Re: what was that?


Subject: Re: what was that?
From: miriam clinton (iriXx) (iriXx@iriXx.org)
Date: Thu Aug 18 2005 - 03:54:03 EDT


Linda Seltzer wrote:

>I cannot believe the naivete going on in in this discussion.
>
>

Are you speaking for yourself? Your tactics seem to involve making an
unproven statement, and then seeking to prove it by the use of
buzzwords. Now if we were to have a real, statistical discussion here,
something might be proven.

Then again, you seem to - like the alleged 'male' counterparts - have an
inability to listen to James' well rounded and accurate arguments.

Buzzwords FTW - they're always likely to get all the Politically Correct
types back into their shells, instead of getting on with and exploring
/real/ discussion - yeahh, guys, lets just row about these poor women
who are so disadvantaged and waste bandwidth on this instead of talking
about e/a.

/yawn

-- 
99% of aliens prefer Earth
--Eminem

www.iriXx.org www.copyleftmedia.org.uk



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:10 EST