Everyday sexism

[Xelasnave.1947]

Not rubbish. You demanded (even more) evidence before you'd believe women are offended by the behaviours we are discussing.

I get it James.

condone the behaviours

Demanding justice is not condoning.

You and paddoboy ought to be able to give a clear "no" in answer to that question, but you can't.

Paddo may be evasive but I have made it entirely clear what I think such that I am surprised you still do not understand me at all.

paddoboy is proud of engaging in those behaviours, and determined to keep behaving like that in regards to women. He has told us all that. He has also made it clear that it doesn't matter to him that he knows that those behaviours are inappropriate - that he (now) understands why women dislike them and are offended by them. In other words, he continues to knowingly act like a sexist pig, and has no intention of ever stopping.

Well I don't condone that at all.

As for you, Alex, you say you don't engage in such behaviours yourself, but you're happy to condone them in others (as in the case of paddoboy

I say that context must be considered...lots of old folk talk that way with no malice..that is what you need to take on board...if Paddo was here and he presents as you say to me I will rip him to pieces....you must appreciate, as I now do, that I came in at the tail end of something with a long history..all my concern turns on is making claims without evidence...and I have no doubt some ladies are offended, I get offended, ....

Why not? If 9 out of 10 women find that behaviour offensive, why would you want to condone it? Because there's a 1 in 10 chance that a random woman paddoboy meets in a shop might not be offended by his inappropriate remarks and attitudes?

James a survey should not determine guilt in any way shape or form..the facts that pertain exclusively to the case in question is all that is relevant....

But you still say I'm talking "rubbish".

That is prompted by the fact you do not have evidence from the ladies in the bank...further your claims that lubricate is a sexual thing is not what I have found in my world..if you want to show Paddo was being sleazy you need more than your say so...that is the point and there is no other...you can not sentence someone for what you are thinking, actually not even for what they are thinking..now if you could show Paddo said in addition ..and I imagined pouring virgin olive oil over them and...whatever..it would be different..if he is that way he would not last with me but we can't go on what you think he is thinking.

You and paddoboy ought to be able to give a clear "no" in answer to that question, but you can't.

If you establish sleasy behaviour I am on side and would not be gentle in the way I called it.

Why? Because I reference a meaning that 95% of the population is aware of, although you claim to be ignorant of it?

James that dictionary had one meaning ..it only dealt with sex..nothing about cars, machinery or booze..it is a shit dictionary and search as I did every other dictionary dealt with machinery, some with booze, ..I am afraid that dictionary can only appeal to sicko....why did it not have anything re machinery, why did it only deal with a sexual thing...my guess is popularised.. I can just see dirty minded little folk looking up words in that dictionary..it does not represent community dictionaries in the least.

The whole point of this thread is to get some men to start thinking about what they say in reference to women and, probably more importantly, what they say directly to women.

Well I am doing my best to keep it rolling and somewhat playing the devils advocate given Paddo is gone but also injecting the notion that justice must be done fairly and not by survey or popular vote.
Your attitude is more like.. let's give him a fair trial and then we hang him...you can't get ahead of yourself and should focus on the fair trial bit not the hanging..bit..now you know me I am all for hanging wife bashers but after examining all the evidence...

To be brief, I think that your desire to put all the blame for sexism on the Church and Hollywood is naive and unsustainable

Read the research which completely contradicts that view.
Honestly James think it thru...say we found Paddo with drugs in his possession...we would ask him why but at some point we would ask...where did you get these drugs...now my bet is he won't say I made them myself but be able to point to a source...these beliefs that women are inferior just don't book into a blokes head..think of an average life..not that there is one ..however..the kid goes to church learns good things but the fact women don't get a look in must leave some impression..add to that they may come across the quotes l posted or may have been at Mommy's side as the priest told Mommy to suck it up.think about that for more than the time it takes for you to ignore it...and why do you ignore so many established facts?..can you not just think about the proppsition rationally.. perhaps read the research..aquaint yourself with the reality that Jews and the church of England are happyly adjusting to the problem you say is naive and unsustainable
..

Why? Because I reference a meaning that 95% of the population is aware of, although you claim to be ignorant of it?

Of course you can't but please bring evidence to support your 95% claim.

In fact tell us how you arrived at that figure..link the paper perhaps.

James you are a decent chap and I hope that after dealing with me you will see the need not to make wild claims that you can't support other than to say you found them in your personal reality.
You are wrong and the longer you take to conceed the sillier you look..your arguement has the sophistication of " tis so"
Then you put up a dictionary that only lists lubricate in reference to sex..honestly what will the audience think of you?

at the expense of defending women

You are really grasping at straws...

Anyways I will think about all you have said and let us hope that passers by realise that they could do well to ask themselves if they are being unwittingly offensive, if they condemn folk without evidence and if their culture needs to be updated with the decent norms I think we both feel sound offensive, become common place.

I left the place. I found it hard enough to turn up but I will not be disrespected and left like a shag on a rock...I will now relax ...a whole day wasted...no lubrication in this state of mind.

So you don't feel bad..whether by design or accident both you and Bells are doing a wonderful job of providing a place to reach out to in these times...kicking you around I sadly find extremely satisfying ...and I forgot to buy guitar strings..honestly what is happening to me...keep up the good work.

Alex

 

[wegs]

If anyone ever wonders why many women don't report accounts of sexual harassment, rape or any other sexual misconduct shortly after it's occurred or even at all - remember this thread. Women are often not believed because men excuse their behavior as jokes, and playfulness - or worse - they suggest that the women encouraged it, even liked it.

2021, and the beat goes on. . .

 

[dumbest man on earth]

If anyone ever wonders why many women don't report accounts of sexual harassment, rape or any other sexual misconduct shortly after it's occurred or even at all - remember this thread. Women are often not believed because men excuse their behavior as jokes, and playfulness - or worse - they suggest that the women encouraged it, even liked it.

2021, and the beat goes on. . .

Grok'd!

 

[Bells]

The quality you observe in Paddo boy is not limited to him...

And?

In this thread, in this discussion and on this subject matter, the issue is Paddoboy.

.look at James..proven wrong over and over and he finally comes up with a dictionary that can only describe "lubricate" in his disgusting interpretation...and non other..the entry is just re sex..no reference to the lubrication of machinery, or to the usage around booze..he has examples..same approach that you find fails with Paddo...and he is still going on about it...

Just because you are unaware of the sexual reference and the double entendre posted by paddoboy, it does not mean that James is wrong.

You are the one choosing to deliberately ignore it. Does not mean it does not exist.

If you tell people that a woman kept you well lubricated, they will not think you are talking about machinery!

The funny thing is I am on side with basically all you see as wrong..my points are about evidence and fair trial...
I realise this goes back a long way and imagine that you have been drained of patience with Paddo.

But you aren't on my side. You are defending paddoboy's behaviour and putting it down to his age and how it's common for people his age to behave this way.

I am not being tactical I swears...I get frustrated that folk can not see my points re evidence etc.

And you again fail to see the point that the behaviour itself is problematic.

I provided you with around half a dozen links showing why his behaviour is problematic in general.

I like to argue straight up..I don't carry on like the previous guy nor do I ignore validcmaterial like James..
And I accept valid critisms and adjust my ways.

You aren't arguing "straight up".

You are chopping and changing, from saying 'yes, it's bad' and then immediately defending it and condoning it because of his age.

I can't speak for Paddo but I can say that I do not miss what it is all about...

Are you sure?

Because all you have done is to speak for him this entire time. He's not even posting in this thread and you are still defending his behaviour and trying to excuse it.

You aren't arguing for yourself. You aren't speaking for yourself. You are in this for paddoboy.

.I think if you look at what I say that I don't like the familararity but am not supportive of jumping on folk who hold no malice..

How do you know he holds no malice?

If someone knows behaviour is bad and can be harmful and they still keep doing it, how can you say that person hold's no malice?

He knows it's harmful. But he keeps doing it.

To me that indicates absolute malice.

Anyways Paddo was raised a catholic and I bet that is where he got his lack of respect..

Bullshit.

My father was raised a Catholic. He was the complete opposite.

And as I have noted to you before, this behaviour, this disregard for women and our fundamental human rights predates religion and Hollywood.

You're just looking for an easy cop-out.

I was raised to respect women and I do..as I have said I have stood up for them and justice all my life.

Except for the women that paddoboy harasses. For them, 'there's no malice'.

I am not your problem if all men were respectful as try to be I suspect we would not have a problem.. or at least a lesser problem.

If you respected women, you would not have defended paddoboy's behaviour and condoned it.

Demanding justice is not condoning.

You are demanding justice for the perpetrator...

You are demanding justice and a pass for the sexual harasser.

You are also demanding that he be allowed to continue sexually harassing young women who are unable to say no or refuse or complain about it because of his age and because you don't think there is any malice behind his sexually harassing these young women.. And in that sense, you don't even think what he is doing is sexual harassment, ergo it's not harmful and without malice..

So when you try and tout yourself as a sort of champion for women's rights, etc, it's hard to take you seriously when you spend the entire time defending a man who openly boasts about how he targets young women and sexually harasses them because he knows he can get away with it and that they won't complain.

 

[billvon]

If anyone ever wonders why many women don't report accounts of sexual harassment, rape or any other sexual misconduct shortly after it's occurred or even at all - remember this thread. Women are often not believed because men excuse their behavior as jokes, and playfulness - or worse - they suggest that the women encouraged it, even liked it.

This should be on the top of the page as a permanent reminder.

Threads like this normalize that sort of behavior, and men use the memes here to gaslight women*. "You're too sensitive." "I said that to XXX and she didn't mind." "I didn't mean it and therefore I am blameless; it's YOU who has the problem."

(* - The overarching issue is much larger than men vs women, but that's what this thread is about so that's what I am keeping it constrained to.)

 

[paddoboy]

Yes and perhaps I am being too emotional..I hate injustice and that is all I can see with how the matter is approached here..think about my words..evidence, mob mentality and kangaroo courts...I want what you all want but not at the expense of justice.
Alex

Alex: Firstly thanks for your efforts, as futile as they may be. I first decided to take a look back yesterday and see what had transpired.
I was correct. The usual lies, slurs, and deliberate misinterpretations by two in particular...let's call them Trump and Gialiani, as in Donald and Rudy,
I am unable to think of a better annalogous example.
What prompted me into looking back was three incidents/happenings, that show up the lies that Donald and Rudy have continually presented.
The first of those....While having a beer at Easts with a mate, I approached one of the bar attendants that looked after us and kept us well lubricated
on our reunion. I mentioned the "lubricated bit that Donald continually lies about, and the casual everyday banter by herself and us blokes. She pissed herself laughing and
went on to say that the "fun police" are getting more and more desperate everyday. Then I asked her age. She replied 36 years old, and I then said, shit Luv, I told them you were in your twenties.
She then returned the compliment and said I look nowhere near 76 years old.
The second incident concerns the little Woolworths shop assistant and the extra virgin olive oil. After an absence
of a month or two, she has finally returned and over the last two weeks, I have always nodded to her when passing and her back..nothing said,just acknowledgemnt. Anyway on Thursday I see
this young assistant [who I didnt recognise] looking after the self service tellers. I went to one of the machines and while checking my groceries,she sidled up behind me [to use Rudy's misleading expression
and said, "Hi, how are you today?"I replied, "Pretty good luv, for an old bloke" she giggled and I further said, "but I hate wearing these bloody masks!"
She said, "yes that's why I am not wearing my glasses, they fog up all the time" I said, "Ahh that's why I didn't recognise you!'shelaughed. Masks are now compulsory.
Third incident was yesterday and gave me the idea of returning to mention these things. Same shop Woolworths, where some of the assistants know me by now...I decided to approach a supervisor...a female supervisor by the way, and explained briefly
that I had addressed the young assistant as Luv [ the supervisor was around 50ish] She seemed surprised and said that no one had complained. When I mentioned the excuse that Donald and Rudy continually raise re being afraid of losing their jobs etc, she said
"Havn't these people learnt that we have unions that most of our girls and guys are in? "Bloody fun police again!the same idiots are trying to change Australia day!!"
Just to be quite clear Alex with regards to the continuing lies from Donald and Rudy...I don't simply approach "young women" in fact one was at least my age...the one that said, "excuse me Luv, I only have one item, can I get in front of you?" There was no slap on the bum by me as Donald likes to fabricate...
It was me getting the slap on the bum by a blonde when much much younger....I don't find such casual banter as harmful, and the proof is evident everyday.
I actually regret needing to return to convey all this Alex, but thought it was necessary. Many other lies by both Donald and Rudy also, but too many to go into, suffice to say, that my beahviour will continue unabbated as described for one simple reason. Because it is common everyday banter without any malice.
My respect goes out to all I come in contact with, male and female, equally, although the female being different, actually probably get the better end of the stick with me standing up for them
on public transport etc.
You look after yourself Alex and really, don't be to concerned with the nonsense being purpetrated on this forum by Donald and Ruby. They have a fanatical caause or movement to uphold and are not being to successful in it being implemented. One thing I have picked up, is the terminology "fun police"love it!!
In essence though, I would say that Donald and Rudy to have one thing going for them. The many likes from dmoe!! you know, that bastion of reasonability, of honesty
of logic, of sensibility.
Sorry no emojis Alex, as I am doing this on word procesor and copy and pasting it in the forum...the least time I need to deal with these fools the better.
One thing in life I have learnt Alex, is that the extreme nonsense of the right, like the 'proud boys"and other right wing orginizations that the real Donald and Rudy push, are no better or no worse then the extreme leftish views being pushed here with regards to stupid inane political correctness terms etc.
One also needs to ask themselves [well at least Donald and Rudy] why the likes of Germaine Greer, Bettina Arndt and Ita Buttrose are now poo pooing the extreme feminazi's movement etc.
seeya Alex!!!

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

the issue is Paddoboy.

Silly me I was taken in by the title..Everyday Sexism.

Sorry I did not mean to spoil a great witch hunt.

Its about getting Paddo and we dont need solid evidence to do that.

Just because you are unaware of the sexual reference and the double entendre posted by paddoboy, it does not mean that James is wrong.

Absolute rubbish.

If there was a double entendre James should be able to prove it and he cant..that is the fact... another fact is he ignores my effort to point to the common usage that I personally have experienced, he ignores Micks dictionary reference...and now you make the unsupported claim that I just dont know...er did you miss my two accounts of how the word is used? And does it not seem rather odd and indeed perverted that James' dictionary only mentions a sexual reference..nothing about machinery..nothing nothing nothing...could it be that the dictionary is worthless..as worthless as James mind reading attempts when carrying out his duty as fun police.

Get real..provide evidence or back down.

To be clear... if you make a claim as did James then back it up with more than dribble scrapped up from a dirty mind out of touch with reality...oh oh oh...I asked another person, a lady re lubricate ..wait rather than me tell you what she said lets get James with his mind reading ability to tell us...well my survey is growing..and its not looking good for professed mind readers.

All I can suggest is if one wants to make a claim that someone has certain thoughts then get some evidence is that unreasonable..well is it..I would like to hear your view of the requirement for evidence.

If you tell people that a woman kept you well lubricated, they will not think you are talking about machinery!

And yet my enquiry tells me that at least those folk follow the common usage definition as outlined in the dictionary Mick looked up...perhaps rather than say if you ask folk ...the best course would be to actually ask folk..that way we would know what they think wouldn't we?

How can you think that you can make such a sweeping unsupported statement and for one moment not be called out for talking thru your hat...my view is.. in your defence you are enabling me to point out the need for evidence and not to say stupid things.

But you aren't on my side.

So you are not on the side
fairness, the need of evidence, to address issues on a subjective basis, to avoid totalitarism, that there are many issues wherein women are not respected that must be addressed..that bullying and abuse is wrong, that one should not assert that they know what another is a thinking...that domestic violence needs more attention...

Oh of course your side is only about Paddo boy...thank goodness you dont dislike him and can still apply a high degree of rational thought to the issue..him I mean..the bastard.

You are defending paddoboy's behaviour and putting it down to his age and how it's common for people his age to behave this way.

I think it is clear that I am defending the right of folk not to be treated in line with what you think they are thinking..I call for the abolition of the fun police particularly their mind reading department...further I support that recognition must be extended to the actual reality and context of the usage you complain about...the fact is the practice is common... it does not matter to you... you want to ignore the common usage but clearly you dont get to places where it is normal..anyways if folk read what I have said I believe my rational fair approach will appeal to those happy to see a fair approach rather than employing the judgemental approach we see from you and James.

Already we have enough input to show that some people are concerned some are not..yet you demand that the views of others be ignored and that your morality or standard be the only standard that should prevail.....you clearly think you are somehow above these folk who carry on in their way and that they must bend to your morality...well what decent person would not tell you to take a flying leap and recognise that you have no right to tell anyone how they should act...now as I said I dont like being called love etc but I recognise that folk do this..and yes because it is common place that does actually give it authority over that which is not...the problem is you do not want to actually think about what I say because..well to you I am on the side of Paddo..that bastard.

And you again fail to see the point that the behaviour itself is problematic.

I provided you with around half a dozen links showing why his behaviour is problematic in general.

This tells me you read my posts selectively..this practice leaves you ignoring what I have said and my comments upon the issue...I have repeatedly made statements that clearly show I understand what the issue is....I am not wasting my time going over it yet again... anyone who actually reads all I have said can only realise my position is not represented honestly by you...and hang the thread title lets get back to Paddo..that bastard.

You are chopping and changing, from saying 'yes, it's bad' and then immediately defending it and condoning it because of his age.

What is so difficult for you to see the following.

A..the use of familiar talk upon a stranger is best avoided...I dont like it and have said so more than I can recall in this thread but you ignore that I have said so.

The problem is yours I state my position you at best ignore it.. at worse case you (..more James really..he does it all the time but is rather clumbsy) try and twist what I have said so as to give my words in some cases a meaning opppsite

B..the practise is perhaps entirely confined to old people...although where I buy my Kabab in Lismore the girl there calls me " darling" (and no I wont risk getting a bad kabab by pulling her up...she calls everyone darling ... ) is around 30 ..and life goes to go on without the mind reading fun police...

C..It has not been shown that such familar talk has any ingredient of malice.

D.. some areas the practice is very common place and in some areas the practice is non existent. You clearly have no experience in areas where the practice is common place..I can accept that..can you?

E..It can be reasonably safely assumed and I expect supported by research that old folk become entrenched in their habits.

Well most humans do but certainly old folk exhibit they are stuck in their ways and this fact would suggest that perhaps they could be treated somewhat differently because of age..different treatment due to age has precedent within the law given children under 8 can not be guilty of any crime..

From looking at myself I think I am fortunate because I " keep up with the times" but it was very difficult for me to to use email for example as I was used to writing letters on paper and mailing them..in law that was a big part of the day, picking up the mail from the post office, opening the mail, organising it for response and at the end of the day reading the letters of reply typed by the secretary correcting them or signing them folding them up and taking them all to the post office...all my working life..tell me it is easy to just change from that approach and habit...you see where I am going here...now if one is reasonable one could see that if someone has called others luv all their life..having learned that from mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, aunts and uncles and the movies for all their lives is there no case for minding your own business and leaving them alone to live out their remaing decade with out being called bad and contributing to the evil in the world..particularly when the main culprits go un scrutinised even on what should be a progressive forum like this...the evil of the church is defended and yet these old folk are run down ...that seems very od and it should seem odd to any decent human.

You aren't arguing for yourself. You aren't speaking for yourself.

I agree..I argue for evidence and against bullying, abuse, mind reading and inability to avoid an objective assessment where only subjectivity can see a fair go.

Paddo..that bastard.. we should not need evidence to hang him.

PARODY ALERT...

Who cares about anything Paddo says in his defence when we all know he is guilty.

Did you see what James said he was thinking...what a slease Paddo is thinking about vaginas and stuff..oh wait ..we dont know what Paddo was thinking but we know what James says he was thinking..what more do we need...

parody complete.


Sarcasm alert
To answer the question posed..what more do we need...more links to pointing out bad behaviour...more links does away with the need for actual evidence dont you know...sarcasm over.

 

[Bells]

Alex: Firstly thanks for your efforts, as futile as they may be. I first decided to take a look back yesterday and see what had transpired.
I was correct. The usual lies, slurs, and deliberate misinterpretations by two in particular...let's call them Trump and Gialiani, as in Donald and Rudy,
I am unable to think of a better annalogous example.

Okay Harvey..

The first of those....While having a beer at Easts with a mate, I approached one of the bar attendants that looked after us and kept us well lubricated
on our reunion. I mentioned the "lubricated bit that Donald continually lies about, and the casual everyday banter by herself and us blokes. She pissed herself laughing and
went on to say that the "fun police" are getting more and more desperate everyday. Then I asked her age. She replied 36 years old, and I then said, shit Luv, I told them you were in your twenties.
She then returned the compliment and said I look nowhere near 76 years old.

You still completely miss the point, don't you?

The second incident concerns the little Woolworths shop assistant and the extra virgin olive oil. After an absence
of a month or two, she has finally returned and over the last two weeks, I have always nodded to her when passing and her back..nothing said,just acknowledgemnt. Anyway on Thursday I see
this young assistant [who I didnt recognise] looking after the self service tellers. I went to one of the machines and while checking my groceries,she sidled up behind me [to use Rudy's misleading expression
and said, "Hi, how are you today?"I replied, "Pretty good luv, for an old bloke" she giggled and I further said, "but I hate wearing these bloody masks!"
She said, "yes that's why I am not wearing my glasses, they fog up all the time" I said, "Ahh that's why I didn't recognise you!'shelaughed. Masks are now compulsory.
Third incident was yesterday and gave me the idea of returning to mention these things. Same shop Woolworths, where some of the assistants know me by now...I decided to approach a supervisor...a female supervisor by the way, and explained briefly
that I had addressed the young assistant as Luv [ the supervisor was around 50ish] She seemed surprised and said that no one had complained. When I mentioned the excuse that Donald and Rudy continually raise re being afraid of losing their jobs etc, she said
"Havn't these people learnt that we have unions that most of our girls and guys are in? "Bloody fun police again!the same idiots are trying to change Australia day!!"

To the one, I simply don't believe you.

To the other, you still completely miss the whole point.

Here are some examples of what Australian unions of retail and workers have found when it comes to sexual harassment issues in Australia..

https://humanrights.gov.au/about/ne...-retail-and-fast-food-workers-finds-women-and
https://sexualharassmentclaims.com.au/union-accuses-mcdonalds-of-sexual-harassment/
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/it-s-ev...st-mcdonald-s-over-systemic-sexual-harassment
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10...being-sexually-harassed-by-customers/11645556

So, yeah.. Try harder..

Oh, I nearly forgot:

Younger workers are much less likely to be union members than older workers. Just over six per cent of employees aged 15 to 24 years were union members compared with 13 per cent of employees aged 25 to 44 years and 19 per cent of employees aged 45 to 64 years. One of the major reasons for lower union membership among young people is they are much more likely to be working on a casual and/or part–time basis compared to older workers.
[https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parlia...ntary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1819/UnionMembership]​

I guess that's why you pick your targets so well, huh?

Just to be quite clear Alex with regards to the continuing lies from Donald and Rudy...I don't simply approach "young women" in fact one was at least my age...the one that said, "excuse me Luv, I only have one item, can I get in front of you?" There was no slap on the bum by me as Donald likes to fabricate...
It was me getting the slap on the bum by a blonde when much much younger....I don't find such casual banter as harmful, and the proof is evident everyday.

Half your age are young women.

And you continue to normalise said behaviour which feeds into a toxic environment for women.

Not to mention the fact that you come across as a perv.

My respect goes out to all I come in contact with, male and female, equally, although the female being different, actually probably get the better end of the stick with me standing up for them
on public transport etc.

That's why you don't call the men you come across as "luv" or ask them to keep you lubricated.

You save that for the women.. Because they are different.

One also needs to ask themselves [well at least Donald and Rudy] why the likes of Germaine Greer, Bettina Arndt and Ita Buttrose are now poo pooing the extreme feminazi's movement etc.

Hmm..

Germaine Greer has called for the lowering of punishment for rape and said society should not see it as a “spectacularly violent crime” but instead view it more as “lazy, careless and insensitive”.

She suggested that a fitting sentence for the offence might be 200 hours’ community service and perhaps an “r” tattoo on the rapist’s hand, arm or cheek.

[...]

“Most rape is just lazy, just careless, insensitive. Every time a man rolls over on his exhausted wife and insists on enjoying his conjugal rights he is raping her. It will never end up in a court of law.

“Instead of thinking of rape as a spectacularly violent crime, and some rapes are, think about it as non consensual … that is bad sex. Sex where there is no communication, no tenderness, no mention of love.”
[https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/may/30/germaine-greer-calls-for-punishment-for-to-be-reduced]​

I mean, I can see why the likes of Greer appeals to you. You're just that type, aren't you paddoboy?

After all, her history of repulsive comments on young boys, her transphobia, her sexism.. Her own perversions and excuses for it speaks directly to you, doesn't it?

 

[Michael 345]

If I call you —or your significant other — Honey, Sweetie, Dear, Babe, Pumpkin, Peanut, Darlin’, etc...it’s not because I’m hot for you.
It’s just that I can’t remember your name.
#bartenderproblems #Istillknowwhatyoudrink #wisconsin

Here are some fertile fields to plow

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

How do you know he holds no malice?

You got me there.

I dont know he holds no malice but oddly you do not know that he does have malice.

But of course we can mind read and seeing upon popular vote we all say he has malice then he is voted to have malice...you just dont get it do you...you can not hang someone just because you hate them...you still need evidence to support your claim.

If someone knows behaviour is bad and can be harmful and they still keep doing it, how can you say that person hold's no malice?

He admits he can see the point but claims he is not guilty..if he thought it was wrong no doubt he would stop.

If you can show otherwise please do.

His contention is everything he has done is indeed without malice and if you want it otherwise and say that is a lie you need to prove it using some sort of evidence.

He claims no malice and as I can not prove otherwise that is why I can say..I dont know..which is what I should have said opposed to saying he has none..

I really dont know..but you dont win by default as you dont know either.

Because we do not know if he held malice or not.

He says none that is what you need to prove is wrong and avoid just making an unsupported judgement.

That would be fair.

He knows it's harmful. But he keeps doing it.

To me that indicates absolute malice.

You could be on your way...but I think he accepts it could harmful be but has yet to see that in anyone he has interacted with..so there is that difference..if it can be shown he was told by someone not to do it and he kept doing it to annoy them them I will go get my rope.

Bullshit

My claim is no wilder than many you have offerred.

And as I have noted to you before, this behaviour, this disregard for women and our fundamental human rights predates religion and Hollywood.

Although I can happily agree that the abuse of women predates hollywood I can not agree that it predates religion...I can make a good case that when we look thru the bible the degrading of women is the unfortunate norm and to take any claim past there is really unnecessary given the church has been a mainstay of Western culture for 2000 plus years...if you want to deny that the bible treats woman badly go ahead but you would be very very very very wrong...and perhaps explain why no high positions are held by women in the church...to deny the church treats women as second class is just naive and ignoring the reality.

You're just looking for an easy cop-out.

To deny the facts as I point out, present quotes and links suggests it is you who are taking the cop out.
I presume your failure to comment on the church can only mean one thing ... However we have the quotes, we have the research ..we have real evidence...face it.

Except for the women that paddoboy harasses. For them, 'there's no malice'.

You have yet to establish what you claim.

If you respected women, you would not have defended paddoboy's behaviour and condoned it.

Everyone has the right to a fair trial.

You are demanding justice for the perpetrator...

That is who has the right to justice.
They are accused they have the right to justice..would you have it any other way.
And remember I do not believe you have established any of your claims against Paddo..if you had established them then I would not be saying over and over....
where is the evidence...I have evidence that the church had a lot to answer for yet you ignore it.
Funny you avoid evidence but using evidence we can find the truth..dont you think.

You are demanding justice and a pass for the sexual harasser.

I am demanding justice and for that we really should have evidence which you dont have and forgive me if I ignore James and his mind reading thing.

It is clear he failed...he still insists on ignoring the evidence and testomony...

Seeing it is clear cut in your view why dont you present your case like I did earlier.
Take the worst case and show what Paddo did wrong and your evidence to rebute any claim he offers.

You are also demanding that he be allowed to continue sexually harassing young women who are unable to say no or refuse or complain about it because of his age and because you don't think there is any malice behind his sexually harassing these young women.. And in that sense, you don't even think what he is doing is sexual harassment, ergo it's not harmful and without malice..

You take what you like but I think if passers by read all I have said it will be interpreted much different to the way you put...

So when you try and tout yourself as a sort of champion for women's rights, etc, it's hard to take you seriously when you spend the entire time defending a man who openly boasts about how he targets young women and sexually harasses them because he knows he can get away with it and that they won't complain.

It would be easy to take me seriously if you could focus on what I say and not let your hatred of Paddo blind you for the need of evidence, to accept the research that tells us the teaching of the church have been identified as at least a big part of the problem...such that other religions are taking steps to be decent.

Anyways it is I that point out that justice must be done, it is I that raise domestic violence and all others ignore it...it is I that have helped women find safety from abusive husbands and gotbinjuctions to keep them safe.. it is I that worked in the courts seeing day in day out the problem and reading the reports from councilling ( all parties with children were assessed by on staff councillors ) which first made me realise that religion is greatly to blame...it is not my imagination..folk just ignore the problem..as I said its like a drug that leaves you high but incapable of seeing the evil...look at you... no comment other than..oh no my father was a Catholic therefore all your research aint worth looking at...mmmm kinda not looking at the real problem...you think going after Paddo will hush up the churches roll...


The evidence shows the church tells women to suck it up and pray that god will stop the abuse or give the victim strength to endure... you ignore all of that... ..your father I can safely assume was a good and decent man and you are very lucky that the evil of the church did not rub off on him but it would be grave folly to think he was in any way representative of their teaching on how to regard a woman.

Thanks for giving me something to think about.

Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

One thing in life I have learnt Alex, is that the extreme nonsense of the right, like the 'proud boys"and other right wing orginizations that the real Donald and Rudy push, are no better or no worse then the extreme leftish views being pushed here with regards to stupid inane political correctness terms etc.

Folk who are over the top are losers..lieing to make your case is wrong..James is far from honest in his allegation re lubricbating but what nails him is his failure to back off when we have an entry in support as posted by Mick and my two examples, I have a third from a female...then he posts a definition which is only about sex..nothing about cars or machinery...the man is not genuine.

I hope you are well, I have some problems that are not fun to deal with but not complaing.

Keep safe.

Alex

 

[DaveC426913]

This just turned up on my feed.

 

[paddoboy]

Okay Harvey..

Except I'm not charged with sexual crimes, am I?

You still completely miss the point, don't you?

Na, hit the nail fair square on the head.

To the one, I simply don't believe you.

What you believe is your business, but it is factual, and of course none of your links say anything about casual banter like Luv as sexual assault, that view simply is a product of [as Alex rightly points out] a dirty mind.

So, yeah.. Try harder..

Perhaps you need to try harder, but don't burst a blood vessel doing it.

Younger workers are much less likely to be union members than older workers.​

I guess that's why you pick your targets so well, huh?

But not all hey? You need to do better again..

Half your age are young women.

Except the one around 75ish hey! and the 50ish bank teller, hey...but mentioning them ruins your crusade doesn't it Bells...Never mind, Donald will be here later to support you.

And you continue to normalise said behaviour which feeds into a toxic environment for women.

My behaviour is normal and par for the course, and none of your business to boot.

Not to mention the fact that you come across as a perv.

And you come across as an embittered old woman.

That's why you don't call the men you come across as "luv" or ask them to keep you lubricated.

On calling another man Luv, your correct, I don't do it as I am not gay...On the second re lubrication, sure1 many many times, but that also doesn't fit in with a fertile dirty mind does it?

You save that for the women.. Because they are different.

Women are different the last time I looked.

Germaine Greer ​

​

Yeah the former bastion and hero of the women's movement...thing is many support her

PS; My Mrs thinks you are bloody crazy by the way, as she is now standing over my shoulder.
[But that also puts a hole in your crusade, doesn't it?

Let's get it clear, and deflate the lies from Donald and Rudy...
I indulge in casual banter as listed, and will continue to do so, and the women of all age groups that I do interact with, also indulge in the same casual sort of casual banter, be they bar attendants, bank tellers, supervisors, casual women in check out lines, ambulance attendants, or police officers.
I suggest you and your kind, stop trying to ram your new age crap down mine and others throat.


Sorry again, just needed to correct some lies.

 

[paddoboy]

Folk who are over the top are losers..lieing to make your case is wrong..James is far from honest in his allegation re lubricbating but what nails him is his failure to back off when we have an entry in support as posted by Mick and my two examples, I have a third from a female...then he posts a definition which is only about sex..nothing about cars or machinery...the man is not genuine.

I hope you are well, I have some problems that are not fun to deal with but not complaing.

Keep safe.

Alex

Hi Alex...Agreed and really its far more then the lubricating lie. I'm not sure how many times I have told him that it wasn't me slapping any blonde on the Bum when I was younger, it was her slapping me on the bum...but he continues to say what supports his crusade. And the extra virgin olive oil and young shop assistant...always guessing that I said it with a smirk and double meaning...The lies are continuious.

The thing is Alex, it won't change anything...society [and me with it] will continue as is and as I described. Yet these little piss ants continue on their crusade while real sexual assault continues and without comment.
Sorry I came back again, just needed to clear up the lies...having fun elsewhere, where thankfully, my time is not called upon as much, and I don't need to neglect other things. Mrs says I'm spending too much time with these idiots! And I have my little project in Fiji to keep tabs on!
Take it easy and Mick too [poor bastard locked up in Bali somewhere...gotta feel for him broken shoulder and all.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

If anyone ever wonders why many women don't report accounts of sexual harassment, rape or any other sexual misconduct shortly after it's occurred or even at all - remember this thread. Women are often not believed because men excuse their behavior as jokes, and playfulness - or worse - they suggest that the women encouraged it, even liked it.

2021, and the beat goes on. . .

If you look at the research within the Woman and Religion thread you will find that the reasons given by actual victims are rather condeming for the church...their reason basically comes from not being treated well by the church...Anyways read it ..but if you don't read that research you can ignore it right? I would like you to read the research, watch the videos and then tell me it's threads like this that are the problem.

In this thread there is no evidence to back up any claim of misconduct and all allegations are clearly driven by a dislike for Paddo ( and myself it now seems) whilst ignoring that evidence is required.

What is the evidence against Paddo...do you know or in your effort to belong you really dont need evidence as what the others say is ok..you have faith right.

Look at Bells last disgusting attempt by calling Paddo "Harvey" ..pretty damn horrible when there is no evidence that one thing Paddo has been called out for is sinister..the guy that Bells referr3d to is a sex offender...do you think it is ok to call Paddo a sex offender...I don't know of any charges so really what entitles Bells to slander him in this way...this is a mindless witch hunt..particularly when I come along and say bullying and abuse is wrong...not a peep out of anyone.. I ask where is the evidence but no one has any other than dirty minded claims that Paddo means something dirty..now like it or not James is wrong..as proved over and over... he could offer evidence to support his claim but no just throw mud..Weggs that is wrong.
Bells and you just will not consider the research which points to very serious matters, matters that if addressed can only improve things for women...Then you all say that I for example don't see the problem...well I do and have since I was a kid and further later actually have acted to help which is more than any of you can say...no let's jump on old folk ...I hope it makes you feel as though you are contributing to a better world but in truth you are not..and you won't even read the research that clearly shows the church massively contributes to the problem...I don't know how you can justify your position but you seem to think the behaviour complained about is so much worse than the quotes of church leaders saying women are second class or the research that shows Christian men use the bible to justify bad behaviour which firstly you think does not occur and if it does that is not as bad as old folk calling folk luv etc..your views are out of wack.

Alex

Alex.

 

[Bells]

Silly me I was taken in by the title..Everyday Sexism.

Sorry I did not mean to spoil a great witch hunt.

Its about getting Paddo and we dont need solid evidence to do that.

Paddoboy and his continued sexism.. Everyday sexism is paddoboy.. Especially in the context of this thread.

You do know how this thread came about, don't you? His casual everyday sexism.

Paddoboy has been exhibiting his sexism for years on this site. We've done this macabre dance too many times to count.

Absolute rubbish.

If there was a double entendre James should be able to prove it and he cant..that is the fact... another fact is he ignores my effort to point to the common usage that I personally have experienced, he ignores Micks dictionary reference...and now you make the unsupported claim that I just dont know...er did you miss my two accounts of how the word is used? And does it not seem rather odd and indeed perverted that James' dictionary only mentions a sexual reference..nothing about machinery..nothing nothing nothing...could it be that the dictionary is worthless..as worthless as James mind reading attempts when carrying out his duty as fun police.

Wow..

The language.. It's as though you and paddoboy are one and the same.

You seem to be obsessed with the use of that term.. Nay, you seem more offended by the interpretation and how it comes across than you are by the man who used it about a woman half his age.

Tell me, do you think he'd have used that term if he was describing a male bartender? Do you think he'd have walked up to a male bartender and commented about how he was keeping paddoboy well lubricated?

Get real..provide evidence or back down.

To be clear... if you make a claim as did James then back it up with more than dribble scrapped up from a dirty mind out of touch with reality...oh oh oh...I asked another person, a lady re lubricate ..wait rather than me tell you what she said lets get James with his mind reading ability to tell us...well my survey is growing..and its not looking good for professed mind readers.

All I can suggest is if one wants to make a claim that someone has certain thoughts then get some evidence is that unreasonable..well is it..I would like to hear your view of the requirement for evidence.

I'm sorry, did you miss the half a dozen links or so that I provided that details and explains how young women in retail and front line customer positions face constant sexual harassment, from "luv" to comments about their appearance to sexual innuendo, etc?

That is evidence. That is hundreds of women detailing how the behaviour paddoboy exhibits when he's out in public is seen. It also details how these young women are afraid to speak up or speak out about it..

Why are you deliberately choosing to ignore it?

You have had two women participating in this thread, telling paddoboy and you that his behaviour is not acceptable and that he should refrain from addressing women who are strangers to him in such a familiar manner.. Do our voices not count here?

Do the hundreds of women who speak out about men who behave as paddoboy behave not count? Or is the only thing you are interested in is "playing devil's advocate" and effectively pretending to be offended when your own behaviour comes into question between doing your red hot best to defend paddoboy's sexual harassment of women - because you were a lawyer that apparently defended women's rights? Given your behaviour here, I don't really believe that you cared or care now.

Because no one who claims to be a bastion of women's rights and equality like you have tried to paint yourself, would ever drag themselves down into the gutter to defend a man who openly boasts about how he sexually harasses young women in their workplaces where it is known that they often refuse to speak up about it for fear of being fired.

And yet my enquiry tells me that at least those folk follow the common usage definition as outlined in the dictionary Mick looked up...perhaps rather than say if you ask folk ...the best course would be to actually ask folk..that way we would know what they think wouldn't we?

How can you think that you can make such a sweeping unsupported statement and for one moment not be called out for talking thru your hat...my view is.. in your defence you are enabling me to point out the need for evidence and not to say stupid things.

Wow, you're really hung up on this point, aren't you?

Ask him if he'd make similar comments about a male bartender. Ask him if he'd ever walk up to a male bartender and comment about how said bartender was keeping him well lubricated.

The common definition of lubricate is to reduce friction.. Perhaps you should consider why a man like paddoboy and his history, he felt the need to comment that the young women working in the bar, did well to keep him and his mates well lubricated. Why he used that term. You can also ask him why he also tried to argue that all parties to his sexual innuendo with his "common banter" are "consenting adults"..

In other words, paddoboy has made sure to describe and explain his behaviour in a certain way.

So you are not on the side
fairness, the need of evidence, to address issues on a subjective basis, to avoid totalitarism, that there are many issues wherein women are not respected that must be addressed..that bullying and abuse is wrong, that one should not assert that they know what another is a thinking...that domestic violence needs more attention...

Oh of course your side is only about Paddo boy...thank goodness you dont dislike him and can still apply a high degree of rational thought to the issue..him I mean..the bastard.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Was I not clear enough from the get go?

I'm on the side of women that men like paddoboy like to use their position and privilege to harass them and call them cutesy names to make sure those women know where they are in the pecking order.

You go on and on about bullying and abuse.

But you say very little about paddoboy's behaviour, which you yourself try to claim is not acceptable at random intervals when it suits you..

I think it is clear that I am defending the right of folk not to be treated in line with what you think they are thinking..

I treat paddoboy like a pervert because his words describe himself as a pervert. Why do I think he's a pervert? Because paddoboy is very selective in who and how he sexually harasses women. This isn't general behaviour. He saves the special names for the younger women. Not the managers as he himself advises. He saves it for the younger retail staff - the staff it is well known are often too afraid to talk back as has been documented repeatedly in this thread with numerous links.

 

[Bells]

I call for the abolition of the fun police particularly their mind reading department...further I support that recognition must be extended to the actual reality and context of the usage you complain about...the fact is the practice is common... it does not matter to you... you want to ignore the common usage but clearly you dont get to places where it is normal..anyways if folk read what I have said I believe my rational fair approach will appeal to those happy to see a fair approach rather than employing the judgemental approach we see from you and James.

Poor you and men like paddoboy... The fun police is telling you that sexually harassing women in their places of work is bad. However will you go on?!

This tells me you read my posts selectively..this practice leaves you ignoring what I have said and my comments upon the issue...I have repeatedly made statements that clearly show I understand what the issue is....I am not wasting my time going over it yet again... anyone who actually reads all I have said can only realise my position is not represented honestly by you...and hang the thread title lets get back to Paddo..that bastard.

Says the man demanding evidence and then keeps demanding it even after numerous links are provided..

I have read everything you have said in this thread Alex. Perhaps that's the issue, isn't it? From your 'oh I'm an old man, forgive me' schtick to your current feral attitude towards me for daring to speak out about his sexual harassment..

You're more concerned that paddoboy may be bullied (he's not) than you are about how he harasses women. What does that say about you, exactly?

What is so difficult for you to see the following.

A..the use of familiar talk upon a stranger is best avoided...I dont like it and have said so more than I can recall in this thread but you ignore that I have said so.

The problem is yours I state my position you at best ignore it.. at worse case you (..more James really..he does it all the time but is rather clumbsy) try and twist what I have said so as to give my words in some cases a meaning opppsite

You keep contradicting yourself.

you want to ignore the common usage but clearly you dont get to places where it is normal

This you?

The issue is that the "common usage" is why it's so bad.

You still have not gotten that point?

The common usage is everyday sexism.

B..the practise is perhaps entirely confined to old people...although where I buy my Kabab in Lismore the girl there calls me " darling" (and no I wont risk getting a bad kabab by pulling her up...she calls everyone darling ... ) is around 30 ..and life goes to go on without the mind reading fun police...

Again, why do you insist on demanding that old people should simply be forgiven or ignored when they behave badly?

C..It has not been shown that such familar talk has any ingredient of malice.

How do you know?

He's been told that some women may not appreciate or like it and that it may make some women uncomfortable. For most people with a functioning brain cells, they stop the behaviour, because they know that they could be making someone uncomfortable or unhappy. Not paddoboy though. No. He persists in doing it. That is malice. Because he does not care about how the recipient may feel about it.

D.. some areas the practice is very common place and in some areas the practice is non existent. You clearly have no experience in areas where the practice is common place..I can accept that..can you?

On the contrary.

But it's reserved for people who know each other and are familiar with each other. Otherwise it comes across as condescending.

E..It can be reasonably safely assumed and I expect supported by research that old folk become entrenched in their habits.

Bill Crosby was entrenched in his habit of sexually assaulting women after drugging them. Should he have been absolved of responsibility because he's an old man and well, it's what he's always known and was common for him?

Well most humans do but certainly old folk exhibit they are stuck in their ways and this fact would suggest that perhaps they could be treated somewhat differently because of age..different treatment due to age has precedent within the law given children under 8 can not be guilty of any crime..

So you want the law to treat "old folks" as though they have diminished capacity? You're just the gift that keeps on giving!

What if it's rape? Assault? Abuse? Murder? Stalking? They can't be tried because of their age?

From looking at myself I think I am fortunate because I " keep up with the times" but it was very difficult for me to to use email for example as I was used to writing letters on paper and mailing them..

Right..

You keep up with the times. It's why you still can't just get the whole "lubricate" thing..

in law that was a big part of the day, picking up the mail from the post office, opening the mail, organising it for response and at the end of the day reading the letters of reply typed by the secretary correcting them or signing them folding them up and taking them all to the post office...all my working life..tell me it is easy to just change from that approach and habit...you see where I am going here...now if one is reasonable one could see that if someone has called others luv all their life..having learned that from mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, aunts and uncles and the movies for all their lives is there no case for minding your own business and leaving them alone to live out their remaing decade with out being called bad and contributing to the evil in the world..particularly when the main culprits go un scrutinised even on what should be a progressive forum like this...the evil of the church is defended and yet these old folk are run down ...that seems very od and it should seem odd to any decent human.

If you need to learn to not sexually harass women, would you like me to provide you with some reading material? I can even make sure that it's on paper.

I agree..I argue for evidence and against bullying, abuse, mind reading and inability to avoid an objective assessment where only subjectivity can see a fair go.

You do realise we are all going on what he is saying, yes?

Who cares about anything Paddo says in his defence when we all know he is guilty.

Did you see what James said he was thinking...what a slease Paddo is thinking about vaginas and stuff..oh wait ..we dont know what Paddo was thinking but we know what James says he was thinking..what more do we need...

Wait.. You mean you missed the part when paddoboy decided it was a good idea to explain his virility at me a few years ago, after I told him how he spoke to women was not acceptable? 'Cos only non perverts do that, right Alex?

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

And I have my little project in Fiji

They are haters and often hate is driven by jealousy...I really think they are jealous...they clearly don't get out much, don't interact with folk at the shops, probably have never had a night at the pub...I posted a video which says folk like this create a reality that suits their beliefs and clearly, object as he does, James is a perfect fit for the stereotype in the video...look at the lubrication thing...and the definition he finds in some shit dictionary...it tells me every thing about the guy...Anyways it is clear that they have the mob here bullied into submission as no one has come forward to oppose them...they have probably tried in the past and now like me and presumably you say to themselves ...why bother with these folk they have no power to reason...they are brain dead....that is also covered in the video..folk like you and me will only be disappointed because we have a reasonable expectation that arguement will be logical and apparently that is a common feature that you won't get it from them..like don't tell us what you were thinking I know then accuse you of the filth they allow in their minds..look how I set out that I think this and that then you get a reply and it's like fuck don't they read anything?

My latest thing to present is the contribution of the church which given they make up a large part of our culture is worth taking into account....these ding bats won't read the research or admit that perhaps the stand of the church is way more serious than calling someone luv....but James can make stuff up..thats ok..
Bells referring to you as Harvey is just so wrong...you should sue her for defamation.

I am keeping notes don't worry.

Irrational misguided folk ..

Alex

 

[Bells]

Look at Bells last disgusting attempt by calling Paddo "Harvey" ..pretty damn horrible when there is no evidence that one thing Paddo has been called out for is sinister..the guy that Bells referr3d to is a sex offender...do you think it is ok to call Paddo a sex offender...I don't know of any charges so really what entitles Bells to slander him in this way...this is a mindless witch hunt..particularly when I come along and say bullying and abuse is wrong...not a peep out of anyone..

Perhaps you missed the part where paddoboy referred to us as Donald and Rudy - as in Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani. You know, the "pussy grabber" and accused sexual abuser and the other one who lay down on a bed and shoved his hands down his pants and fondled his bits in front of a young woman because he thought he was going to get sex...

Not a peep out of you!

Do you know why I called him Harvey?

Because Harvey's behaviour was the norm for decades - aka the 'casting couch' analogy..

Because each time paddoboy whines that his behaviour is common and the norm, I immediately hark back to Harvey and the casting couch - that was common and the norm for the majority of women trying to get work in the entertainment industry. And I think about how sunshine shone a light on their perverted behaviour and how they fought against being outed.. Funny how that behaviour just kind of repeats itself when it's this subject matter, huh?

Bells and you just will not consider the research which points to very serious matters, matters that if addressed can only improve things for women.. well I do and have since I was a kid and further later actually have acted to help which is more than any of you can say

Yes.

Because Wegs and I need a man like you to tell us what is good for us, Alex!

Please, tell us!

If anyone wants a perfect example of everyday sexism, you just provided it.

no let's jump on old folk ...I hope it makes you feel as though you are contributing to a better world but in truth you are not..

Ah, the "old folk" argument again.

Should we treat you like a child who does not know better:

Well most humans do but certainly old folk exhibit they are stuck in their ways and this fact would suggest that perhaps they could be treated somewhat differently because of age..different treatment due to age has precedent within the law given children under 8 can not be guilty of any crime..

Or would you prefer that we treat you as though you are too stupid to know better because you had a religious upbringing?

and you won't even read the research that clearly shows the church massively contributes to the problem...I don't know how you can justify your position but you seem to think the behaviour complained about is so much worse than the quotes of church leaders saying women are second class or the research that shows Christian men use the bible to justify bad behaviour which firstly you think does not occur and if it does that is not as bad as old folk calling folk luv etc..your views are out of wack.

Where do you think the Church got its beliefs from?

Society.

The behaviour predates the Church.

And I can assure you, Wegs and I know more about how women are treated in society than you will ever know or understand.

 

[paddoboy]

Perhaps you missed the part where paddoboy referred to us as Donald and Rudy - as in Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani. You know, the "pussy grabber" and accused sexual abuser and the other one who lay down on a bed and shoved his hands down his pants and fondled his bits in front of a young woman because he thought he was going to get sex...

No, because as I said, because both Trump and Guliani are known for their lying and distortion in the current situation and previously...just as you and James have done, and as you continue to do to support your little crusade/movement.
Wake up Rudy, this lying is not looking good for you or James.