You are incorrect actually, there are many women protesting all across the middle east right now. Fewer than men sure but that is because culturally they are kept down. However more and more are finding their voices. Certainly more than is shown on western television.
Furthermore the russian revolution was started by women on International women’s day.
It is when the women are angry that the ruling class tremble.
Cassie,
You are an idiot, or more likely, a liar…
“You are incorrect actually, there are many women protesting all across the middle east right now. Fewer than men sure but that is because culturally they are kept down.”
You say I am incorrect, then you agree that the protesters are mostly male, which strangely enough is what I said, hence if I am wrong so are you. As for being kept down, how does that explain the Battle Of Seattle? Those women weren’t “kept down” enough to not protest, yet as soon as the shit hit the fan the poor dears felt oppressed and the only people left to fight the state thugs were the men in balaclavas.
“Furthermore the Russian revolution was started by women on International women’s day.”
Even if true, it is only one example – and one in which the majority of the actual fighting was done by men – whereas on the male side we have dozens of examples, from Spartacus to Alaric, from Marx to Castro, which supports what I said, IE “It is almost always men who get outraged enough and angry enough” Next time you may want to throw in Boudica, though she was the queen and therefore the only one of her people who could start a rebellion against the Romans, and feel free also to ignore the fact that virtually all the Iceni doing the actual fighting were men.
And by the way, nice attempt at making it look as if you have already presented evidence by using the word “furthermore!”
“It is when the women are angry that the ruling class tremble.”
One example of a revolution in which women had a part does not support the idea that the ruling class are scared of women, dozens of revolutions carried out by men does support the premise that the ruling class are scared of men. This is because there are only two sexes, and whenever one sex is responsible for the minority of action X, it can be safely assumed that the other sex is automatically responsible for the majority of action X.
Here’s an idea, Cassie. Pull your head out of your ass, stop glorifying your sex with non-existent achievements, and put the welfare of the masses before your need to feel empowered. Until you and the rest of your fantasy-hungry sex do so, the oligarchs will continue to load the lower classes with the sex far less likely to give them hassles when pissed on, and yes, madam, that is the wiminz.
PS
Any responses as illogical as the first will be deleted. I’m not always this nice you know.
2 Comments
You are incorrect actually, there are many women protesting all across the middle east right now. Fewer than men sure but that is because culturally they are kept down. However more and more are finding their voices. Certainly more than is shown on western television.
Furthermore the russian revolution was started by women on International women’s day.
It is when the women are angry that the ruling class tremble.
Cassie,
You are an idiot, or more likely, a liar…
“You are incorrect actually, there are many women protesting all across the middle east right now. Fewer than men sure but that is because culturally they are kept down.”
You say I am incorrect, then you agree that the protesters are mostly male, which strangely enough is what I said, hence if I am wrong so are you. As for being kept down, how does that explain the Battle Of Seattle? Those women weren’t “kept down” enough to not protest, yet as soon as the shit hit the fan the poor dears felt oppressed and the only people left to fight the state thugs were the men in balaclavas.
“Furthermore the Russian revolution was started by women on International women’s day.”
Even if true, it is only one example – and one in which the majority of the actual fighting was done by men – whereas on the male side we have dozens of examples, from Spartacus to Alaric, from Marx to Castro, which supports what I said, IE “It is almost always men who get outraged enough and angry enough” Next time you may want to throw in Boudica, though she was the queen and therefore the only one of her people who could start a rebellion against the Romans, and feel free also to ignore the fact that virtually all the Iceni doing the actual fighting were men.
And by the way, nice attempt at making it look as if you have already presented evidence by using the word “furthermore!”
“It is when the women are angry that the ruling class tremble.”
One example of a revolution in which women had a part does not support the idea that the ruling class are scared of women, dozens of revolutions carried out by men does support the premise that the ruling class are scared of men. This is because there are only two sexes, and whenever one sex is responsible for the minority of action X, it can be safely assumed that the other sex is automatically responsible for the majority of action X.
Here’s an idea, Cassie. Pull your head out of your ass, stop glorifying your sex with non-existent achievements, and put the welfare of the masses before your need to feel empowered. Until you and the rest of your fantasy-hungry sex do so, the oligarchs will continue to load the lower classes with the sex far less likely to give them hassles when pissed on, and yes, madam, that is the wiminz.
PS
Any responses as illogical as the first will be deleted. I’m not always this nice you know.