Sean Connery discusses women slapping

[Also]

I say to you apricity men, take the words of this fine wise gentleman.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oo0d1zTAFKA

[Marusya]

When men were men. Bond, James Bond hitting women.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJWfObq2cFk

[Atvend]

We'll never get to hear things like these anymore, the media of today would crucify him. The art of manhood has been effectively censored.

Based Connery.

[Era]

I have seen plenty of those old movies with women slapping men too. For me it's unacceptable, be it a man, a woman or a child.

[Also]

We'll never get to hear things like these anymore, the media of today would crucify him. The art of manhood has been effectively censored.

Based Connery.

True.

Today we mostly have manginas, social justice warriors and pussywhipped men. Not to mention a growing acceptance of feminine behavior in men and transexualism. Today you can't even talk about 'putting a woman in her place' without being flooded by weak men and frustrated women.

[Rædwald]

The way the woman talks in this video makes me want to slap her.

[Wadaad]

I say to you apricity men, take the words of this fine wise gentleman.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oo0d1zTAFKA

When Sean Connery says this, you wet your panties, I've seen this video posted by chauvinists too many times to count...but when the Quran states this (which is obviously where Sean got the line of thinking, almost verbatim he is quoting Sura 4:34) it is barbarism. You dont really care about the message as much as the manner it was delivered.

[Atvend]

I have seen plenty of those old movies with women slapping men too. For me it's unacceptable, be it a man, a woman or a child.

Come on, not even children? Parent authority has to be established through violence if you want the child to learn discipline.

[Also]

When Sean Connery says this, you wet your panties, I've seen this video posted by chauvinists too many times to count...but when the Quran states this (which is obviously where Sean got the line of thinking, almost verbatim he is quoting Sura 4:34) it is barbarism. You dont really care about the message as much as the manner it was delivered.

Is 'you' singular directed to me? I don't remember talking about the Quran in this forum.

I checked your verse, I don't think he got this line of thinking from the Quran, specially if he is not a muslim, this was a somewhat common concept among men until a few decades ago. I could have said basically the same thing and I had never read that part of the Quran before.

[Abdelnour]

Wadaad does have a point here.

I mean a lot of beliefs Americans had over 50 years ago or so would seem barbaric today. This puts Islam and the Sharia, which some believe is perfect and applied all time, over time as a disadvantage.

The more liberal we get, the more barbaric Islam gets.

[Beit El]

When Sean Connery says this, you wet your panties, I've seen this video posted by chauvinists too many times to count...but when the Quran states this (which is obviously where Sean got the line of thinking, almost verbatim he is quoting Sura 4:34) it is barbarism. You dont really care about the message as much as the manner it was delivered.

It's because many white people are stuck in their edgy atheism/autism stage.

[BeerBaron]

It used to be common, it's not even physically painful and doesnt injure the woman. It's more like a little whack to pay attention.

Would people rather have something like this happen, OR, have it fester and boil until it reaches critical mass, explodes the woman tears after the man with kitchen knife, he punches her, gets arrested, charged with domestic violence, they get fined up the yin yang, the kids are a mess being raised by a single parent, they grow up to be little shit heads, she gets it in her head that she can do whatever she wants, tears after the wrong mofo, gets put into the concrete and ends up in a wheelchair sucking dick for crack rocks.

[Wadaad]

It used to be common, it's not even physically painful and doesnt injure the woman. It's more like a little whack to pay attention.

Would people rather have something like this happen, OR, have it fester and boil until it reaches critical mass, explodes the woman tears after the man with kitchen knife, he punches her, gets arrested, charged with domestic violence, they get fined up the yin yang, the kids are a mess being raised by a single parent, they grow up to be little shit heads, she gets it in her head that she can do whatever she wants, tears after the wrong mofo, gets put into the concrete and ends up in a wheelchair sucking dick for crack rocks.

settle down there, Eminem

[Zmey Gorynych]

Connery got it right, women do not know when it's time to shut up.

[Imamudin]

True.

Today we mostly have manginas, social justice warriors and pussywhipped men. Not to mention a growing acceptance of feminine behavior in men and transexualism. Today you can't even talk about 'putting a woman in her place' without being flooded by weak men and frustrated women.

It's your own fault.

[Era]

Come on, not even children? Parent authority has to be established through violence if you want the child to learn discipline.

Nope, not on the face. Maybe somewhere on the back but in the face I find it very humiliating even for a child. And it depends on the child, when they are the sensitive type ( and smart) a good talk does the job much beter.

[Atvend]

Nope, not on the face. Maybe somewhere on the back but in the face I find it very humiliating even for a child. And it depends on the child, when they are the sensitive type ( and smart) a good talk does the job much beter.

You are going to talk sense into, say, a 4 year old? Fat chance that they will actually learn that way or even understand the consequences of their mistakes.
But you go ahead and do that. My mother did the same thing. As a result I was always an asshole to her(asshole by day, regretful by night), but only when father wasn't around. He knew how to put me in my place, cheeks all red.
Today I am only grateful. You might want to reconsider your stance.

[Era]

You are going to talk sense into, say, a 4 year old? Fat chance that they will actually learn that way or even understand the consequences of their mistakes.
But you go ahead and do that. My mother did the same thing. As a result I was always an asshole to her(asshole by day, regretful by night), but only when father wasn't around. He knew how to put me in my place, cheeks all red.
Today I am only grateful. You might want to reconsider your stance.

As I said it depends on the child. I have seen well behaved kids and some really nasty ones, maybe they deserve some slapping in their buts :)

[Dandelion]

When men were men. Bond, James Bond hitting women.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJWfObq2cFk

Context is everything, as proves the video.

[Atvend]

As I said it depends on the child. I have seen well behaved kids and some really nasty ones, maybe they deserve some slapping in their buts :)

Fair enough, that's what I was advocating from the start.

[Dandelion]

When Sean Connery says this, you wet your panties, I've seen this video posted by chauvinists too many times to count...but when the Quran states this (which is obviously where Sean got the line of thinking, almost verbatim he is quoting Sura 4:34) it is barbarism. You dont really care about the message as much as the manner it was delivered.

The Surah mentions that you can beat your wife if she refuses to lay with you. :)

[Also]

The Surah mentions that you can beat your wife if she refuses to lay with you. :)

The most honorable thing in this case is to dump your wife. But that is still better than doing nothing.

[NatiaCutie]

The most honorable thing in this case is to dump your wife. But that is still better than doing nothing.

Women decide when to have sex. Forcing them in anyway is rape.

[Also]

Women decide when to have sex. Forcing them in anyway is rape.

If a man is married he should have made it to clear to his wife he expects sex from her on a regular basis and denying him it is a deal breaker.

In our instinct as humans and animals we understand a wife denying sex repeatedly to her husband will only cause trouble and is failing her primary duty. That's why in places and times where people were people were not brainwashed into this soft weak feminist thing the idea of a man beating of a wife for denying him what is his is not absurd.

Look at what buthanese women say:

"roughly 70% of women say they deserved beating if they neglect children, argue with their partners, refuse sex or burn dinner"

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?162549-Bhutanese-women-know-their-husbands-can-beat-them

[Wadaad]

The Surah mentions that you can beat your wife if she refuses to lay with you. :)

No it doesnt. The opposite infact. It says to not sleep in the same bed as a punishment to obstinate behaviour.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

We'll never get to hear things like these anymore, the media of today would crucify him. The art of manhood has been effectively censored.

Based Connery.

It was baba wawas. She was trying to crucify him, he just didn't give a fuck. That is the mistake too many people make, apologizing. Think people won't go see films by Mel Gibson? LOL

Of course getting them financed is not going to be easy when you are (supposedly, not sure if he really is) super judenhass.

[BeerBaron]

I cant help but wonder how much less voilent behavior from women, especially within the anglosphere we would have if this were still the social norm.

For those that aren't aware, womens violent crimes have been on a sharp rise

[NatiaCutie]

If a man is married he should have made it to clear to his wife he expects sex from her on a regular basis and denying him it is a deal breaker.

In our instinct as humans and animals we understand a wife denying sex repeatedly to her husband will only cause trouble and is failing her primary duty. That's why in places and times where people were people were not brainwashed into this soft weak feminist thing the idea of a man beating of a wife for denying him what is his is not absurd.

Look at what buthanese women say:

"roughly 70% of women say they deserved beating if they neglect children, argue with their partners, refuse sex or burn dinner"

What archaic tribes where women probably have no education to begin with do is of no concern.

The civilized world has kept improving and people have a better social consciousness on the freedoms and rights of women. When a woman marries a man, she agrees to share their life so long as they both have freedoms and the right to make choices. Marriage is a contract made by agreement.
If the man feels like raping her, he's not only breaching the contract but also breaking the law and deserves to punished severely by the authorities!!

[Svipdag]

My mother taught me in my boyhood that "If she can't behave like a lady, you don't have to be a gentleman." In practise, this meant that, if she strikes first, you may reciprocate in like manner.

[Svipdag]

The Surah mentions that you can beat your wife if she refuses to lay with you. :)

It would.

[Melina]

If a man is married he should have made it to clear to his wife he expects sex from her on a regular basis and denying him it is a deal breaker.

In our instinct as humans and animals we understand a wife denying sex repeatedly to her husband will only cause trouble and is failing her primary duty. That's why in places and times where people were people were not brainwashed into this soft weak feminist thing the idea of a man beating of a wife for denying him what is his is not absurd.

Look at what buthanese women say:

"roughly 70% of women say they deserved beating if they neglect children, argue with their partners, refuse sex or burn dinner"

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?162549-Bhutanese-women-know-their-husbands-can-beat-them

I agree with you that a woman has the responsibility to keep her husband satisfied. Just as much as men has the responsibility of giving her security. Relationships are give and take. However I don't think violence is the answer. There are other ways. If your wife keeps rejecting you make it clear you will go look for it somewhere else or divorce.

Hate women that after they are married they don't have any obligations because the man was caught on her fish hook.

[Also]

What archaic tribes where women probably have no education to begin with do is of no concern.

The civilized world has kept improving and people have a better social consciousness on the freedoms and rights of women. When a woman marries a man, she agrees to share their life so long as they both have freedoms and the right to make choices. Marriage is a contract made by agreement.
If the man feels like raping her, he's not only breaching the contract but also breaking the law and deserves to punished severely by the authorities!!

That's very derrogatory of you towards the great nation of Bhutan. Using terms like 'archaic' and implying they are 'uncivilized' and putting the down, they are of more concern than you are. You are not progressive at all.

Men should dump women that repeatedly refuse sex. The contract of marriage is understood differently by different people, if a woman is denying sex repeatedly she is already breaching the contract.

[Marusya]

As a Christian, this is how I have been taught relationships and marriage should be:

Number one rule for keeping a marriage/relationship sexy and happy...

Say yes to sex, even when you're tired.

In a marriage there will be times when you as a wife will be very exhausted. Your husband comes home after a hard day's work, you get the baby to bed, and he is going to be looking forward to that time with you. You must be available. Anyone can make him lunch, but only one person can meet that physical need of love that he has, and you always need to be available when he calls.

2. But give it a rest sometimes.

Abstinence, occasionally, does make the heart grow fonder. Certain times do call for it. The time after childbirth, for instance.


3. Treat your wife well and she will respond in kind to you, her husband.


4. Men must share their heart with their wives, their struggles, their fears and their dreams. Many men would not do that, but God's word says that before honor comes humility. Communicate!


5. Always be ready to apologize. The words "I was wrong" and "Will you forgive me?" are some of the most important words for keeping a relationship strong.

[Marusya]

Nope, not on the face. Maybe somewhere on the back but in the face I find it very humiliating even for a child. And it depends on the child, when they are the sensitive type ( and smart) a good talk does the job much beter.

Never hit a child in the face, God created a better place. ;)

[Drawing-slim]

:roll:

[NatiaCutie]

That's very derrogatory of you towards the great nation of Bhutan. Using terms like 'archaic' and implying they are 'uncivilized' and putting the down, they are of more concern than you are. You are not progressive at all.

Men should dump women that repeatedly refuse sex. The contract of marriage is understood differently by different people, if a woman is denying sex repeatedly she is already breaching the contract.

He's in all his right to do that. If the husband has too much of a problem with a woman not agreeing to being used as sex doll, it's better if they get a divorce before he lashes out, beats her, and rapes her.

[Aviator]

What archaic tribes where women probably have no education to begin with do is of no concern.

The civilized world has kept improving and people have a better social consciousness on the freedoms and rights of women. When a woman marries a man, she agrees to share their life so long as they both have freedoms and the right to make choices. Marriage is a contract made by agreement.
If the man feels like raping her, he's not only breaching the contract but also breaking the law and deserves to punished severely by the authorities!!

Should she be punished severely if she rapes him as well?

[Also]

He's in all his right to do that. If the husband has too much of a problem with a woman not agreeing to being used as sex doll, it's better if they get a divorce before he lashes out, beats her, and rapes her.

It's not about her being a 'sex doll', a real men with self-respect won't waste amounts of his valuable time and energy being stuck in a relationship with a woman that denies him sex, something she implicitly or explicitly commited to provide to him when she married him, while he is demanded to not seek it elsewhere.

But for you when men are men there are something wrong with them, typical feminist who hate male sexuality. A man's sexual need doesn't adapt to a woman's mood.



Number one rule for keeping a marriage/relationship sexy and happy...

Say yes to sex, even when you're tired.

In a marriage there will be times when you as a wife will be very exhausted. Your husband comes home after a hard day's work, you get the baby to bed, and he is going to be looking forward to that time with you. You must be available. Anyone can make him lunch, but only one person can meet that physical need of love that he has, and you always need to be available when he calls.

This is so good, they should teach this in school to girls.

[Lightman]

Women are nature's punching bag so you better get me a beer and cash my unemployment check you cunt!

[NatiaCutie]

It's not about her being a 'sex doll', a real men with self-respect won't waste amounts of his valuable time and energy being stuck in a relationship with a woman that denies him sex, something she implicitly or explicitly commited to provide to him when she married him, while he is demanded to not seek it elsewhere.

But for you when men are men there are something wrong with them, typical feminist who hate male sexuality. A man's sexual need doesn't adapt to a woman's mood.

And why should a woman's sexuality adapt to the cravings of men?

[Also]

And why should a woman's sexuality adapt to the cravings of men?

If she's your wife that's what she's gotta do. She doesn't necessarily need to want to do it, she just has to do it.

[NatiaCutie]

If she's your wife that's what she's gotta do. She doesn't necessarily need to want to do it, she just has to do it.

The contract of marriage is about living together, sharing responsabilities and helping out each other.
It's not about long-term prostitution.

[Smitty]

And why should a woman's sexuality adapt to the cravings of men?

By the same token, why should a man's sexuality adapt to the indifference of women? (I'm speaking in terms of marriage here, lest someone accuse me of being pro-rape.)

[Also]

The contract of marriage is about living together, sharing responsabilities and helping out each other.
It's not about long-term prostitution.

Marriage is not a friendship. I can live together, share responsibilities and help even with my male friends. In fact, people barely need to be my friends for those things to be possible.

Marriage has a sexual clause and has expectations of sexual provisions that cannot be removed. Period. The way you characterize marriage is ridiculous.

If you are a woman marrying a man you are expected to put out regularly and not be selfish that you already trapped a man into an unsatisfying marriage and it's hard for him to move out and leave while you deprive him of sex.

[Imamudin]

The contract of marriage is about living together, sharing responsabilities and helping out each other.
It's not about long-term prostitution.

But no one wants such a woman like you and the result is that women like you normally stay forever alone.

[Marusya]

The contract of marriage is about living together, sharing responsabilities and helping out each other.
It's not about long-term prostitution.

A big part of marriage is LOVE, RESPECT and DUTY. A woman agrees, at least in a Christian marriage, to attend to her husband's needs. Sexual need is included here.

[Unome]

The contract of marriage is about living together, sharing responsabilities and helping out each other.
It's not about long-term prostitution.
Incorrect, maybe you're right according to "feminist marriage" but not traditional marriage and certainly not christian marriage. However we've been through these debates before. Liberal amorality is a cheap imitation of christian morality. Liberals pretend to be conservatives, have traditional values, but end-up making a mockery of them. This is the same reason you support two queers "playing house" where, even still, one takes the role of father and the other takes role of mother.

In traditional marriage, wife must put-out whenever hubby feels like it, by law.

That is the contract of (traditional) marriage. Women gives sex; man gives security/status.

[NatiaCutie]

By the same token, why should a man's sexuality adapt to the indifference of women? (I'm speaking in terms of marriage here, lest someone accuse me of being pro-rape.)

Sex is about consent.
If both want it, then it happens. Forcing people is rape, being married makes no difference.

[NatiaCutie]

Marriage is not a friendship. I can live together, share responsibilities and help even with my male friends. In fact, people barely need to be my friends for those things to be possible.

Marriage has a sexual clause and has expectations of sexual provisions that cannot be removed. Period. The way you characterize marriage is ridiculous.

If you are a woman marrying a man you are expected to put out regularly and not be selfish that you already trapped a man into an unsatisfying marriage and it's hard for him to move out and leave while you deprive him of sex.

Women are not sex dolls. If you cannot understand something so simple, then better not get married.

[Unome]

Sex is about consent.
If both want it, then it happens. Forcing people is rape, being married makes no difference.
Marriage is consent for the rest of your lifetime, hence the legally binding status of the marriage vow.

By law a married woman always consents to her husband; there are no exceptions (except in liberal-leftist-lala-land).

If you marry an abusive rapist who pounds your face into mud then it's your responsibility, nobody else's and certainly not the state's affair. Don't like it? Then pick a better husband in your next lifetime.

[NatiaCutie]

Incorrect, maybe you're right according to "feminist marriage" but not traditional marriage and certainly not christian marriage.

Silly religions and their dustdead books don't matter in society. People are secular. Only in forums can I find social rejects who praise a backward society that is thankfully never coming back

[Smitty]

Sex is about consent.
If both want it, then it happens. Forcing people is rape, being married makes no difference.

Well, I (and many here, obviously) would argue that the marriage vows are consent. That's not to say that times don't exist when a husband should show deference to his wife when she doesn't want to have sex. But more often than not, she should do it for him. As others have pointed out, that's a major reason why men get married.

[NatiaCutie]

But no one wants such a woman like you and the result is that women like you normally stay forever alone.

I am currently dating a man, and I've never had trouble socializing.
But thanks for the interest dear :)

[Unome]

Silly religions and their dustdead books don't matter in society. People are secular. Only in forums can I find social rejects who praise a backward society that is thankfully never coming back
The more you espouse your logical inconsistencies and contradict yourself between sentences, the more you'll push people to the traditional-conservative-right, so keep up the good work cutie. :thumbs up

[Wadaad]

I am currently dating a man, and I've never had trouble socializing.
But thanks for the interest dear :)

What's your sex life like? How does he respond when you're not in the mood?

[Lightman]

The contract of marriage is about living together, sharing responsabilities and helping out each other.
It's not about long-term prostitution.

I want a women who will work at a job while I stay home all day drinking my beer, total sexual submission, mow the lawn, keep the cars clean, bring home a paycheck, household chores, take care of the kids while I have complete financial control, own my property. Is that too much to fucking ask?

[Unome]

I want a women who will work at a job while I stay home all day drinking my beer, total sexual submission, mow the lawn, keep the cars clean, bring home a paycheck, household chores, take care of the kids while I have complete financial control, own my property. Is that too much to fucking ask?
No, every man has the right to expect at least this much from a wife.

[Melina]

Sex is about consent.
If both want it, then it happens. Forcing people is rape, being married makes no difference.

Marriage makes a difference. In the U.S and of all Europe a woman consents to getting married. Nobody forces a woman to get married. She accepts. Marriage is a contract. Part of that contract is attending your partners sexual needs.

I think women like you seem to always want power and in some cases want to control the husband through sex. This leads to power struggle and competition which would lead to frustrations.

All right let us turn the tables. If a woman gets rejected from her husband would you say the same? Would you say he shouldn't abide towards her sexual needs.

[NatiaCutie]

Well, I (and many here, obviously) would argue that the marriage vows are consent. That's not to say that times don't exist when a husband should show deference to his wife when she doesn't want to have sex. But more often than not, she should do it for him. As others have pointed out, that's a major reason why men get married.

Don't be silly please.
Could you find a single clause in a marriage contract that says "the woman, and only the woman, agrees to being used for sexual purposes whenever requested" ?

What you're saying is the same as suggesting that by signing a contract with my employer, I suddenly must obey whatever order he gives me, even if it is waking up a 3 am and fetching him a pair of new slippers.

[NatiaCutie]

Marriage makes a difference. In the U.S and of all Europe a woman consents to getting married. Nobody forces a woman to get married. She accepts. Marriage is a contract. Part of that contract is attending your partners sexual needs.

I think women like you seem to always want power and in some cases want to control the husband through sex. This leads to power struggle and competition which would lead to frustrations.

All right let us turn the tables. If a woman gets rejected from her husband would you say the same? Would you say he shouldn't abide towards her sexual needs.

Of course, there is no difference.
Sex is about consent, not about imposing one's will.

[Dandelion]

People on this forum fail to recognise one point. Most people have an active sex life before marrying already. But even within a marriage consent is key anyway.

Also funny how people behave as if NatiaCutie is the one with the most extreme viewpoints on this matter, while she's actually pretty mainstream here compared to the misogynist paleoconservatives here ("if a woman marries a man who later turns to be a total psycho who mistreats her, she's forced to be stuck with him"). Seriously...

[NatiaCutie]

The more you espouse your logical inconsistencies and contradict yourself between sentences, the more you'll push people to the traditional-conservative-right, so keep up the good work cutie. :thumbs up

I'm not sure I know what you're talking about. But take care moosh.

[NatiaCutie]

I want a women who will work at a job while I stay home all day drinking my beer, total sexual submission, mow the lawn, keep the cars clean, bring home a paycheck, household chores, take care of the kids while I have complete financial control, own my property. Is that too much to fucking ask?

I'm sure you can write that in your dating profile if you want to.
Don't get your hopes up though :)

[Unome]

I'm not sure I know what you're talking about. But take care moosh.
That's because you write but never read.

It's called close-minded/ignorance.

[NatiaCutie]

People on this forum fail to recognise one point. Most people have an active sex life before marrying already. But even within a marriage consent is key anyway.

Also funny how people behave as if NatiaCutie is the one with the most extreme viewpoints on this matter, while she's actually pretty mainstream here compared to the misogynist paleoconservatives here ("if a woman marries a man who later turn to be a total psycho who mistreats her, she's forced to be stuck with him"). Seriously...

I was very appauled when I first read comments of The Apricity regarding women and their role in society, then I was very, very angry and offended.

Now I just pity them :(.
Lonely little men watching porn on their cellars, hating society covertly because they're too cowardly to show their true colours at their workplace or their social circle, hoping for some magical catastrophy that will suddenly push the world back 200 years to a time where their awkwardness could be masked better. I honestly only worry about those that might be creepy enough to try to hurt people, the rest, oh well, they can keep on being social rejects I think :lol:

[Unome]

Natia the flaw with your ad hom insults is that you falsely presume and imply that you are not a social reject…

What makes you believe that you're socially acceptable?

[NatiaCutie]

Natia the flaw with your ad hom insults is that you falsely presume and imply that you are not a social reject…

What makes you believe that you're socially acceptable?

LOL!
You are a silly bloke, aren't you? :lol:

First of all, I'm not a pauper like you are who can't even afford proper clothing, I have a larger number of friends and I am part of social groups defending progressiveness. I do street activism with my face uncovered where I talk to people very often and most are very receptive and friendly :) I write in blogs as well, sometimes anonymously but sometimes with my full name as well.

I am dating and I have good prospects of work once I'm done studying next year cuz I've already met with other girls working in NGOs and even one who works as chief of human resources in a public institution here in Portsmouth.

[Also]

I was very appauled when I first read comments of The Apricity regarding women and their role in society, then I was very, very angry and offended.

Now I just pity them :(.
Lonely little men watching porn on their cellars, hating society covertly because they're too cowardly to show their true colours at their workplace or their social circle, hoping for some magical catastrophy that will suddenly push the world back 200 years to a time where their awkwardness could be masked better. I honestly only worry about those that might be creepy enough to try to hurt people, the rest, oh well, they can keep on being social rejects I think :lol:

Yeah, I am sure your average feminazi activist friend who I suppose is brave enough to defend her ideas of sibling-incest in public is a lot less pathetic than conservative men who watch pornography sometimes.

[Marusya]

Silly religions and their dustdead books don't matter in society. People are secular. Only in forums can I find social rejects who praise a backward society that is thankfully never coming back

You just slapped every Christian in the face. Do feminists and progressives deny the right to freedom of religion? Or, do they believe Christians should be persecuted? Now, that's backward. Pontius Pilate would love you!

[Unome]

LOL!
You are a silly bloke, aren't you? :lol:

First of all, I'm not a pauper like you are who can't even afford proper clothing, I have a larger number of friends and I am part of social groups defending progressiveness. I do street activism with my face uncovered where I talk to people very often and most are very receptive and friendly :) I write in blogs as well, sometimes anonymously but sometimes with my full name as well.

I am dating and I have good prospects of work once I'm done studying next year cuz I've already met with other girls working in NGOs and even one who works as chief of human resources in a public institution here in Portsmouth.
Yet I show my face on this forum and you are too cowardly??

See, this is what I mean by you contradicting yourself between sentences…

And one more thing, your petty resume doesn't impress me, try again. ;)

[Wadaad]

Natia the flaw with your ad hom insults is that you falsely presume and imply that you are not a social reject…


What makes you believe that you're socially acceptable?

Her views are mainstream...arguing her views in public will make YOU the outcast.

[Also]

You just slapped every Christian in the face. Do feminists and progressives deny the right to freedom of religion? Or, do they believe Christians should be persecuted? Now, that's backward. Pontius Pilate would love you!

Yes. In fact, sometimes in feminist protests you'll find a naked feminist woman masturbating in public with religious objects.

[Marusya]

LOL!
You are a silly bloke, aren't you? :lol:

First of all, I'm not a pauper like you are who can't even afford proper clothing, I have a larger number of friends and I am part of social groups defending progressiveness. I do street activism with my face uncovered where I talk to people very often and most are very receptive and friendly :) I write in blogs as well, sometimes anonymously but sometimes with my full name as well.

I am dating and I have good prospects of work once I'm done studying next year cuz I've already met with other girls working in NGOs and even one who works as chief of human resources in a public institution here in Portsmouth.

Well, bully for you! I volunteer at the local library reading stories to children every Saturday morning. I like to think it's important work. Right now, I'm reading them "Little House on the Prairie." :D I love Caroline and Charles Ingalls. Great marriage they had. When her husband, Charles, respectfully asks his wife's opinion on something, he says, "Do you object to my plans, Caroline?" Caroline says, "Whatever you decide, Charles." Charles responds, "I'm glad you agree." ;)

[Unome]

Her views are mainstream...arguing her views in public will make YOU the outcast.
Not if your social circle is a bunch of conservative people

[NatiaCutie]

Yeah, I am sure your average feminazi activist friend who I suppose is brave enough to defend her ideas of sibling-incest in public is a lot less pathetic than conservative men who watch pornography sometimes.

Yep, hihi, she is. :)

All my activist friends get to leave their houses and meet new people while openly defending their ideas. Some are dating, some are just having fun casually, but I can tell you most get intimacy with real people.
It's very pitiful to see men who only have religious books and internet porn to live on. Covering themselves with their own spunk cuz no real woman is there for them (not like it's a surprise :p).

[Also]

Her views are mainstream...arguing her views in public will make YOU the outcast.

Not all of them.

- Deep despise for abrahamic religions
- Support of any type of incestual relationships
- Idea of a 'friendship'-shaped married without expectations of sex
- Proposing men with high testosterone or men diagnosed with psychopathy should be chemically castrated
- Wanting to ban pornography and hating men who consume pornography
- Insinuating men who had sex with hookers don't deserve to live

There may be more, those are the ones on top of my head now.

[Atvend]

People on this forum fail to recognise one point. Most people have an active sex life before marrying already. But even within a marriage consent is key anyway.

Also funny how people behave as if NatiaCutie is the one with the most extreme viewpoints on this matter, while she's actually pretty mainstream here compared to the misogynist paleoconservatives here ("if a woman marries a man who later turns to be a total psycho who mistreats her, she's forced to be stuck with him"). Seriously...

The misogynist paleoconservatives were mainstream yesterday and may reclaim their status again tomorrow. Being mainstream does not validate a viewpoint.

You can bash the paleoconservatives for their extreme views, but you cannot deny that their views, in all their extremity, are at least supported by biology and do not contradict the natural order of things. But the Natias of this world on the other hand are not only extreme, they are also out of touch with the reality of our species. Between 2 extremes I would rather choose the most natural and logical one.

[NatiaCutie]

You just slapped every Christian in the face. Do feminists and progressives deny the right to freedom of religion? Or, do they believe Christians should be persecuted? Now, that's backward. Pontius Pilate would love you!

Everybody is welcome to believe in whatever they want to believe privately. No persecution, that was an awful part of the Soviet Union and I know that story too well.

Public society is secular, and people shouldn't bring their personal rubbish beliefs into it. That's all :)

[NatiaCutie]

Yet I show my face on this forum and you are too cowardly??

See, this is what I mean by you contradicting yourself between sentences…

And one more thing, your petty resume doesn't impress me, try again. ;)

Hmm? What? Don't know what you mean. I think I have posted more pictures of myself, in clearer angles than what you have in the last few months :)

[NatiaCutie]

Well, bully for you! I volunteer at the local library reading stories to children every Saturday morning. I like to think it's important work. Right now, I'm reading them "Little House on the Prairie." :D I love Caroline and Charles Ingalls. Great marriage they had. When her husband, Charles, respectfully asks his wife's opinion on something, he says, "Do you object to my plans, Caroline?" Caroline says, "Whatever you decide, Charles." Charles responds, "I'm glad you agree." ;)

That's a good calling. I respect you for that :)

[Wadaad]

Not all of them.

- Deep despise for abrahamic religions
- Support of any type of incestual relationships
- Idea of a 'friendship'-shaped married without expectations of sex
- Proposing men with high testosterone or men diagnosed with psychopathy should be chemically castrated
- Wanting to ban pornography and hating men who consume pornography
- Insinuating men who had sex with hookers don't deserve to live

There may be more, those are the ones on top of my head now.

Those are indeed radically anti-male, but on the issue of women slapping and entitlement to sex, even conservatives would find affront to someone who argues otherwis. I reckon if anything, conservatives (who are more 'white knight' and imagine women as damsels in distress) will find affront to the idea even more than libruls

[Dandelion]

The misogynist paleoconservatives were mainstream yesterday and may reclaim their status again tomorrow. Being mainstream does not validate a viewpoint.


I neither think the argumentum ad populum is a valid one. However, the views of some people here in regards to women would also make the generation of my great-grandparents frown. I do read old literature. My ancestors still had a basic respect for women.

[NatiaCutie]

Not if your social circle is a bunch of conservative people

Oh well, there are people who gather up to party and cross-dress as the other gender. It's all part of their rights too! :lol:

Seriously though, he's obviously talking about the general public cuz that's what really matters.

[Marusya]

Yes. In fact, sometimes in feminist protests you'll find a naked feminist woman masturbating in public with religious objects.

Awful. I have no words... :D

[NatiaCutie]

Awful. I have no words... :D

He's talking about the FEMEN girls.

http://www.shotmcn.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/femen-protesters-vatican-shotmcn.jpg

I personally disagree with their methods cuz they strip naked and let a woman's body be objectified.
The picture is still funny :lol: :lol:

[Anima Libera]

Yep, hihi, she is. :)

All my activist friends get to leave their houses and meet new people while openly defending their ideas. Some are dating, some are just having fun casually, but I can tell you most get intimacy with real people.
It's very pitiful to see men who only have religious books and internet porn to live on. Covering themselves with their own spunk cuz no real woman is there for them (not like it's a surprise :p).

He's saying that it's not pathetic to watch porn sometimes, not saying that living on it and not getting any sex from other women isn't pathetic.

Men who do watch porn sometimes can have a sex life. Really, nothing wrong with watching it, it's not like we have to always to get laid to satisfy our sexual needs. There's the internet, it can relieve us of our sexual needs.

[Also]

First of all, I'm not a pauper like you are who can't even afford proper clothing,

Natia, remember what you posted.....



http://41.media.tumblr.com/c56802dbc6fd27e34c396c5d1f3e5619/tumblr_nigop713tb1qkfpu0o1_500.jpg


...you should be against classism. I have also noted you have a despise, that shows off from time to time, for people from Albania, Buthan and possibly from any country which you perceive as less wealthy than your own.

[NatiaCutie]

Natia, remember what you posted.....



http://41.media.tumblr.com/c56802dbc6fd27e34c396c5d1f3e5619/tumblr_nigop713tb1qkfpu0o1_500.jpg


...you should be against classism. I have also noted you have a despise, that shows off from time to time, for people from Albania, Buthan and possibly from any country which you perceive as less wealthy than your own.

You're right dear.
I apologise for that. I just find it funny he'd say I'm a social reject when he can't even get to wear decent clothing :lol:

[Marusya]

He's talking about the FEMEN girls.

http://www.shotmcn.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/femen-protesters-vatican-shotmcn.jpg

I personally disagree with their methods cuz they strip naked and let a woman's body be objectified.
The picture is still funny :lol: :lol:

FEMEN is not a real feminist organization. It's simply a disgusting attempt to make money. This is why Ukraine needs economic development. Feminism will never happen in Eastern Slavic countries. Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine don't need it. Women and men there follow traditional models of marriage and family life.

[Smitty]

Don't be silly please.
Could you find a single clause in a marriage contract that says "the woman, and only the woman, agrees to being used for sexual purposes whenever requested" ?

What you're saying is the same as suggesting that by signing a contract with my employer, I suddenly must obey whatever order he gives me, even if it is waking up a 3 am and fetching him a pair of new slippers.

Marriage is much broader than a mere legal contract. It has religious, moral, and cultural overtones as well. Sex is an integral part of marriage under most any definition whether or not that provision is stipulated in a legal document (do people really do that?), and to reduce one spouse's request for sex to "rape" is, in your terminology, silly. Incidentally, the man owes his wife sex when she wants it as well. It cuts both ways.

[Also]

You're right dear.
I apologise for that. I just find it funny he'd say I'm a social reject when he can't even get to wear decent clothing :lol:

It was just a stupid remark.

[NatiaCutie]

FEMEN is not a real feminist organization. It's simply a disgusting attempt to make money. This is why Ukraine needs economic development. Feminism will never happen in Eastern Slavic countries. Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine don't need it. Women and men there follow traditional models of marriage and family life.

Well, think of it this way.
If Russia's illegal invasion can be sorted out, Ukraine will join the European Union and receive money from more advanced countries, but will have to adapt their laws to be in accordance to Western standards. This means that there can't be any room for homophobia, pro-choice laws need to get enacted, and gender equality must also be a priority.

The alternative for Ukraine is to stay close to Russia and the archaic institutions that you like and the 'tradition' right-wingers like to flaunt about so much and remain poor.

Those are the only two choices they've got and they must decide.

I'm very glad my granddaddy's country, Georgia, has opted to join the EU and is already fighting homophobia as a sign of their commitment to be part of our progressive world :)

[Unome]

You're right dear.
I apologise for that. I just find it funny he'd say I'm a social reject when he can't even get to wear decent clothing :lol:
You should place more importance upon logically coherent ideas instead of obsessing about clothing and money.

It really shows in your responses. I'll always be content and happy to be 'rejected' by such a shallow-minded person, superficial and hollow inside, never wanted to be accepted by your type. Although I've been invited countless times… I'd rather have a few close friends, or none, than waste my time on an ignorant person, who cannot learn, and is too unintelligent to earn my feigned respect.

[Smitty]

The misogynist paleoconservatives were mainstream yesterday and may reclaim their status again tomorrow. Being mainstream does not validate a viewpoint.

You can bash the paleoconservatives for their extreme views, but you cannot deny that their views, in all their extremity, are at least supported by biology and do not contradict the natural order of things. But the Natias of this world on the other hand are not only extreme, they are also out of touch with the reality of our species. Between 2 extremes I would rather choose the most natural and logical one.

Well said.

[NatiaCutie]

Marriage is much broader than a mere legal contract. It has religious, moral, and cultural overtones as well. Sex is an integral part of marriage under most any definition whether or not that provision is stipulated in a legal document (do people really do that?), and to reduce one spouse's request for sex to "rape" is, in your terminology, silly. Incidentally, the man owes his wife sex when she wants it as well. It cuts both ways.

Marriage isn't long-term prostitution, neither female, male, nor LGBT prostitution. They're not required to go to the bedroom whenever the other person orders it. Consent everytime is the key.

Civil marriage is now the majoritary form of marriage in a lot of countries, also the case in the UK :)
This means that religion and personal morality don't factor in. People get married cuz they want to live together, share legal responsibilities and make a commitment. If it were just sex they could just stay unmarried and having fun on the side, hehe. :lol:

[NatiaCutie]

You should place more importance upon logically coherent ideas instead of obsessing about clothing and money.

It really shows in your responses. I'll always be content and happy to be 'rejected' by such a shallow-minded person, superficial and hollow inside, never wanted to be accepted by your type. Although I've been invited countless times… I'd rather have a few close friends, or none, than waste my time on an ignorant person, who cannot learn, and is too unintelligent to earn my feigned respect.

Oh, I can live with that just fine. Move along then lad :)

[Smitty]

Marriage isn't long-term prostitution, neither female, male, nor LGBT prostitution. They're not required to go to the bedroom whenever the other person orders it. Consent everytime is the key.

Civil marriage is now the majoritary form of marriage in a lot of countries, also the case in the UK :)
This means that religion and personal morality don't factor in. People get married cuz they want to live together, share legal responsibilities and make a commitment. If it were just sex they could just stay unmarried and having fun on the side, hehe. :lol:

I actually think we may agree on the consent issue. I just think the woman (and man, as the case may be) is more or less obligated to consent most of the time. If she doesn't, she's not holding up her part (I share Marusya's views on that point).

And I'm not saying marriage is just about sex. But sex is an integral part of marriage. Why get married if you're not going to have sex? So to reduce marriage to cohabitation, legal responsibilities, and commitment isn't fully honest either. Then again, to what does "commitment" refer if not, in part at least, sex?

[NatiaCutie]

I actually think we may agree on the consent issue. I just think the woman (and man, as the case may be) is more or less obligated to consent most of the time. If she doesn't, she's not holding up her part (I share Marusya's views on that point).

And I'm not saying marriage is just about sex. But sex is an integral part of marriage. Why get married if you're not going to have sex? So to reduce marriage to cohabitation, legal responsibilities, and commitment isn't fully honest either. Then again, to what does "commitment" refer if not, in part at least, sex?

Because that's not why people get married.

If people wanted just sex they could just go to a pub or to a club and meet someone cute. Not even when you're just beginning to date someone as boyfriend or girlfriend, when everything is like rosey and funny, you're not expected to have sex everytime the other person is up for it. Now imagine couples with years behind them and problems, getting one day from work to be bossed around and told to go the bedroom even if you're not interested? That's just a divorce waiting to happen.

[Smitty]

Because that's not why people get married.

If people wanted just sex they could just go to a pub or to a club and meet someone cute. Not even when you're just beginning to date someone as boyfriend or girlfriend, when everything is like rosey and funny, you're not expected to have sex everytime the other person is up for it. Now imagine couples with years behind them and problems, getting one day from work to be bossed around and told to go the bedroom even if you're not interested? That's just a divorce waiting to happen.

People don't get married to have sex. They get married to have sex with one person, the commitment you referred to. I forget who said it on this thread (Marusya, I think), but that exclusivity places constraints on a person's sexuality, which means their desires merit more attention.

[NatiaCutie]

People don't get married to have sex. They get married to have sex with one person, the commitment you referred to. I forget who said it on this thread (Marusya, I think), but that exclusivity places constraints on a person's sexuality, which means their desires merit more attention.

Oh please, so for you going to sign a contract of marriage means that you will treat your wife as a sex doll, and will bully her into having sex with you when she's in pain, distressed or simply doing else?

[Unome]

Oh, I can live with that just fine. Move along then lad :)
Think I'll stay awhile, I actually enjoy this thread, LOL!

[Marusya]

Because that's not why people get married.

If people wanted just sex they could just go to a pub or to a club and meet someone cute. Not even when you're just beginning to date someone as boyfriend or girlfriend, when everything is like rosey and funny, you're not expected to have sex everytime the other person is up for it. Now imagine couples with years behind them and problems, getting one day from work to be bossed around and told to go the bedroom even if you're not interested? That's just a divorce waiting to happen.

Bossing people around, being rude, and having no manners is not acceptable anywhere, especially not in a marriage. A husband who acts disrespectfully and rudely is truly breaking his marriage vows. In a free society, women have the choice to use good judgment in selecting a husband. The same for men.

Anyway, I'm done with this debate. My views are fairly unchangeable, and I've expressed them. Each person can decide for him or herself how they want their lives to be, and to that I say, good luck! I do think a traditional society is more stable and healthy. I think radical feminism has caused the basic foundation of society, the family, to crumble. This, in turn, like a virus, has infected all other aspects of society.

[NatiaCutie]

Bossing people around, being rude, and having no manners is not acceptable anywhere, especially not in a marriage. A husband who acts disrespectfully and rudely is truly breaking his marriage vows. In a free society, women have the choice to use good judgment in selecting a husband. The same for men.

Anyway, I'm done with this debate. My views are fairly unchangeable, and I've expressed them. Each person can decide for him or herself how they want their lives to be, and to that I say, good luck! I do think a traditional society is more stable and healthy. I think radical feminism has caused the basic foundation of society, the family, to crumble. This, in turn, like a virus, has infected all other aspects of society.

I don't understand you.
You're fairly respectful and admirative of the EU and Western countries, and the work being done to protect Ukraine from Russia, so it changes and gets improved.

Why are you now defending the same backward view that is defended only by Russia, Iran and those countries?

[Unome]

Natia really has no sense nor idea of marriage. There is no such thing as "secular marriage" unless people mean two adult fruitcakes playing house, like children, where one pretends to be daddy and the other pretends to be mommy. Secular marriage is a mockery, even an insult to, real marriage, of course involving biological parents to their own child.

[NatiaCutie]

Natia really has no sense nor idea of marriage. There is no such thing as "secular marriage" unless people mean two adult fruitcakes playing house, like children, where one pretends to be daddy and the other pretends to be mommy. Secular marriage is a mockery, even an insult to, real marriage, of course involving biological parents to their own child.

Oh yes, the laws of so many countries of the world who provide civil unions for millions of people, mean nothing next to the very important opinion of a random American. I'll drink to that :)

[Aviator]

Her views are mainstream...arguing her views in public will make YOU the outcast.

Her views in this topic are mainstream, and I agree that consent is always important.

But most of her ideas aren't anywhere close to mainstream.

[NatiaCutie]

Her views in this topic are mainstream, and I agree that consent is always important.

But most of her ideas aren't anywhere close to mainstream.

Practically all of my ideas are now laws or being introduced as bills.

Even the incest proposal that some of you were so squeamish about, has been judged reasonable by modern panels of sociologists. The article I linked that time, was a reply to an official study asked by the German government for example :)

[Wadaad]

Natia is just a symptom of your society's decaence...you will never understand this, but your society will collapse because it bans what is lawful and legalizes what is forbidden. She may not be aware of her role in your society's demise, but it is what it is.

[Aviator]

Why are you now defending the same backward view that is defended only by Russia, Iran and those countries?

You have absolutely no sense of causation vs correlation.

"Progressive" ideas, as you call them, come about only when a society is rich enough to be reckless and dabble in bizarre concepts (which have ultimately shown to be harmful in terms of economics and human psyche.) Progressive ideas don't create prosperity; prosperity creates a stable enough environment for progressive ideas to not immediately collapse under their own weight when put into action.

Nonetheless, we're going to have to reap what we have sown at some point.

[BeerBaron]

Oh look, she deleted my comment, again

[Also]

Natia is just a symptom of your society's decaence...you will never understand this, but your society will collapse because it bans what is lawful and legalizes what is forbidden. She may not be aware of her role in your society's demise, but it is what it is.

british decadence... tsc tsc

[Aviator]

Practically all of my ideas are now laws or being introduced as bills.

Ah, I didn't realize preemptive chemical castration is a thing now. Or ending internet privacy.

[Smitty]

Oh please, so for you going to sign a contract of marriage means that you will treat your wife as a sex doll, and will bully her into having sex with you when she's in pain, distressed or simply doing else?

I was under the impression we were having a civil conversation, but you obviously haven't been reading my posts. I said we probably agree on the consent issue. In other words, if I were married, I would never force my wife to have sex with me. Believe me, if she didn't want to, I'd be the last person on earth telling her to. But when a man or woman decides to enter into a marital relationship, his/her spouse's sexual needs and desires become, in a sense, his/her responsibility. This is much the same as when a person gets sick or is going through a rough patch in life; those problems become the spouse's problems as well. However, I also noted that there are times when a man should forgo his own sexual appetite in deference to his wife's needs/desires. So the upshot is that you're putting words in my mouth.

[NatiaCutie]

Ah, I didn't realize preemptive chemical castration is a thing now. Or ending internet privacy.

Here dear :)
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/08/uks-lords-and-eu-take-aim-online-anonymity

You are twisting my words about preemptive chemical castration. In that thread I opened months ago, I said "I'm not sure if preemptive measures could be considered" since I wasn't sure, and then I changed my mind after I listened to some arguments and even said it was a bad thing, in the very same thread.

[Also]

natia, stop deleting posts if you have any wisdom.

[Aviator]

Here dear :)
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/08/uks-lords-and-eu-take-aim-online-anonymity


That has very little in common with your idea of ending internet anonymity. Saying it's the same as your idea of everyone using their full names at all times is like Beitel saying that slightly lowering immigration means his dream of wiping out brown-eyed people is about to come true.

Also, the UK and EU do not have jurisdiction over users outside of its quickly decaying borders.

[NatiaCutie]

That has very little in common with your idea of ending internet anonymity. Saying it's the same as your idea of everyone using their full names at all times is like Beitel saying that slightly lowering immigration means his dream of wiping out brown-eyed people is about to come true.

Also, the UK and EU do not have jurisdiction over users outside of its quickly decaying borders.

I never said every single I have ever suggested is somehow the same of what the government of the UK thinks, good lord, where do you get that from? :picard2:

I just said that progressive thinking has an important role in our civil society, and changes are being done that are similar to many of our positions. That is what makes the feminist point of view normal and mainstream.

[NatiaCutie]

Thread closed for cleaning

[Wadaad]

Alright guys...no more off topic. This thread is about Sean Connery's views regarding violence to women. You have my word if you stick on topic and dont break any forum rules by getting personal no post will be deleted.

[NatiaCutie]

Alright guys...no more off topic. This thread is about Sean Connery's views regarding violence to women. You have my word if you stick on topic and dont break any forum rules by getting personal no post will be deleted.

It's morning already here, I'm off :)

Thread reopened btw, someone else watch the off-topic now.

[Unome]

It's morning already here, I'm off :)

Thread reopened btw, someone else watch the off-topic now.
I think this demonizing Sean Connery is symptom of a larger social problem, give a leftist an inch and she takes a mile…

The problem in western countries is this "impenetrable aura" that women are absolutely unaccountable individuals, incapable of moral responsibility and autonomy.

This is what happens when one group (females) are given far, far too much social power and credence. So the scale eventually shifts back to patriarchy, instead of emotionally laden, irrational matriarchy.

[Brianna]

He gets a "sexy old guy" pass from me. While I despise domestic violence and sexism (from women too), I wish more young guys were like his James Bond persona rather than emo wimps. It seems like only athletes, servicemen and blue-collar workers are manly, in my country.

[Kim Dotcom]

Just don't talk to them if they're annoying. No need to behave like a douche and slap people around.

[Shqipez]

When men were men. Bond, James Bond hitting women.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJWfObq2cFk

Do you dream of getting hit?

[Curiosity]

Wow, I don't know if where I live things are different than in Europe, but I would think that this kind of violence wouldn't even be subject for discussion anymore. I mean, domestic violence is real everywhere, as violent people and misogynist men are everywhere, I know that. But usually (sadly not always) even men that are violent understand it is wrong. And even when they don't, at least they understand it is socialy reprehensible, so don't talk about it as if society should accept it. I guess this is the first time I see people talking about it as if it was anything other than a crime. Like, it could be acceptable in some reality. Just refering to violence as "manhood" is so sad. That is really weird for me.

I mean, is that how most people or at least many people think in Europe? Or there are few people thinking like the ones in here?