Author Topic: "Male Species" versus "Male of the Species"? (Read 1483 times)

rum · « **on:** November 06, 2015, 03:58:20 PM »

This is a quote from someone who's made some waves in the trad Cath world:

Quote

Who cares what mere creatures of the male species think when it comes to women?

Shouldn't it be the male of the species? That struck me as bizarre when I read it.

clare · « **Reply #1 on:** November 07, 2015, 03:21:07 AM »

Quote from: rum

Shouldn't it be the male of the species?

Yep.

The female of the species is deadlier than the male, as the song goes.

Jaynek · « **Reply #2 on:** November 07, 2015, 04:30:25 AM »

Quote from: rum

This is a quote from someone who's made some waves in the trad Cath world:

Quote
Who cares what mere creatures of the male species think when it comes to women?

Shouldn't it be the male of the species? That struck me as bizarre when I read it.

That looks like feminist influence at work. Feminism basically takes Marxism and replaces class warfare with war between the sexes. Rather than seeing men as leaders and protectors, women are taught to see men as oppressers and enemies. Women view men with hostility and resentment instead of respect and gratitude. It fits this mindset to treat men as a different species.

I don't know who said that or what the context was, but it is not a Catholic statement. Even if the person quoted was trying to say that we should care more about what God thinks than what men think, that was, at best, clumsy wording. And it might be something much worse.

rum · « **Reply #3 on:** November 07, 2015, 08:36:03 PM »

The quote is from Dawn Marie, the supposed seer:

http://imgur.com/rwjRBIx

Let it be known that there was no insulting of women. This comment was a response to two threads I started on female hair length and gender-segregated forums. They were locked by the wimpy mod SpiritusSanctus. I was well-behaved throughout.

It's pretty ironic that clare thumbed up DawnMarie's post.

Anyway, it doesn't sound like the kind of thing a seer would say. Nor would a true seer interpret a discussion on female hair length and gender-segregated forums as an insult to women.

clare · « **Reply #4 on:** November 08, 2015, 01:30:52 AM »

Quote from: rum

It's pretty ironic that clare thumbed up DawnMarie's post.

Is it? It seems you're just desperately trying to catch people in these minor slip-ups, and catch other people in the act of liking posts which contain minor slip-ups! Have you never said anything imprecise, or inaccurate when you really think about it?

I am not a devotee of "the seer". I just agreed with the general thrust of that post. Still do, notwithstanding that one minor mistake.

The fact that you even kept a screenshot of it is indicative of something! "Look, a post defending women, with a clumsy, ambiguous phrase in it! And clare liked it too! Bonus! I must take a picture!"

richard · « **Reply #5 on:** November 08, 2015, 07:06:52 AM »

Quote from: rum

The quote is from Dawn Marie, the supposed seer:

http://imgur.com/rwjRBIx

Let it be known that there was no insulting of women. This comment was a response to two threads I started on female hair length and gender-segregated forums. They were locked by the wimpy mod SpiritusSanctus. I was well-behaved throughout.

It's pretty ironic that clare thumbed up DawnMarie's post.

Anyway, it doesn't sound like the kind of thing a seer would say. Nor would a true seer interpret a discussion on female hair length and gender-segregated forums as an insult to women.

This post makes no sense.If I recall there was a lot more going on in that thread then your comment about Female hair length,I think you are one of those who would use any and every opportunity whether legitimate or not to discredit some one you disagree with.

Jaynek · « **Reply #6 on:** November 08, 2015, 09:35:19 AM »

I don't know what was going on in that discussion on the other forum, but I am surprised that so many people liked the post that rum linked to. It had a really disrespectful and insulting tone toward men. If someone posted it here, I would probably down vote it.

rum · « **Reply #7 on:** November 09, 2015, 03:49:13 AM »

Quote from: clare

Quote from: rum
It's pretty ironic that clare thumbed up DawnMarie's post.

Is it? It seems you're just desperately trying to catch people in these minor slip-ups, and catch other people in the act of liking posts which contain minor slip-ups!

Care to give some examples?

Were you thinking of this one?: http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=38076&f=3&min=0&num=5

It's a stretch to say it was a "minor slip-up" on your part to thumb up a post containing such rank lies.

And based on what I know about Dawn Marie I do wonder if her comment was a "minor slip-up". If I thought for sure that this was the case I wouldn't bother making note of it.

rum · « **Reply #8 on:** November 09, 2015, 03:52:42 AM »

Quote from: richard

Quote from: rum
The quote is from Dawn Marie, the supposed seer:

http://imgur.com/rwjRBIx

Let it be known that there was no insulting of women. This comment was a response to two threads I started on female hair length and gender-segregated forums. They were locked by the wimpy mod SpiritusSanctus. I was well-behaved throughout.

It's pretty ironic that clare thumbed up DawnMarie's post.

Anyway, it doesn't sound like the kind of thing a seer would say. Nor would a true seer interpret a discussion on female hair length and gender-segregated forums as an insult to women.

This post makes no sense.If I recall there was a lot more going on in that thread then your comment about Female hair length,I think you are one of those who would use any and every opportunity whether legitimate or not to discredit some one you disagree with.

What else was going on? As I remember it I was dealing with two subjects which should not have caused an iota of rancor on a forum that advertised itself as traditional Catholic. I kept the argument civil. The incivility came from Dawn Marie and her devotees, with the admin, mods and a few others joining the hysteria.

Jaynek · « **Reply #9 on:** November 09, 2015, 08:07:30 AM »

Rum, consider the possibility that the likes on that post were expressions of personal animosity towards you rather than due to subjects under discussion. While I did not observe those exchanges, I have noticed on other forums that you have an abilty to put people's backs up. I suspect it is because so much of your posting takes the form of personal attacks rather than having a focus on issues. It is only to be expected that you would create enemies.

Nevertheless, even though I don't like you, I cannot imagine expressing approval for Dawn Marie's post. I detest the tactic of expressing disagreement with a man by attacking his masculinity. Comments along the lines of "if you were secure as a man you would ..." Make me furious. I do not think that such emasculating comments should ever be given support.