WiseOwl182 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 why muslims? Why religion? why not pigeons on the track...they cause more disruption than muslims. in your view there has to more than 50% of men comitting sexual crimes to be a 'majority' worthy of consideration.. loony left?...loony full stop..lol! ---------- Post added 28-08-2015 at 11:15 ---------- A female only carriage is not a punishment towards men. Although you see it like that for some reason... A carriage for non-Muslims wouldn't be a punishment for Muslims either then. I think Cyclone is right, you're on a wind up mission. Either that or you're incredibly blind to your own hypocrisy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJC1 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 So he gets to vote on things. I suppose he could even put forwards his own motion. But he's in opposition, he has no effective power to implement a consultation like the one you say is being considered. ---------- Post added 28-08-2015 at 11:44 ---------- The point is that you keep saying things like "men are sex pests" Whereas you'd object if someone else said "Muslims are terrorists". In both cases a minority of those groups fit those descriptions. I think you're doing it deliberately to wind people up though, since you are male yourself, and presumably not a rapist. the definition of minority is under 50%. It doesnt prove we should lump muslims and sexual attacks in together. Thats not a coherent or rational argument. ---------- Post added 28-08-2015 at 12:41 ---------- So he gets to vote on things. I suppose he could even put forwards his own motion. But he's in opposition, he has no effective power to implement a consultation like the one you say is being considered. ---------- Post added 28-08-2015 at 11:44 ---------- The point is that you keep saying things like "men are sex pests" Whereas you'd object if someone else said "Muslims are terrorists". In both cases a minority of those groups fit those descriptions. I think you're doing it deliberately to wind people up though, since you are male yourself, and presumably not a rapist. the definition of minority is under 50%. It doesnt prove we should lump muslims and sexual attacks in together. Thats not a coherent or rational argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseOwl182 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 the definition of minority is under 50%. It doesnt prove we should lump muslims and sexual attacks in together. Thats not a coherent or rational argument. No, its a parallel comparison. Replace men with Muslims, and rapists with terrorists. Both are scenarios with a minority of bad guys, but you're ok with generalising about men, but not Muslims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJC1 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 A carriage for non-Muslims wouldn't be a punishment for Muslims either then. I think Cyclone is right, you're on a wind up mission. Either that or you're incredibly blind to your own hypocrisy. There isnt an argument for muslims to have own carriage. ---------- Post added 28-08-2015 at 12:43 ---------- No, its a parallel comparison. Replace men with Muslims, and rapists with terrorists. Both are scenarios with a minority of bad guys, but you're ok with generalising about men, but not Muslims. Ok. So you admitting youve made a parallel comparison. ---------- Post added 28-08-2015 at 12:45 ---------- So he gets to vote on things. I suppose he could even put forwards his own motion. But he's in opposition, he has no effective power to implement a consultation like the one you say is being considered. ---------- Post added 28-08-2015 at 11:44 ---------- The point is that you keep saying things like "men are sex pests" Whereas you'd object if someone else said "Muslims are terrorists". In both cases a minority of those groups fit those descriptions. I think you're doing it deliberately to wind people up though, since you are male yourself, and presumably not a rapist. Men are sex pests. Thats why this thread exists. i dont know what youre trying to defend? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_bloke Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Feel free to review the other countries where women have their own carriages: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/26/women-only-train-carriages-around-the-world-jeremy-corbyn Interesting to note that women are far from equal in those societies and are unlikely to be considered as equals any time soon, even in Japan. Women only carriages are only tolerated in those countries because of the low stature women already have there, and the patriarchy has dictated what is in the best interest of women, in the same way humans decide what is in the best interest of animals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseOwl182 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Men are sex pests. Thats why this thread exists. i dont know what youre trying to defend? Why it ok for you to say that, but not for someone else to say "Muslims are terrorists. That's why threads about Islamist terrorism exist". Exact parallel scenario. Double standards applied. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WageSlave Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 There isnt an argument for muslims to have own carriage. ---------- Post added 28-08-2015 at 12:43 ---------- Ok. So you admitting youve made a parallel comparison. ---------- Post added 28-08-2015 at 12:45 ---------- Men are sex pests. Thats why this thread exists. i dont know what youre trying to defend? Is that all men, just some men. Are you a sex pest. What % of the male population are sex pests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Men are sex pests. Thats why this thread exists. i dont know what youre trying to defend? Like I said, you're deliberately on the wind up. Some, specifically a minority of men are sex pests. Like some, specifically a minority of Muslims are terrorists and like some, specifically a minority of posters are trolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJC1 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Why it ok for you to say that, but not for someone else to say "Muslims are terrorists. That's why threads about Islamist terrorism exist". Exact parallel scenario. Double standards applied. Why? Because muslims arent terrorists. radical extremists are terrorists. Or do you think the quoran tells people to murder? ---------- Post added 28-08-2015 at 14:36 ---------- Is that all men, just some men. Are you a sex pest. What % of the male population are sex pests. of course its not all men. ---------- Post added 28-08-2015 at 14:37 ---------- Like I said, you're deliberately on the wind up. Some, specifically a minority of men are sex pests. Like some, specifically a minority of Muslims are terrorists and like some, specifically a minority of posters are trolls. 2 trolls right here. Im the only one posted the data and has a coherent argument. ---------- Post added 28-08-2015 at 14:39 ---------- Feel free to review the other countries where women have their own carriages: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/26/women-only-train-carriages-around-the-world-jeremy-corbyn Interesting to note that women are far from equal in those societies and are unlikely to be considered as equals any time soon, even in Japan. Women only carriages are only tolerated in those countries because of the low stature women already have there, and the patriarchy has dictated what is in the best interest of women, in the same way humans decide what is in the best interest of animals. Omg a link at last! evidence. Im so happy you didnt bring muslims into this farcical thread. ---------- Post added 28-08-2015 at 14:42 ---------- What % of the male population are sex pests. Millions. Going by data and research. Or a minority if you go by personal opinion based on a narrow world view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 This whole thread is based on a deliberately misquoted comment. Jeremy Corbyn didn't say he wanted to introduce women only carriages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now