Women in pants

Clippings from news sources involving fashion freedom and other gender equality issues.
User avatar
Jim
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 732
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:39 am
Location: Northern Illinois, USA

Re: Women in pants

Post by Jim »

Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:
So could we please stow the misogynistic crap and figure out who our natural allies are and make common cause with them?
Good point, even if I prefer more polite language.

User avatar
Pdxfashionpioneer
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1132
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:39 am
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: Women in pants

Post by Pdxfashionpioneer »

I said "please."

"misogynistic" is the proper way to speak of male chauvinistic piggery.

And "crap" is much more polite than its synonym. :D
David, the PDX Fashion Pioneer

Social norms aren't changed by Congress or Parliament; they're changed by a sufficient number of people ignoring the existing ones and publicly practicing new ones.

User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 10849
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Women in pants

Post by crfriend »

Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:"misogynistic" is the proper way to speak of male chauvinistic piggery.
As an aside, calling me misogynistic" is about as far from the truth as one can get, and any one of my friends -- several of whom are women -- will attest. What I am laying into is the misandric mess that is now institutionalised in what passes for law in the USA. (Hilariously, the dictionary in Firefox does not know about the word "misandry". Are we not supposed to us it any longer?)

As far as what passes for the latest appointee to the US Supreme Court goes, that's the current president's "Get Out Of Jail Free" card. And, the questions I've been pondering recently include, "Does it really matter that we have a juvenile jock on the highest court of the land?" and "What role does a Supreme Court play in a post-Constitutional State?"
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!

Gusto10
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 667
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 12:07 pm

Re: Women in pants

Post by Gusto10 »

crfriend wrote:
Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:"misogynistic" is the proper way to speak of male chauvinistic piggery.
As an aside, calling me misogynistic" is about as far from the truth as one can get, and any one of my friends -- several of whom are women -- will attest. What I am laying into is the misandric mess that is now institutionalised in what passes for law in the USA. (Hilariously, the dictionary in Firefox does not know about the word "misandry". Are we not supposed to us it any longer?)

As far as what passes for the latest appointee to the US Supreme Court goes, that's the current president's "Get Out Of Jail Free" card. And, the questions I've been pondering recently include, "Does it really matter that we have a juvenile jock on the highest court of the land?" and "What role does a Supreme Court play in a post-Constitutional State?"
It's just the most explicite example. You will find "for the occasion adapted use of the system" at many levels of organizations. mr. T plays the game of use the system to beat the system with the sole purpose of self gain.

Post Reply