It's really none of your business and I find your assumptions to be very insulting. And I see no reason why you feel the need to extrapolate on my desires, my wants in a man. I have said nothing even close to "men should not protect women", what I have said is that women are equal and do not necessarily need protection as women are capable. Where have I said I would never marry a man who would protect me? Where are you pulling these asinine assumptions from? Have you decided to just make crap up about me? This is quite rude. I'm not doing so with "enthusiasm" nor am I "controlling". I'm challenging you to look at what you post and think about it. Slob is dealing with hygeine, which you can be clean and still a rapist, so I have no idea why you keep saying "fools and slobs" as if it was some sort of mantra. I wouldn't consider them "fools and slobs" I believe rapists and malicious are far better words. And I suppose, in a way, that's exactly what a mom is when they need to be. You don't even realize how strong you are, you just feel like a force of nature at that point. I've lifted over my own weight with one hand to get to my kid, and I've fought off someone trying to hurt me and my kid. I haven't done that, but I've had cause to know that "mom strength" is a very real thing. The stories about mothers lifting cars off their kid are no joke. It's even become a running joke that if there's ever a Zombie Apocalypse (or anything similar, IE plague/bombings/whatever) that *I* will be the one tracking him down and saving his rear for being in Deep S***.Īs for being a mother. Even my husband, who is a Marine, knows I'm fully as capable as he is of defending our home: He actually says that's one reason among many that he loves me. I haven't been what I consider a "girl" for over a decade, and I don't need protecting.Įven with nothing but my own hands and feet, I've never met a man that I couldn't take down in a fight if my home and child were in danger.
Hearing that logic, "well *girls* need men to protect them from rapists" just pisses me off. And the unnecessary drama starts right when one of them decides he needs to state and propagate their sexuality publicly. enter a random idiotic reason (he is afraid of being approached by a gay or that he would catch some disease, he is christian, it's not natural, etc). The straight guy has something against homosexuals. One of them states he is gay, the other one is straight. Do you think this is necessary? If two people live in on city and one flat and don't know about each other's sexuality, everything is good, they greet themselves and the life goes on. The whole thing is completely nuts! You are born with some sexuality, you are influenced in some way, which forms it, but it is not something you have achieved! It's like one would make banners "I have a leg!" and make a Leg pride and wave flags with leg, people would put banners with leg onto their profiles to show, that they have legs too.Īnd as for the drama, just look at the size of the comments, how many people commented this. I understand, that in many lands gays don't have the rights they deserve and am sorry about it, yet I think the pride thing miss-evolved into something completely different, what only serves the straight part to point at gays and saying we really don't want THIS. I am a zoophile, and I don't go into the city, waving a flag with a zeta on it or walk in some kind of pride. I am fed up with gays, screaming they are gay, because I simply don't care.
What my point is, I am fed up with rainbow paws and similar stupid shit. And if it is not what you think, you can either argue, discuss, accept, or ignore it. If you go out with something publicly, you need to understand that while on one side you can post it and have the right to, on the other side you have to expect that people have the same right to comment it and tell you their opinion. You are right it is a social network, but if you say A, you have to understand the B will follow. You wrote, that maybe you want to show - you used 1st person, therefore I wrote my reply as if this was about you. For the part you don't understand - we were speaking about propagating one's sexuality with banners, tags, etc. I have responded to you, since you responded to what I have written to certain topic. I don't know you and don't consider you important enough for me to get to know you. Well, you do realize, this discussion was based on the Straight furry banner, not on what you really do or not? I don't really give a fuck what you do or do not.