Monday, January 31, 2005

Univeristies Part Deux

So, remember the Vagina Monologues thing? Well I'm walking the dog with my wife this weekend and I'm seeing stakes and torn up signs all over the campus. I looked at a few signs here are some that I saw.

"Sexual Violence affects everyone"
"1 in 4 women suffer sexual assault"

Yeah they all support anti-violence messages. Even better, they are all torn down. So tell me, what is the point? What were these kids thinking?

Did they think they were supporting the anti-Vagina Monologues message?
Did they think they were making a moral statement about open female sexuality?

Well regardless I'll tell you what they did. They torn down signs supporting anti-violence. To me that says you don't support sexual crime awarness. Really, it tells me that you support sex-crimes. Since I know that's probably not true, I'll just assume that they are fucking morons. Immature pricks should think about the consequences of their actions before they take part in them. Fucking morons. These are the same pricks that complain about all their professors being liberal. You don't have to think like the professors you stupid shit you just have to go pass the class.

--Chuck

20 Comments:

Blogger Puma said...

Actually, since intentions don't excuse anything and actions are what matter, these people actually DO support rape and other sex crimes. And on top of that, I have a feeling there are quite a few of these who support sex crimes in their intentions as well. It goes something like this: "The bitch should have kept her legs shut/mouth shut/done what she was told, now she got what she deserves." It comes down to the control of women, the control of female sexuality, and the bolstering of their own insecurity (they feel stronger by using physical force against a weaker body, or by "sending a message" designed to silence and scare women - such as the tearing down of the signs.) They feel powerless themselves, and so conjure up all sorts of paranoid fantasies that women have more power than they actually have, and need to be "taken down a peg or two." There are studies that have been done, citing many men who would rape if they thought they could get away with it. It is also what is at the heart of the anti-abortion viciousness. And like any societal pathology, there are female enablers. I would suspect that the women who support the limiting of choices for women, and who support the restriction of sexual freedom for women, are really just trying to align themselves with those they believe are powerful - and probably think they will be protected from violence, taken care of, because of it.
To self-confident, happy, secure men and women, this looks like insanity. It is.

1/31/2005 1:06 PM  
Blogger Chuck said...

Sarah,

For some damn reason I still try to be optimistic and give people the benefit of the doubt. However, you're right I'm sure many of the dumb-shits do support sex-crimes. Even worse. It appears that the University does since they support this kind of behavior and do not allow participation in anti-violence events.

--Chuck

1/31/2005 2:20 PM  
Blogger Jesse said...

"I'll just assume that they are fucking morons. Immature pricks should think about the consequences of their actions before they take part in them."
-Kind of like people that have abortions because of 'poor planning'.

1/31/2005 3:01 PM  
Blogger Jimbo said...

I told you dude, it is all about kolpophobia. These nuts bouncing on their chins! -Jimbo

1/31/2005 4:13 PM  
Blogger Chuck said...

Jesse,

Did I say anything about abortion? No. I don't recall every saying anything about abortion. Not here. Not anywhere. Nope. Nothing about abortion. Are you moron? Why are you trying to start an argument completely off topic. Especially when I have never said anything about abortion and you have no idea what I think about the topic. I might even agree with you. Might.

--Chuck

2/01/2005 7:23 AM  
Blogger Jesse said...

Hey buddy!
I saw you registered in my forum, but decided not to sumbit anything. Nice!
-J

2/01/2005 9:44 AM  
Blogger Puma said...

In that case Jesse, don't forget that many women become pregnant from other causes besides "poor planning": rape, and failure of birth control.

2/01/2005 10:24 AM  
Blogger Puma said...

And Jimbo, I love how you register your name in blogger, but don't have the guts to refer anyone to your own writings.

2/01/2005 10:34 AM  
Blogger Claire said...

watch out for that Jimbo guy. you have thus been warned

2/01/2005 11:59 AM  
Blogger Chuck said...

Jesse,

I did comment on your forum but I cannot logon because it tells me I do not exist. Yes I have confirmed my email address. However, there really isn't anything to say because you haven't written anything worth commenting on.

--Chuck

2/01/2005 12:13 PM  
Blogger Puma said...

Claire, what exactly should we be afraid of? His scintillating wit? His impressive vocabulary? His astounding contributions to society? LOL

2/01/2005 1:47 PM  
Blogger Claire said...

no, that's chuck's minister. he'll spread the gospel!

2/01/2005 2:18 PM  
Blogger Jimbo said...

"Sarah said... And Jimbo, I love how you register your name in blogger, but don't have the guts to refer anyone to your own writings.".....Refer to my own writings? I don't have the time or attention span to figure out how to make a blog. I have a hard enough time as it is reading any of Chuck’s postings that are more than four sentences. Shit, what was I doing before I started typing this?

2/01/2005 3:12 PM  
Blogger Jesse said...

Sarah, I'd LOVE to have an abortion debate with you if you are game. Nay, I herby CHALLENGE you formally. If you are confident in your reasons for your stance on the issue, you'll have no problem with that.

2/01/2005 4:05 PM  
Blogger Chuck said...

Jesse,

Why do you challenge Sarah to a debate on my blog? Isn't that what her blog is for? Oh well. Since this is my blog, let me ask you a question first. What is your stance and what are your reasons? So far all I've heard you say is that abortion shouldn't be used as birth control. However, that really isn't a stance is it?

--Chuck

--Chuck

2/02/2005 8:15 AM  
Blogger Jesse said...

Sorry, Chuck chuck. I don't feel like debating you at your site, because frankly nobody reads your blogs. But I'll do you one better: I'll write my next post on the topic, and we can quibble back and forth with comments. Expect the new post Thursday night.

2/02/2005 4:07 PM  
Blogger Chuck said...

Jesse,

You really are fucking funny man. Read the thread. You brought up abortion. Nobody else. You. You just came and thought you'd start an argument that now you won't even have. What's even funnier is that you obviously read my blog and you "challenge" other readers on it as well. Then you claim nobody reads it. Hell, half the comments on your blog are from me and Adam. There were five people involved in this thread including me and yourself. I am sure that if you make a big enough ass of yourself that Adam will speak up too. Or did you forget that he exists? The only reason you won't have the argument is because I called you on it. Then you go back to Sarah's blog and say it is on topic hoping nobody will come here and see that YOU brought it up. You must have even less intelligence than I was giving you credit for.

--Chuck

2/02/2005 4:39 PM  
Blogger Adam Ritenour said...

I refuse to get involved in your flame war. When you children are ready to talk like adults I'll be ready to chime in.

--Adam

2/02/2005 4:42 PM  
Blogger Puma said...

I will just provide a separate "abortion post" on my own blog. That way this post can get comments on the points Chuck actually made.

2/02/2005 6:49 PM  
Blogger Jesse said...

I like Sarah's idea. And why is it I always come off sounding like a jerkoff? Don't answer that.

2/02/2005 7:23 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


View My Stats