DiscussMormonism.com

I just want to make sure every poster on this board realizes that crocket has insulted scratch by repeatedly calling him a woman.

I'm making a formal announcement: this guy is a misogynist arsehole and from now on I will treat him even worse than our roughest posters ever dreamed of.

http://mormondiscussions.com/discuss/vi ... 4&start=84

One of his statements:

Yes, Ms. Scratch. You hit the nail on the head.

I responded:

I hope your daughters read what you write here so they can understand that their father thinks a good way to belittle and demean a man is to call him a woman.

He answered:

I have reason to believe Scratch is a female posing as a male. How is that demeaning?

I pulled this out of the thread in question just in case any readers weren't following the thread. I want everyone to know this guy is a misogynist arsehole.

Hey, bob, it's a miracle you have seven kids. I guess that means your wife laid back and thought of England seven times. God knows I'd never let a misogynist touch me.

What a stupid post, Beastie!

I really don't care what you think about it, marg. I already told you to avert your eyes if it's too much for you to stand.

marg wrote:What a stupid post, Beastie!

I'm not following your logic, marg. Why is Beastie's post a stupid post?

marg wrote:What a stupid post, Beastie!

It's fine. I would rather talk about history and doctrine, but I don't need defenders from insults. Too bad she has to malign my poor wife.

rcrocket

It's fine. I would rather talk about history and doctrine, but I don't need defenders from insults. Too bad she has to malign my poor wife.

I wasn't maligning her, I was pitying her.

Yeah, sure you'd rather talk about history and doctrine. That's why you've spent the vast majority of your time here correcting grammar and whining about anonymous posting. I was willing to tolerate that as normal, if pathetic, internet silliness.

But this I will not tolerate. You can try to spin this manure anyway you want to, bob, your words speak for themselves.

rcrocket wrote:

marg wrote:What a stupid post, Beastie!

It's fine. I would rather talk about history and doctrine, but I don't need defenders from insults. Too bad she has to malign my poor wife.

rcrocket

Why do you refer to your wife as "poor wife"? (It's not the things we intend to write that are so revealing. It's the things we don't intend to write that reveal what we really think.)

And, by the way, for silly believers who seem to think that every criticism of the church is launched in anger and have accused me of being angry in the past when I was not -

THIS is anger.

harmony wrote:

rcrocket wrote:

marg wrote:What a stupid post, Beastie!

It's fine. I would rather talk about history and doctrine, but I don't need defenders from insults. Too bad she has to malign my poor wife.

rcrocket

Why do you refer to your wife as "poor wife"? (It's not the things we intend to write that are so revealing. It's the things we don't intend to write that reveal what we really think.)

And after God unleashed man from the undifferenciated medium of the Light of Truth he must have realized that he would be paying for that mistake over and over and over again.

And after God unleashed man from the undifferenciated medium of the Light of Truth he must have realized that he would be paying for that mistake over and over and over again.

Yeah, God is sort of stupid, isn't he? In soooo many ways.