The W
Views: 100851329
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
25.11.07 2219
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - We need more protesters like this
This thread has 1 referral leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 Next(1866 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (63 total)
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 935/1759
EXP: 4948428
For next: 44442

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1349 days
Last activity: 115 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#21 Posted on 10.2.03 1832.55
Reposted on: 10.2.10 1835.44
Please then, give me the proper feminine form of the word "guys" then, since "guys" refers to a group of men or a group of people of mixed sex (basic grammar rules usually dictate that when referring to a group of masculine and feminine nouns, the masculine word is acceptable). So since I can't use guys to describe a group of women, and the proper word "Girls" (as gals is outdated, and no longer used), what exactly am I supposed to say?
And no, women is not an appropriate word either. Women is NOT the feminine counterpart of the word "guys."
Jeez- talk about touchy. I just can't keep up with the PC rules and regulations. They change far too often.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 933/4700
EXP: 21664327
For next: 172335

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1303 days
Last activity: 1100 days
#22 Posted on 10.2.03 2107.52
Reposted on: 10.2.10 2108.39

    Originally posted by messenoir
    So please, even if you disagree with the message, give some fucking credit to who is giving the message.

If it looks like shit, and smells like shit, it's probably shit. The groups you mentioned have no credibility outside of the liberal political sphere. While there are conservatives who oppose the war for philosophical reasons, they sure as hell aint liing up behind these left-wing wacko train...
Stephanie
Landjager
Level: 63

Posts: 742/946
EXP: 1997008
For next: 100155

Since: 2.1.02
From: Madison, WI

Since last post: 555 days
Last activity: 24 days
#23 Posted on 11.2.03 0435.21
Reposted on: 11.2.10 0435.55

    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    Please then, give me the proper feminine form of the word "guys" then, since "guys" refers to a group of men or a group of people of mixed sex (basic grammar rules usually dictate that when referring to a group of masculine and feminine nouns, the masculine word is acceptable).


From the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary (emphasis added):

Main Entry: guy
Function: noun
Etymology: Guy Fawkes
Date: 1806
1 often capitalized : a grotesque effigy of Guy Fawkes traditionally displayed and burned in England on Guy Fawkes Day
2 chiefly British : a person of grotesque appearance
3 a : MAN, FELLOW b : PERSON -- used in plural to refer to the members of a group regardless of sex {saw her and the rest of the guys}

So, technically, "guys" could mean a group of men or a group of women. In the real world, though, we're more likely to call each other "girls", regardless of age.

Steph
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 214

Posts: 1662/16363
EXP: 144018358
For next: 1707062

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 4 hours
Last activity: 4 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#24 Posted on 11.2.03 0509.21
Reposted on: 11.2.10 0511.08
I don't want to get dragged into a semantics discussion (he said, as he got dragged into a semantics discussion)...

I'm sorry, maybe I'm just old-fashioned but I can't think of a group of 20- to 50-somethings as "girls." My mom is not a "girl."

I would have preferred "ladies" or "women," I guess. Please tell me you can at least see how others could find a difference between the terms.

The sad thing is that wasn't even my main point. "Girls" on its own probably wouldn't have gotten a response from me, but my REAL issue was with your "I bet none of them even knows where Iraq is" crack which, when added to the use of "girls" not to mention "no clue," totals out to what I see as pretty much a sexist remark ("girls are dumb") even if you don't/won't/can't see it as such. In addition, it gave the (still as yet unrefuted) impression that you didn't bother reading the story or getting into the facts because all you really wanted to do was make a smartass remark. And, golly, that annoys me, so I'll waste my precious time dragging both of us into this inane semantical exercise.
Eddie Famous
Andouille
Level: 90

Posts: 477/2182
EXP: 7011411
For next: 177225

Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL

Since last post: 367 days
Last activity: 361 days
#25 Posted on 11.2.03 0514.36
Reposted on: 11.2.10 0522.20

    Originally posted by Stephanie
    So, technically, "guys" could mean a group of men or a group of women. In the real world, though, we're more likely to call each other "girls", regardless of age.

    Steph



"Guys" could also mean a group of French-Canadian hockey players.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 214

Posts: 1664/16363
EXP: 144018358
For next: 1707062

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 4 hours
Last activity: 4 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#26 Posted on 11.2.03 0521.41
Reposted on: 11.2.10 0524.32

    Originally posted by Eddie Famous


    "Guys" could also mean a group of French-Canadian hockey players.

Guy! I mean, "Gee!"
Stephanie
Landjager
Level: 63

Posts: 746/946
EXP: 1997008
For next: 100155

Since: 2.1.02
From: Madison, WI

Since last post: 555 days
Last activity: 24 days
#27 Posted on 11.2.03 0540.37
Reposted on: 11.2.10 0547.59

    Originally posted by CRZ
    I'm sorry, maybe I'm just old-fashioned but I can't think of a group of 20- to 50-somethings as "girls." My mom is not a "girl."


You're as old as you feel.

Steph
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 940/1759
EXP: 4948428
For next: 44442

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1349 days
Last activity: 115 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#28 Posted on 11.2.03 1115.01
Reposted on: 11.2.10 1119.30
OK- I seem to have to packpedal a bit here.

The comment "not a signle one of these girls even knows were Iraq is" was not intended to be sexist. My reason for thinking that was NOT because they happened to be female. If anything, it was a slam at protesters in general. I think the protest culture in this country has seen a dramatic shift over the decades. People who marched in women's rights events and civil rights protests back in the day seemed to have a very clear idea what they were protesting about. Today, I find that most people who are out protesting something really have no clue what is going on. Sure, their heart may be in the right place, "no war" is indeed a noble idea, but when there is no real contest in the protest, there is less meaning. Especially considering the fact that these very liberal people were nowhere to be seen when Clinton was rattling his sabre about Iraq. They are not protesting the war, they are protesting Bush, and only because of his political party.

So it was not a slam on women. It was a slam on modern-day protesters. This group happened to be all female.

I will say that I would never dare call a group of women my Mom's age "girls." I would call them ladies. But this was a dominantly younger group.

And Stephanie, I do appreciate the definition. I admit that I was mistaken about the definition of "guys." In my own defense, my adversity to using the term guys in regards to a group of women stems from an ex-girlfriend, who turned out to be quite the man-hating feminazi (not a feminist- she truly believed that women were superior to men), who would go absolutly ballistic when I would use "guys" to refer to a group of women. Perhaps I assumed that it was a more universally offensive term...
rockdotcom_2.0
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 365/763
EXP: 1445459
For next: 40478

Since: 9.1.02
From: Virginia Beach Va

Since last post: 615 days
Last activity: 230 days
AIM:  
#29 Posted on 11.2.03 1409.38
Reposted on: 11.2.10 1410.10

    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    Especially considering the fact that these very liberal people were nowhere to be seen when Clinton was rattling his sabre about Iraq. They are not protesting the war, they are protesting Bush, and only because of his political party.


Well Clinton didnt deploy 200,000 troops to the Persian Gulf. Id say his sabre wasnt rattling quite as hard. And even when Clinton did use any kind of military force, against the Iraqis, Al-Quaida, or in Kosovo the anti war folks were quite upset and let people know it. Any President going to war would face the wrath of the anti-war folks. Gore would have the same problem.

Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 943/4700
EXP: 21664327
For next: 172335

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1303 days
Last activity: 1100 days
#30 Posted on 11.2.03 1436.59
Reposted on: 11.2.10 1440.17

    Originally posted by rockdotcom_2.0
    Well Clinton didnt deploy 200,000 troops to the Persian Gulf. Id say his sabre wasnt rattling quite as hard. And even when Clinton did use any kind of military force, against the Iraqis, Al-Quaida, or in Kosovo the anti war folks were quite upset and let people know it. Any President going to war would face the wrath of the anti-war folks. Gore would have the same problem.

Clinton's "sabre-rattling" was the epitomy of the "hit a camel in the butt" method. Kosovo was a ridiculous situation because there was no overwhelming national interest there other than for the sake of having troops there. It's not like Iraq where there are(as a matter of fact) national security interests involved.
rockdotcom_2.0
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 367/763
EXP: 1445459
For next: 40478

Since: 9.1.02
From: Virginia Beach Va

Since last post: 615 days
Last activity: 230 days
AIM:  
#31 Posted on 11.2.03 1728.47
Reposted on: 11.2.10 1728.54

    Originally posted by Grimis

      Originally posted by rockdotcom_2.0
      Well Clinton didnt deploy 200,000 troops to the Persian Gulf. Id say his sabre wasnt rattling quite as hard. And even when Clinton did use any kind of military force, against the Iraqis, Al-Quaida, or in Kosovo the anti war folks were quite upset and let people know it. Any President going to war would face the wrath of the anti-war folks. Gore would have the same problem.

    Clinton's "sabre-rattling" was the epitomy of the "hit a camel in the butt" method. Kosovo was a ridiculous situation because there was no overwhelming national interest there other than for the sake of having troops there. It's not like Iraq where there are(as a matter of fact) national security interests involved.





You lost me here, Im not debating were we right or wrong in doing any military action. My point is Clinton didnt have the war protesters hounding him as hard because he hadnt deployed almost a quarter million soldiers to the Gulf in preparation for war. Bush 43 has, so he gets the headache.


And what does "hit a camel in the butt" mean?
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 942/1759
EXP: 4948428
For next: 44442

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1349 days
Last activity: 115 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#32 Posted on 11.2.03 1739.17
Reposted on: 11.2.10 1739.42
Ah, but the protests started LONG before it was even announced that so many troops would be going there.
Hell, the protests started as soon as Bush mentioned "Iraq" and "war" in the same sentance.
Explain that?
rockdotcom_2.0
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 368/763
EXP: 1445459
For next: 40478

Since: 9.1.02
From: Virginia Beach Va

Since last post: 615 days
Last activity: 230 days
AIM:  
#33 Posted on 11.2.03 2107.25
Reposted on: 11.2.10 2109.41

    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    Ah, but the protests started LONG before it was even announced that so many troops would be going there.
    Hell, the protests started as soon as Bush mentioned "Iraq" and "war" in the same sentance.
    Explain that?




Part of the Job. Bush is a big boy, Im sure naked protesters arent keeping him up at night....
Jaguar
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 1309/3273
EXP: 12822462
For next: 268891

Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 232 days
Last activity: 33 days
#34 Posted on 11.2.03 2356.41
Reposted on: 11.2.10 2358.44
I just want to point out that there were people protesting the economic sanctions against Iraq. And the bombing of the Sudan in an effort to get bin Laden. No matter what you do, as a politician or celebrity (any media figure really), if a liberal feels you are out of line, they'll protest. It's just in their roots. Of course, we protest so much these days, that it just becomes a blur, and there's no focus. So I do agree with you there. Non-violent protests have ceased to be effective. We'll just have to wait and see what develops once people start to realize this.

-Jag
Scott Summets
Sujuk
Level: 64

Posts: 601/1008
EXP: 2155084
For next: 59025

Since: 27.6.02

Since last post: 3939 days
Last activity: 3907 days
#35 Posted on 12.2.03 0325.42
Reposted on: 12.2.10 0325.59

    Originally posted by rockdotcom_2.0

      Originally posted by Grimis

        Originally posted by rockdotcom_2.0
        Well Clinton didnt deploy 200,000 troops to the Persian Gulf. Id say his sabre wasnt rattling quite as hard. And even when Clinton did use any kind of military force, against the Iraqis, Al-Quaida, or in Kosovo the anti war folks were quite upset and let people know it. Any President going to war would face the wrath of the anti-war folks. Gore would have the same problem.

      Clinton's "sabre-rattling" was the epitomy of the "hit a camel in the butt" method. Kosovo was a ridiculous situation because there was no overwhelming national interest there other than for the sake of having troops there. It's not like Iraq where there are(as a matter of fact) national security interests involved.





    You lost me here, Im not debating were we right or wrong in doing any military action. My point is Clinton didnt have the war protesters hounding him as hard because he hadnt deployed almost a quarter million soldiers to the Gulf in preparation for war. Bush 43 has, so he gets the headache.


    And what does "hit a camel in the butt" mean?



The hit a camel in the butt reference is in light of Clinton shooting million dollar cruise missles into 10 dollar tents and basically doing nothing of worth except shooting missiles as a feel good measure.
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 1045/2108
EXP: 6639527
For next: 11163

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 35 days
Last activity: 2 hours
#36 Posted on 12.2.03 0931.51
Reposted on: 12.2.10 0935.08
Non-violent protests have ceased to be effective.

Unless, of course, they're naked non-violent protests.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 951/4700
EXP: 21664327
For next: 172335

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1303 days
Last activity: 1100 days
#37 Posted on 12.2.03 1007.48
Reposted on: 12.2.10 1009.35

    Originally posted by MoeGates
    Non-violent protests have ceased to be effective.

    Unless, of course, they're naked non-violent protests.


Nope....still not effective.
messenoir
Summer sausage
Level: 45

Posts: 12/449
EXP: 649546
For next: 10623

Since: 20.2.02
From: Columbia, MO

Since last post: 579 days
Last activity: 446 days
AIM:  
#38 Posted on 12.2.03 1442.16
Reposted on: 12.2.10 1447.36
Ah, but protests are still effective. Support for the war is much, much, much down from where it was. Naked protests are not effective however. It's all in the approach and message.
Brian P. Dermody
Liverwurst
Moderator
Level: 69

Posts: 233/1205
EXP: 2790147
For next: 79611

Since: 20.9.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 971 days
Last activity: 393 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#39 Posted on 14.2.03 0108.47
Reposted on: 14.2.10 0109.16
    Originally posted by Stephanie


    You're as old as you feel.

    Steph



I disagree. You're only as old as *who* you feel.



(edited by DJ Ran on 14.2.03 0209)
Stephanie
Landjager
Level: 63

Posts: 751/946
EXP: 1997008
For next: 100155

Since: 2.1.02
From: Madison, WI

Since last post: 555 days
Last activity: 24 days
#40 Posted on 14.2.03 0310.09
Reposted on: 14.2.10 0310.22

    Originally posted by DJ Ran
      Originally posted by Stephanie
      You're as old as you feel.

      Steph



    I disagree. You're only as old as *who* you feel.



Disgusting.

Steph
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 NextThread ahead: Miguel Estrada
Next thread: Moseley-Braun throws hat into Dem. primary
Previous thread: A slightly different State of the Union...
(1866 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - We need more protesters like thisRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.292 seconds.