On Jul 13, 3:07 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Rupert wrote:
On Jul 10, 4:59 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Dutch wrote:
"Rupert" wrote in message
groups.com...
On Jul 10, 12:59 pm, "Dutch" wrote:
"Rupert" wrote
It's your job to state the mechanism whereby my behaviour causes
animal deaths. You've utterly failed to meet this obligation. I've
generously been helping you out by suggesting possible mechanisms.
Listen to how self-serving and condescending you sound, referring to
yourself as "generous".
You claim not to read Rick's posts, in which case you are hardly in a
position to comment.
I was reading to see what you said, not rick.
I am being extraordinarily reasonable and patient
in engaging with him. Calling me condescending in the context of
Rick's torrent of mindless abuse is utterly ludicrous.
His torrents of mindless abuse are not the issue, I accused you earlier
of being condescending and you gave me an example.
Then you squeal like an infant about verbal abuse.
No, I don't. I simply point out that the behaviour of all the antis
here, including yours, utterly flouts all civilized standards of
decency, rationality, or justice.
You didn't "simply point it out", you announced that you're going to
withdraw from the debate if we don't start acting according to your
rules. Incidentally you have threatened that about a dozen times and
never followed through on it.
Ha ha ha ha ha! Yes, he tried something like that with
me before. He said I "needed" to stop replying to him,
that it was my obligation or some such horseshit. He
implied he didn't want to keep replying to me, but he
kept replying all the same, and I never did give him
the silly apology he kept demanding.

What happened was that I said

You flounced your skirts and said I shouldn't reply to
you. I told you to **** off, that I would post as I
saw fit. You took it, rupie, and you liked it.


I expressed my disgust at the depths to which you had sunk. You
proceeded to continue to abase yourself without the slightest hint of
shame. You continue to do so to this day.

Please keep your sexual fantasies about me in your own head. We do not
want to hear about them.

rupie flounces his skirt and stamps his delicate foot,
and then writes condescending bullshit. But I know how
to get him off that game.

The point is that you don't like the rough
language, I don't mind it at all, at least it's direct. I don't like the
air of superiority you try to project, I find that offensive.
It makes one want to smack him right in his pasty white
face.

You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.
That is exactly right.

In the eyes of any decent person


.... you are a worthless, pitiful excuse for a human being.

"Rupert" wrote in message ps.com...
On Jul 10, 4:59 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Dutch wrote:
...
You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.

That is exactly right.


In the eyes of any decent person who reads these conversations, it's
an utter absurdity.

It is the typical "he/she asked for it" refrain of all abusers.

Seems Ball feminizes male opponents, as he's tried with you,
because more than men, he hates and likes to attack women.

The following includes behaviour that is seen here.

'The Power and Control Wheel

Using isolation. One of the most effective ways to begin to
overpower another person is to keep her from having contact
with others. By systematically severing her relationships with
family, friends, and co-workers, the batterer insures that his
victim has little support. He becomes her only point of
reference, thereby defining and controlling her world.
Batterers can isolate their partners in a variety of ways, from
excessive jealousy to restricting their access to education and
jobs or controlling where they go or with whom they spend
their time. For women with disabilities, lesbians, older
women, immigrant women, or others who are marginalized by
mainstream society, isolation takes on an increased potency.

Minimizing, denying, and blaming. Batterers often minimize or
deny the abuse, or they blame their partners for provoking it.
He may minimize the severity of her injuries, or outright deny
that he caused them. Unfortunately, "victim-blaming" is
prevalent in our society. Sometimes abusers play mind games
with their victims trying to make them feel crazy. Often violent
behavior towards women is justified by saying things like
"she asked for it" or "she needed to be put back in her place."
In so doing, the blame and accountability shifts from the
abusive behavior of the batterer to the "weakness" of the victim.

Using children. Using children is yet another way that a batterer
can instill feelings of guilt and incompetence in his partner,
making her feel like a "bad" mother. Some batterers will force
children to turn against their mothers, or will threaten to take the
children away if the victim were to try to leave. There is also
evidence that in homes where there is abuse towards the mother,
there is an increased likelihood of abuse towards the children.
Girls whose fathers batter their mothers are 6.5 times more
likely to be sexually assaulted by their fathers than are girls
from non-violent homes.

Using male privilege. In our patriarchal society, men are often
raised to believe that they have been given the right to be
dominating and aggressive. Being "tough" and "in charge" are
accepted and expected as part of one´s manhood. It is all too
often the case that batterers use this gender imbalance as a
justification for violent or controlling behavior.

Using economic abuse. By controlling and limiting a woman´s
access to financial means, a batterer can assure that his victim
will have limited resources if she has thoughts of leaving. She
may have to turn over her paycheck, leave her job, or account
for every penny spent. Too often women have to choose
between staying in an abusive relationship or being thrust into
economic ruin or poverty.

Using coercion and threats. Threats are used to control by
creating intense fear that can paralyze the victim's ability to act
or keep herself constantly on guard in an effort to protect our
lives or well-being. Some common threats are suicide, threats
to kill her or the children, threats to damage property, etc. The
victim may also be coerced into acting in ways that contradict
her values, such as prostitution or fraud.

Using intimidation. Abusers will often commit terrifying acts in
order to keep their partner in a state of continuous fear. This
may include smashing things, killing pets, harassing friends and
family, setting fires, driving recklessly, suicide and homicide.
Intimidation periodically reinforced with assault, makes violence
a daily part of the victim´s reality and, therefore, makes her easier
to control.

Using emotional abuse. Emotional abuse is the most common
form of control and can often exist in relationships where there
is not physical battering. This includes put-downs, insults to
the victim´s intelligence and abilities, name-calling, etc. In so
doing, the batterer systematically breaks her spirit and
self-esteem. She may begin to feel as if the abuse is her fault or
that she must deserve it.

These forms of abuse are used in multiple combinations.
Constant violence and criticism leaves women uncertain,
humiliated, and much easier to control.

Labels: blame shifting, coercion, denying, economic,
emotional abuse, intimidation, isolation, minimizing, misogyny
......
http://abusesanctuary.blogspot.com/

Rupert wrote:
On Jul 13, 3:07 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Rupert wrote:
On Jul 10, 4:59 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Dutch wrote:
"Rupert" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jul 10, 12:59 pm, "Dutch" wrote:
"Rupert" wrote
It's your job to state the mechanism whereby my behaviour causes
animal deaths. You've utterly failed to meet this obligation. I've
generously been helping you out by suggesting possible mechanisms.
Listen to how self-serving and condescending you sound, referring to
yourself as "generous".
You claim not to read Rick's posts, in which case you are hardly in a
position to comment.
I was reading to see what you said, not rick.
I am being extraordinarily reasonable and patient
in engaging with him. Calling me condescending in the context of
Rick's torrent of mindless abuse is utterly ludicrous.
His torrents of mindless abuse are not the issue, I accused you earlier
of being condescending and you gave me an example.
Then you squeal like an infant about verbal abuse.
No, I don't. I simply point out that the behaviour of all the antis
here, including yours, utterly flouts all civilized standards of
decency, rationality, or justice.
You didn't "simply point it out", you announced that you're going to
withdraw from the debate if we don't start acting according to your
rules. Incidentally you have threatened that about a dozen times and
never followed through on it.
Ha ha ha ha ha! Yes, he tried something like that with
me before. He said I "needed" to stop replying to him,
that it was my obligation or some such horseshit. He
implied he didn't want to keep replying to me, but he
kept replying all the same, and I never did give him
the silly apology he kept demanding.
What happened was that I said
You flounced your skirts and said I shouldn't reply to
you. I told you to **** off, that I would post as I
saw fit. You took it, rupie, and you liked it.


I expressed my disgust at

You bitchily demanded that I stop replying to your
posts until I "apologized". I kept replying as I saw
fit; no apology. And here we are.


rupie flounces his skirt and stamps his delicate foot,
and then writes condescending bullshit. But I know how
to get him off that game.
The point is that you don't like the rough
language, I don't mind it at all, at least it's direct. I don't like the
air of superiority you try to project, I find that offensive.
It makes one want to smack him right in his pasty white
face.
You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.
That is exactly right.
In the eyes of any decent person
You deserve the abuse you get.

... you are

....just the person to give you the abuse you request
and deserve.

pearl wrote:
"Rupert" wrote in message ps.com...
On Jul 10, 4:59 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Dutch wrote:
..
You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.
That is exactly right.

In the eyes of any decent person who reads these conversations, it's
an utter absurdity.

It is the typical "he/she asked for it" refrain of all abusers.

Seems Rudy feminizes male opponents, as he's tried with you,

rupie is a bitch.


because more than men, he hates and likes to attack women.

False.

Add psychoanalysis to the long and growing list of
things about which you know nothing but love to huff
and puff and try to perpetrate frauds.


The following includes behaviour that is seen here.

'The Power and Control Wheel

[snip stale copy-and-paste bullshit]

**** off, ****.

"Rudy Canoza" wrote in message nk.net...
pearl wrote:
"Rupert" wrote in message ps.com...
On Jul 10, 4:59 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Dutch wrote:
..
You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.
That is exactly right.

In the eyes of any decent person who reads these conversations, it's
an utter absurdity.

It is the typical "he/she asked for it" refrain of all abusers.

Seems Rudy feminizes male opponents, as he's tried with you,

rupie is a bitch.

'The serial bully:
... is constantly imposing on others a false reality
made up of distortion and fabrication ..
http://www.bullyonline.org/workbully/serial.htm

'Warning signs

It is very difficult to predict who may or may not be
a potential rapist. Considering rapists have many
personality types and use many different methods, it
might seem impossible. However, certain behavioral
characteristics have been observed in some rapists.
These should be used cautiously as "warning signs",
since non-rapists and other innocent people may also
show similar behaviours.

*Extreme emotional insensitivity and egotism.
*Habitual degradation and verbal devaluation of others.
*Tries to tell others what they are feeling and thinking
as though it is his decision and not theirs. "She said no,
but she meant yes".
*Consistently uses intimidation in language or
threatening behavior to get his way. Uses words like
"bitch" and "whore" to describe women.
*Excessive, chronic, or brooding anger.
*Becomes obsessed with the object of his romantic
affections long after his advances have been rejected.
*Extreme mood swings.
*Violent outbursts; lack of impulse control.
*Aggressive and violent.
*Under the influence of alcohol or drugs, cruel behavior
is seen.
...'
http://www.answers.com/topic/rape

because more than men, he hates and likes to attack women.

False.

"You harass women in every post -- you are one of the most
misogynistic people I have ever read. Even your terms of
abuse for male posters demonstrate a deep hatred of women."
....
http://www.iol.ie/~creature/boiled%20ball.html

Add psychoanalysis to the long and growing list of
things about which you know nothing but love to huff
and puff and try to perpetrate frauds.

'The serial bully:
... is constantly imposing on others a false reality
made up of distortion and fabrication ..
http://www.bullyonline.org/workbully/serial.htm

The following includes behaviour that is seen here.

'The Power and Control Wheel

[snip stale copy-and-paste bullshit]

**** off, ****.

Textbook. Let's put that back.

'The Power and Control Wheel

Using isolation. One of the most effective ways to begin to
overpower another person is to keep her from having contact
with others. By systematically severing her relationships with
family, friends, and co-workers, the batterer insures that his
victim has little support. He becomes her only point of
reference, thereby defining and controlling her world.
Batterers can isolate their partners in a variety of ways, from
excessive jealousy to restricting their access to education and
jobs or controlling where they go or with whom they spend
their time. For women with disabilities, lesbians, older
women, immigrant women, or others who are marginalized by
mainstream society, isolation takes on an increased potency.

Minimizing, denying, and blaming. Batterers often minimize or
deny the abuse, or they blame their partners for provoking it.
He may minimize the severity of her injuries, or outright deny
that he caused them. Unfortunately, "victim-blaming" is
prevalent in our society. Sometimes abusers play mind games
with their victims trying to make them feel crazy. Often violent
behavior towards women is justified by saying things like
"she asked for it" or "she needed to be put back in her place."
In so doing, the blame and accountability shifts from the
abusive behavior of the batterer to the "weakness" of the victim.

Using children. Using children is yet another way that a batterer
can instill feelings of guilt and incompetence in his partner,
making her feel like a "bad" mother. Some batterers will force
children to turn against their mothers, or will threaten to take the
children away if the victim were to try to leave. There is also
evidence that in homes where there is abuse towards the mother,
there is an increased likelihood of abuse towards the children.
Girls whose fathers batter their mothers are 6.5 times more
likely to be sexually assaulted by their fathers than are girls
from non-violent homes.

Using male privilege. In our patriarchal society, men are often
raised to believe that they have been given the right to be
dominating and aggressive. Being "tough" and "in charge" are
accepted and expected as part of one´s manhood. It is all too
often the case that batterers use this gender imbalance as a
justification for violent or controlling behavior.

Using economic abuse. By controlling and limiting a woman´s
access to financial means, a batterer can assure that his victim
will have limited resources if she has thoughts of leaving. She
may have to turn over her paycheck, leave her job, or account
for every penny spent. Too often women have to choose
between staying in an abusive relationship or being thrust into
economic ruin or poverty.

Using coercion and threats. Threats are used to control by
creating intense fear that can paralyze the victim's ability to act
or keep herself constantly on guard in an effort to protect our
lives or well-being. Some common threats are suicide, threats
to kill her or the children, threats to damage property, etc. The
victim may also be coerced into acting in ways that contradict
her values, such as prostitution or fraud.

Using intimidation. Abusers will often commit terrifying acts in
order to keep their partner in a state of continuous fear. This
may include smashing things, killing pets, harassing friends and
family, setting fires, driving recklessly, suicide and homicide.
Intimidation periodically reinforced with assault, makes violence
a daily part of the victim´s reality and, therefore, makes her easier
to control.

Using emotional abuse. Emotional abuse is the most common
form of control and can often exist in relationships where there
is not physical battering. This includes put-downs, insults to
the victim´s intelligence and abilities, name-calling, etc. In so
doing, the batterer systematically breaks her spirit and
self-esteem. She may begin to feel as if the abuse is her fault or
that she must deserve it.

These forms of abuse are used in multiple combinations.
Constant violence and criticism leaves women uncertain,
humiliated, and much easier to control.

Labels: blame shifting, coercion, denying, economic,
emotional abuse, intimidation, isolation, minimizing, misogyny
......
http://abusesanctuary.blogspot.com/

lesley the foot-rubbing whore of Cork lied:
"Rudy Canoza" wrote in message nk.net...
pearl wrote:
"Rupert" wrote in message ps.com...
On Jul 10, 4:59 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Dutch wrote:
..
You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.
That is exactly right.

In the eyes of any decent person who reads these conversations, it's
an utter absurdity.
It is the typical "he/she asked for it" refrain of all abusers.

Seems Rudy feminizes male opponents, as he's tried with you,
rupie is a bitch.

'The serial

rupie *is* a bitch.

You're just a ****ing lying whore.

On Jul 13, 10:25 pm, "pearl" wrote:
"Rupert" wrote in glegroups.com...
On Jul 10, 4:59 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Dutch wrote:
..
You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.

That is exactly right.

In the eyes of any decent person who reads these conversations, it's
an utter absurdity.

It is the typical "he/she asked for it" refrain of all abusers.

Seems Ball feminizes male opponents, as he's tried with you,
because more than men, he hates and likes to attack women.


In this post he seems to want to construct this narrative where he is
the dominant male and I am the submissive female and I get masochistic
gratification from yielding to him. A bit more information about his
sexual psyche than we need to know, I think.

http://groups.google.com/group/talk....1?dmode=source

Rupert the skirt-boy blabbered:

In this post he seems to want to construct this narrative where he is
the dominant male and I am the submissive female

rupie, your utter lack of talent as a psychoanalyst is
exceeded only by your pomposity.

"Rupert" wrote in message oups.com...
On Jul 13, 10:25 pm, "pearl" wrote:
"Rupert" wrote in glegroups.com...
On Jul 10, 4:59 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Dutch wrote:
..
You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.

That is exactly right.

In the eyes of any decent person who reads these conversations, it's
an utter absurdity.

It is the typical "he/she asked for it" refrain of all abusers.

Seems Ball feminizes male opponents, as he's tried with you,
because more than men, he hates and likes to attack women.

In this post he seems to want to construct this narrative where he is
the dominant male and I am the submissive female and I get masochistic
gratification from yielding to him. A bit more information about his
sexual psyche than we need to know, I think.

http://groups.google.com/group/talk....1?dmode=source

Not to mention his violent fantasies involving broomsticks and
broken bottles. Jonathan Ball is clearly an extremely sick 'man'.

Rupert wrote:
On Jul 13, 10:25 pm, "pearl" wrote:
"Rupert" wrote in glegroups.com...
On Jul 10, 4:59 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Dutch wrote:
..
You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.
That is exactly right.
In the eyes of any decent person who reads these conversations, it's
an utter absurdity.
It is the typical "he/she asked for it" refrain of all abusers.

Seems Ball feminizes male opponents, as he's tried with you,
because more than men, he hates and likes to attack women.


In this post he seems to want to construct this narrative where he is
the dominant male and I am the submissive female and I get masochistic
gratification from yielding to him. A bit more information about his
sexual psyche than we need to know, I think.

http://groups.google.com/group/talk....1?dmode=source



However you protest, you obviously revel in it, you're perpetuating it.

On Jul 15, 12:20 am, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Rupert the skirt-boy blabbered:

In this post he seems to want to construct this narrative where he is
the dominant male and I am the submissive female

rupie, your utter lack of talent as a psychoanalyst is
exceeded only by your pomposity.

I don't need any talent as a psychoanalyst. What I said is simply an
obvious statement of fact which anyone can verify by reading your
post. "You took it, and you liked it." The homoerotic feeling is
barely concealed.

On Jul 15, 4:07 am, Dutch wrote:
Rupert wrote:
On Jul 13, 10:25 pm, "pearl" wrote:
"Rupert" wrote in glegroups.com...
On Jul 10, 4:59 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Dutch wrote:
..
You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.
That is exactly right.
In the eyes of any decent person who reads these conversations, it's
an utter absurdity.
It is the typical "he/she asked for it" refrain of all abusers.

Seems Ball feminizes male opponents, as he's tried with you,
because more than men, he hates and likes to attack women.

In this post he seems to want to construct this narrative where he is
the dominant male and I am the submissive female and I get masochistic
gratification from yielding to him. A bit more information about his
sexual psyche than we need to know, I think.

http://groups.google.com/group/talk....g/89988189a95b...

However you protest, you obviously revel in it, you're perpetuating it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, I find it extremely funny, I thought I made that clear. I like
pointing out the level of immaturity and what it reveals about Ball.
I'm not protesting about it, I'm just stating the facts about it.
Contrary to what you said earlier I do not find it particularly
"irritating". It's good fun.

It's always fun when Ball makes a clown of himself. Like in the other
thread where he just tried to tell me that "axiomatizable" isn't a
word. Absolutely fantastic. I wonder how long that will go on for.
Ball obviously intends to keep replying, despite the fact that he has
nothing to say. Should be quite a lot of comic value to be extracted
there, I think, until I get bored.

On Jul 13, 11:57 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Rupert wrote:
On Jul 13, 3:07 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Rupert wrote:
On Jul 10, 4:59 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Dutch wrote:
"Rupert" wrote in message
legroups.com...
On Jul 10, 12:59 pm, "Dutch" wrote:
"Rupert" wrote
It's your job to state the mechanism whereby my behaviour causes
animal deaths. You've utterly failed to meet this obligation. I've
generously been helping you out by suggesting possible mechanisms.
Listen to how self-serving and condescending you sound, referring to
yourself as "generous".
You claim not to read Rick's posts, in which case you are hardly in a
position to comment.
I was reading to see what you said, not rick.
I am being extraordinarily reasonable and patient
in engaging with him. Calling me condescending in the context of
Rick's torrent of mindless abuse is utterly ludicrous.
His torrents of mindless abuse are not the issue, I accused you earlier
of being condescending and you gave me an example.
Then you squeal like an infant about verbal abuse.
No, I don't. I simply point out that the behaviour of all the antis
here, including yours, utterly flouts all civilized standards of
decency, rationality, or justice.
You didn't "simply point it out", you announced that you're going to
withdraw from the debate if we don't start acting according to your
rules. Incidentally you have threatened that about a dozen times and
never followed through on it.
Ha ha ha ha ha! Yes, he tried something like that with
me before. He said I "needed" to stop replying to him,
that it was my obligation or some such horseshit. He
implied he didn't want to keep replying to me, but he
kept replying all the same, and I never did give him
the silly apology he kept demanding.
What happened was that I said
You flounced your skirts and said I shouldn't reply to
you. I told you to **** off, that I would post as I
saw fit. You took it, rupie, and you liked it.

I expressed my disgust at

You bitchily demanded that I stop replying to your
posts until I "apologized".

Not quite. I expressed the view that if you didn't do that then you
were a pitiful coward.

It really is a marvel that you're not ashamed for mocking someone for
having a history of mental illness. As I say, it's just the same as
mocking someone for having cerebral palsy. Most people find that sort
of behaviour to be fairly despicable. You have no qualms about it,
fine.

I kept replying as I saw
fit; no apology.

Yes, you did. And you're obviously very proud of that and have the
idea that you thereby somehow showed that you were the more dominant
male. Whatever floats your boat.

And here we are.


Yes, here we are, and you get funnier and funnier every day.

rupie flounces his skirt and stamps his delicate foot,
and then writes condescending bullshit. But I know how
to get him off that game.
The point is that you don't like the rough
language, I don't mind it at all, at least it's direct. I don't like the
air of superiority you try to project, I find that offensive.
It makes one want to smack him right in his pasty white
face.
You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.
That is exactly right.
In the eyes of any decent person
You deserve the abuse you get.

... you are

...just the person to give you the abuse you request
and deserve.

You're obviously very proud of the job you're doing. Are you aware of
the fact that these days most of the "abuse" you give me makes me howl
with laughter? Is that the desired effect?

Rupert wrote:
On Jul 15, 4:07 am, Dutch wrote:
Rupert wrote:
On Jul 13, 10:25 pm, "pearl" wrote:
"Rupert" wrote in glegroups.com...
On Jul 10, 4:59 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Dutch wrote:
..
You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.
That is exactly right.
In the eyes of any decent person who reads these conversations, it's
an utter absurdity.
It is the typical "he/she asked for it" refrain of all abusers.
Seems Ball feminizes male opponents, as he's tried with you,
because more than men, he hates and likes to attack women.
In this post he seems to want to construct this narrative where he is
the dominant male and I am the submissive female and I get masochistic
gratification from yielding to him. A bit more information about his
sexual psyche than we need to know, I think.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk....g/89988189a95b...
However you protest, you obviously revel in it, you're perpetuating it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, I find it extremely funny, I thought I made that clear. I like
pointing out the level of immaturity and what it reveals about Ball.
I'm not protesting about it, I'm just stating the facts about it.
Contrary to what you said earlier I do not find it particularly
"irritating". It's good fun.

It's always fun when Ball makes a clown of himself. Like in the other
thread where he just tried to tell me that "axiomatizable" isn't a
word. Absolutely fantastic. I wonder how long that will go on for.
Ball obviously intends to keep replying, despite the fact that he has
nothing to say. Should be quite a lot of comic value to be extracted
there, I think, until I get bored.


That is a 180 degree shift from only short while ago when you were so
perturbed that you were issuing ultimatums. Let's be frank, the tone of
the debate doesn't bother you in the least as long as you feel you have
the upper hand.

On Jul 15, 9:12 am, Dutch wrote:
Rupert wrote:
On Jul 15, 4:07 am, Dutch wrote:
Rupert wrote:
On Jul 13, 10:25 pm, "pearl" wrote:
"Rupert" wrote in glegroups.com...
On Jul 10, 4:59 pm, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Dutch wrote:
..
You earn every bit of verbal abuse you get, and then some.
That is exactly right.
In the eyes of any decent person who reads these conversations, it's
an utter absurdity.
It is the typical "he/she asked for it" refrain of all abusers.
Seems Ball feminizes male opponents, as he's tried with you,
because more than men, he hates and likes to attack women.
In this post he seems to want to construct this narrative where he is
the dominant male and I am the submissive female and I get masochistic
gratification from yielding to him. A bit more information about his
sexual psyche than we need to know, I think.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk....g/89988189a95b...
However you protest, you obviously revel in it, you're perpetuating it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, I find it extremely funny, I thought I made that clear. I like
pointing out the level of immaturity and what it reveals about Ball.
I'm not protesting about it, I'm just stating the facts about it.
Contrary to what you said earlier I do not find it particularly
"irritating". It's good fun.

It's always fun when Ball makes a clown of himself. Like in the other
thread where he just tried to tell me that "axiomatizable" isn't a
word. Absolutely fantastic. I wonder how long that will go on for.
Ball obviously intends to keep replying, despite the fact that he has
nothing to say. Should be quite a lot of comic value to be extracted
there, I think, until I get bored.

That is a 180 degree shift from only short while ago when you were so
perturbed that you were issuing ultimatums. Let's be frank, the tone of
the debate doesn't bother you in the least as long as you feel you have
the upper hand.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Are you talking about when I said I chose not to engage with you
because of the way you were behaving? That doesn't mean I was
perturbed, it was just a choice I made. I didn't feel inclined to
engage with you while you were behaving in that way. I didn't see any
tangible benefit to be had from it.

The tone of the debate doesn't *especially* bother me. I sometimes
find it frustrating and irritating, and I think it reflects poorly on
you people, and I sometimes say what I think about it and choose to
terminate conversations because of it. But you're right of course,
ultimately it's my choice whether I want to bother participating here
or not, and if I'm going to stick around then there's really not much
point in getting too fussed. Another reason I don't get too fussed is
that I think pretty much all of the derogatory comments you make have
about the same level of credibility as Ball's nonsense. I think you
have some legitimate criticisms and I accept those, although I also
believe similar criticisms apply to your position as well. I'll
clarify that when I write up my position, which hopefully I'll get
around to doing this weekend. But the great majority of the
uncomplimentary things you say about me I think are just palpable
nonsense, and they really don't bother me because I have no respect
for your judgement. However, it does get tiresome sometimes,
especially when you have the nerve to suggest that I am the one who is
at fault and I am the one who is being condescending. I really can't
believe you can say that with a straight face. You ought to try
listening to yourself sometimes.

But, yes, you're right, Ball is a different kettle of fish. He is so
entertaining that, as you say, I positively revel in making fun of
him. The difference is with you it's just a tiresome chore pointing
out how nonsensical your personal attacks are, like having to brush
away a fly all the time, with Ball it's a form of entertainment. Since
it's an inevitable and permanent feature of this board, why not
appreciate its comic side?

Anyway, as you say, all this is boring and irrelevant rubbish.
Hopefully I'll get around to writing up my position soon and we can
actually have a discussion about animal ethics. That'll be something
new and exciting.