Everyday sexism

Alex, when was the last time you read up on defamation laws in Australia?

If I had used his real name, photo or anything that clearly identified him, if I had caused him damage or harm by that reference and application of context, if I had damaged his reputation or say, for example, his relationships with others or even, as one example, affected his ability to get a job, then you might have had a point. He goes by the name of paddoboy on an internet forum. No one knows who he is. He's having a rip roaring time going about his life, hardly exhibiting any damage or lasting negative affects on his life, nor has he suffered any actual harm as a result by his own commentary of what he's getting up to.

Your legal bluster? You really should stop.

Here is what you said:

I am not twisting your words.

I'm going to let you in on a little secret. Try and pay attention now..

Are you ready?

This thread...?

Is not about domestic violence!

Wow.. Just.. Wow!

Sumerians believed in anthropomorphic polytheism.

No, their religious text does not show that they invented the Bible, Adam, the garden of Eve or the flood. Some believe there are parallel's with the Torah - in that they are similar to some of the stories in the Hebrew Tanakh.

I'm an atheist. This thread is not about the Catholic Church.

And once more. You keep saying that paddoboy has not done anything wrong and you've seen no evidence that he's done anything wrong, while at the same time you are blaming religion and Hollywood for the bad treatment of women and you have repeatedly claimed that paddoboy is like he is because he was raised a Catholic .. If he isn't doing anything wrong in your opinion, then what does his religious upbringing have to do with it?

Understand now?

Are you asking me to repeat myself over and over again because you can't remember? Or because you don't understand?

That I provided you with around half a dozen links?

Here is where I provided you with a bunch of links: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/everyday-sexism.163836/page-24#post-3660885
Here is where I also provided paddoboy with links: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/everyday-sexism.163836/page-25#post-3660986

Yeah yeah..

We shall rue the day, etc..

You know, given you have kept repeating how Paddoboy is the way he is because he was raised a Catholic, perhaps this is not the best way for you to try to defend him..

And this thread is not about domestic violence.

Perhaps you should write that on your hand so you don't forget when you are posting in this thread.

If you want to discuss domestic violence, start a thread. I will gladly participate. But let's try and keep this one on topic, yeah?

Really Mr "I'm keeping notes"?

When you tell someone that they should do something, you are giving them advice.

 

Depends.

If it's my mother, my aunt, mother-in-law, or elderly women among my family and friends? Not at all.

If it's my boss, I'd find it somewhat condescending and patronising.

 

This would have to be, the dumbest and most insane strawman I've seen in a while.

The fact that you are so blatantly dishonest was obvious from the start. But the sheer level of maliciousness of your actions in this thread is something to behold.

You claim to be his friend, but you ramped him up and you shoved him out there and opened him up to all sorts of risk.

He, being as dumb-fuck crazy as you are, took you seriously and started begging me to take him to court, because you, the crazy and delusional friend with an ego the size of the fucking moon and who does not have a goddamn clue of defamation law, told him "you should sue her for defamation" and then told him how he should not worry because you were taking notes.

And when you are caught out as a completely delusional fraud, you try to make it seem as though it's a test and accuse me of looking for sex offenders.

I would say you should be ashamed of yourself, but I don't think you are capable of even understanding what that would even entail. Seek help.

 

And the moronic chest thumping continues.

You know his first name, where he downs the beers and where he lives? Okay. And?

Were you led to believe he was a sex offender so much so that it damaged his reputation with you? No. Did you shun him as a result? No, you clearly have not. Has he been damaged by my comment to the point where it's affected his way of life, he has been shunned by his friends (ie you), damaged him economically and prevented him from living his life? No, he clearly was not.

Was context provided for the opinion I stated? Yes, it clearly was. Numerous times. Damages? What? Is this craven display because you think you're onto easy cash or something?

You, sir, are certifiable. Seek help.

 

Where are the women?

 

paddoboy:

I thought you said you were leaving.

You're still a bit sulky, but you're back now? Or will you be heading off again soon?

Tut tut! We have rules about referring to members of this forum by their chosen screen names, paddoboy. I'll let it pass this one time, but in future if you want to address somebody or refer to them, you need to use the correct name, clear?

Kind of like the real Donald, you've been unable to document any actual lies, so far. You ought to stop making false accusations that you can't support.

Who's Donald, here? Is that me, or Bells? Leaving that aside, because it doesn't much matter...

I note that you've repeated the story about "lubricated" - the one I commented on. In other words, far from pointing out any lie on my part, you have once again merely confirmed your initial account.

There's not much to say about your little anecdote here, other than that we're not hearing from the bar attendant in question. We're hearing your second-hand report of something said bar attendant may or may not have said.

I ask readers to note the term "fun police", attributed to the bar attendant, for future reference.

She "sidled up to you", did she? I note that she isn't here to confirm that.

Now, I ask the readers: what are the chances that two unrelated women both used the term "fun police", within days of one another, in response to paddoboy's supposed inquiries about what they consider to be acceptable behaviour from men? Could it be that paddoboy isn't accurately reporting what these women said?

Could it be that the entirety of paddoboy's reports of all these interactions present them from an entirely self-interested perspective that takes no account of the actual opinions of the women involved?

Lastly, let us take paddoboy at his word, and assume that he presented two of these women with some version of the points that I and Bells have put to him in this thread. What are the chances that he accurately reproduced our arguments, to them? Not very good, I imagine.

I think we can dismiss at least two out of three of these latest anecdotes as being implausible, in whole or part. I doubt that, if they happened at all, paddoboy has accurately reported them.

But what if they happened more or less as reported by him, after all? Then we only really have evidence that these particular women were willing to humour him and not rock his boat, once again.

Nothing in any of this makes the slightest impact on the fact that paddoboy is habitually sexist and patronising towards women who are obliged by reason of their employment, to assist him. Nor does any of this impact the fact that he is now choosing to knowingly act like a sexist pig, or that he expresses pride that this is how he acts.

If "Donald" means me, you ought not to tell lies, paddoboy. I have never alleged any "slap on the bum". That has only ever come up in the context of another of your tales - one in which you decided it was important to flaunt your prowess as a chick magnet, for some bizarre reason, as if that somehow would excuse your unethical behaviours.

You no longer have the excuse that you don't know your patronising and sexist behaviour towards women is inappropriate. You continue it in the full knowledge that you are harassing women and that most women consider your behaviours unwelcome, offensive, and, in some cases, sleazy.

Asking men to treat women with respect is not fanatical.

Yes. Funny that two different, unrelated women, chose to use that particular term, just at the time you started loving it. Isn't it?

Seriously?

You want to equate the behaviours of the real Donald Trump and his ex-lawyer with the actions here of Bells and myself, in urging you to be better than you are?

You're all at sea, paddoboy. Your moral compass broke somewhere along the line. You should take a long hard look at yourself and fix it.

That's quite a crew you picked there as your support on this, paddoboy. Are you sure you want to tie your boat to theirs?

Do you admit that it can have a double meaning? How about "lubricate"? Or do you agree with Alex that those words are only ever entirely innocent?

You are unable to document a single lie from me or from Bells. Which makes you the liar.

Do yourself a favour and type "sexual harassment definition" into your favorite search engine. Spend 10 minutes researching it. This talking out of your arse isn't helping you.

You haven't let her read the whole thread yet, have you? She gets the filtered version from you, just like we get the filtered versions of your tall tales. We also get your second-hand reports about what your wife says and what she thinks.

Note: please don't waste her time by asking her to respond to this. The best way she can help here would be to read through the thread and to talk to you, paddoboy, about what she really thinks. Because, if I had to guess, I'd say she'll most likely agree with Bells, wegs and myself about what is and isn't appropriate behaviour towards women - particularly women in their workplaces. You might take more notice of what she has to say than of what we have to say.