't define or prescribe the position of groups of which i am not a member.

Do you have a role beyond being being a wind bag or a punching bag. @Pioneer PS I don't engage with you much and neither do your brains. However you are democratic ,because you give everyone the opportunity to own you. Here's a list. Troy Kalexander Mel Cynique. Even the nicest sweetest person, Chevdove owned ya. Let me know when you had enough. Do you realise I am insulting your ability er I mean your attempt to think (that's condescension wrapped around a metainsult) The only thing that doesn't go over your head is the subway.

You know..... I have an opinion about this comment Del just made about Cynique's post to me What's your response?

Ouch

@Troy please include a quote from me. That supports your statement. Because I NEVER DEFINED FEMINISM. @Troy no response to a point by point answer. You are projecting when you say I don't answer your questions. Ok @Troy

Based on your comment I would say it doesn't make a difference to you. And perhaps if my words and or thinking were more in alignment with you or yours. We wouldn't have these disagreements. However there probably wouldn't be any need for me to post. I thought that before I started thinking about some of the possible implications and the multitude of branches of thought or ideas. You could argue that thought and ideas are different. Not certain whether they should agree in number. or to be a bit more accurate (precise ) should both be plural. Since writing them singularly doesn't seem or feel correct or the right thing to do . So I left out the alternative due noto being an ambidextrous thinker or writer of words and by extension ideas, or thoughts on the subject matter. Even though the field or rather scope seems to have shifted, but I could wrong. I have never seen a naudance on my life. Although in the future or rather going forward it could give more insightful answers. unless you prefer other types or manners of exposition. perhaps you are right except that I don't know what in the name of f♡<k you are talking about. Since I posted a pro and con postion on the issue of pormograohy (BTW I didn't correct this typo so that You don't think I am grammar mazi about spelling. BTW themail there isn't agreement as to whether spelling is part of grammar. or at least that is what my search either implied or stated explicitly. or rather the results stated by their sites that were a function of the query.

I guess this is a humorous response to my question. You give the following answers . 38, Idk ,I have never counted. And then ask three questions. I don't know how many I know. I can make an estimate of how many based on how many women I have talked to over 12 years. Although I have no way of determining whether they were feminists when I met them. Or are we counting current feminists. I am assuming my estimate only applies to women. Since I don't generally think of men as feminists , although they could be feminsts in either theory , practice either or both. You could I mean that rhetorically argue whether something or someone is a feminist based on the above points. Or I can give you the answer that you want or would at least be more satisfactory. So if you can respond I will answer in the manner that you choose. Although of you don't answer or give plural answers that are members of the null set ... I will respond in some way that either feels correct or is not correct.

I will respond point by point.

illuminating

@Troy how many feminists do you know? Pornography transformed women into “adult toys,” wrote feminist activist, journalist and Women Against Pornography (WAP) co-founder Susan Brownmiller in 1975, “dehumanized objects to be used, abused, broken and discarded.” “Pornography is the theory; rape is the practice,” former Ms. magazine editor Robin Morgan declared in 1977. Pornography, some argued, was a form of terror: women “will know that we are free when the pornography no longer exists,” wrote Andrea Dworkin, one of the most well-known advocates of anti-porn feminism, in 1981. In 1996, legal scholar Catharine MacKinnon argued against the idea that pornography was a creative practice entitled to First Amendment protection. While pornography itself was not responsible for sexual assaults against women, wrote MacKinnon, “men who are made, changed and impelled by” porn were. Defenders of porn within radical feminism did not seek to deny the reality of exploitation and sexual violence: novelist Dorothy Allison, a member of FACT, wrote freely about having been subjected to cruel, sexualized beatings and incestuous rape as a child. But feminists who called themselves “pro-sex” objected to the idea that consuming or making porn was categorically harmful. Journalist Ellen Willis asked in 1979: “Is there any objective criterion for healthy or satisfying sex, and if so what is it?” In the same vein, others pointed out that the charges against pornography could be made against most erotic art. As former sex worker and lesbian feminist activist Amber Hollibaugh wrote in 1980, she “could make a strong argument for the potential violence of Harlequin romances” because of their depictions of heterosexual relationships. Gay historian and longtime feminist activist John D’Emilio saw violence against women on television and in mainstream films as a greater danger than porn, “since the mass media pose as real life.”

I don't know how many feminists you know ,but it's is an issue.

okay Neo

Really Cynique?

@Troy maybe the question isn't looking for the cause. But trying to understand the significance of the effect. In which case it means that there are no randomn occurrences. I seem to be a connector or I used to be. For instance at one of my brunches I had two people who were next door neighbors but had never met.

People are not rational. I knew a woman who would try and get over on her man. And then said if she did she couldn't respect him. She ended up with a sensitive big teddy bear of a guy. Who was street but really affectionate. Later on. I heard he literally took cats out. So at the job he was really sweet to her but in the hood he was a killer. I also knew a feminist who liked to look at porn. I Asked her how that worked she said i dont know but it turns me on.

I'll check out Saul, he is much more progressive and proactive than myself. It's a big complement (is that the correct one , don't want to appear obtuse.