Re: Men, do you prefer a stay-at-home mom or not?

In article <db9f9918-cf5f-4379-86f9-
038241b9ae8a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, andrelieven@xxxxxxxx says...
On May 1, 11:35 am, Mark Borgerson <massive@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> flubs:
In article <7036a6f2-0b16-4dea-b7d3-b9bbc9288af7
@v1g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, andrelie...@xxxxxxxx says...

On May 1, 2:23 am, Mark Borgerson <mcblus...@xxxxxxxxxx> slobbered:
In article <90cc8639-de9a-49c4-b9f8-
5334d8816...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, andrelie...@xxxxxxxx says...

On May 1, 12:22 am, Mark Borgerson <mbombas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> flailed:
In article <ed27df0f-46cd-4c38-aee0-
01f622fe3...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, andrelie...@xxxxxxxx says...

On Apr 30, 9:48 pm, Mark Borgerson <mborger...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <25f01cf1-e205-4667-b3ff-50540d86ce27
@t36g2000prt.googlegroups.com>, andrelie...@xxxxxxxx says....

On Apr 30, 8:57 pm, Mark Borgerson <mborger...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <h8ekv41h0181b4b8ap6nhvejq8e66oc...@xxxxxxx>,
perspicaci...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx says...> On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:35:07 -0700 (PDT), Andre Lieven
<andrelie...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

It is a reasonable conclusion to draw that a moron such as you
spouting your moronity here, were you to make little Borgerson
mini-morons, that that would not be a boon for humanity.

Wow, that was so good it deserves to be a signature line.  Succinct
and to the point and factual to boot.  :-)

Sounds like Andre doesn't know the definition of 'moron'.  But then
he's been known to engage in a bit of hyperbole now and then.  ;-)

<Massive Misandrist Kook Projection>

Several folks have corrected you, and have noted that you are the
one who engages in hyperbolic moronity. But, don't let that bother
your kookiness.

LOL.  Several folks have said the same about you after you have
irritated them sufficiently.

Yet, none of them could make any case that I am a sexist bigot.

That's a long ago well made case about your expressed views.

I'll grant that you do have a consistent belief system.  But then so
do Catholic Priests, feminists, and voodoo witch doctors.

Ah, that's the old women's "on one hand fine, and then the other
hand does the slap" schtick.

How... useless.

Au Contraire.  Some of the groups named above actually provide a service
to society.

Typical for you, the point wooshing way over your head.

My comment was about your Old Whore's argument.

That's one concession from you...

Where?? YOU wrote the lines above. Are you conceding to yourself?

 One difference between us is that
I don't bother to feign great outrage at your opinons.  I do, in
fact, find them rather entertaining  in a shock-radio
fashion.

That's OK, I rather view yours as similar to a garden variety
village idiot. Nothing extraordinary to see.

But it does seem to occupy a lot of your attention.

Given that it is taking as much of yours, you are not in any
moral position to throw your stones from such a glassed in
house...

Ah, but I find your opinions to be extraordinary---and interesting.

A pity for you that that is then a one way street. Your views are...

common.

That's why I'm continuing.

Plus, your PJR class kook trolling...

That's two concessions from you...

Conceding to yourselfe again? What I wrote before you inserted your
lines between mine is:

Ah, but I find your opinions to be extraordinary---and interesting.
That's why I'm continuing.



 Is it merely
a distraction from other events, or do you think you're learning
something?

You answer yours first.

So I'm supposed to answer my own questions to you?  Sorry, but I don't
presume to know your thoughts.

<Laughs> That "question" was exactly that, just done in the typical
wimmin's way of "thinking, so that you would not be busted out for
the innate deceit of the "question".

"80% of all questions are really statements in disguise." Dr. Phil.

Ah, so Dr. Phil is your authority now?

<Laughs> Here's yet another pathology of the *whipped* scoundrel
Borgerson; His IN-ability to grasp that there are positions of
"authority" that one can accept that are *between* 100% and 0%.

Stupid little kook.

OK, so Dr. Phil is less than a 100% authority to you. Does that
render him worth quoting?

 Having fun living in the world of pop psychology?

His work is more than sufficient to examine little pissants such as
you.

 Outrage and hyperbole are part of what makes this
group interesting.

So, you play-act at being calm 24/7/365. Very repressed of
you, I would suggest.

I don't play act at being calm.   I really am calm.

<Laughs> Well, many people are calm, yet many of them are
really boring.

True. I do know some calm people.  Not all of them are boring,
though.

<Shrug> You are boring, so people who are like you would also be
boring.

That's three concessions from you...

Conceding to your self again.

People who are like that are usually like that because even
they cannot trust their honest views and reactions.

And this opinion is based on what data?

Once again, you first. You're the one who has yet to offer any.

OK,  I understand that you can't, or won't answer the question.

Ibid Dr. Phil.

That's four...

Conceding to your self again.

Fortunately, I don't have that problem, only you do.

I can live with that, as well.

AHA, so you can be calm about some things, but not about
others. That's somewhat at odds with your statement in
another thread:

From some years ago; Obsess much, oh hypocrite ?

It doesn't take obsession.  Just a decent search engine and some
memory.

Yet, you continue to store up/keep in mind my years ago statements.

Uh huh.

POT--KETTLE--BLACK.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it
means." The Princess Bride.

 You keep bringing up opinions expressed
about me by Chris Raum several years ago.

So ? I only needed to bother to recall one four WORD phrase.

So your memory is less effective than mine. Sorry about that.

 You seem to have an equally long memory about my usenet history.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it
means." The Princess Bride

Is that supposed to make sense?

"Well, if you mean my posts that appear " angry ", understand that
I always know why I'm writing what I'm writing, and such posts are
constructed to display my deep disdain at the loons, bigots and
sexists. Were I really emotionally affected by reading or writing
such posts, I'm sure my S/O would notice ( As she's standing within
a half metre, as I write this, for example ). Rather, I often call
her in to hear a funny post, or a particularly loony one. And, if
she didn't like me doing that, she'd tell me."

Which seems to imply that you are really calm, but are playing at
being emotionally affected.

<Laughs> Borgerson, really don't give up the day job, because you
really, really SUCK at this attempt at playing shrink.

I'll take that to mean that you know more about shrinks than
I do.  

<Laughs> I know more about most things than you do. It doesn't
require personal experience with each topic for me to be able to
accurately say that.

But, once again, you display the all too *common* wimmin's way
of "thinking" to ASSume that the ONLY path to knowledge is
through personal experience.

What brought that up?  

YOUR display of that old whore in your statement.

Which old whore and which statement? Are the '>' marks getting
too deep for you?

I didn't say anything about the
origin of your knowledge about shrinks.

OK, so now you PROVE that you are illiterate and suffering
from Alzheimers'...

"I'll take that to mean that you know more about shrinks than
I do."

Exactly.
YOU wrote that; It implies that such a "knowledge" exists,
and thus, there IS an implication on that point.
Exactly. However the statement does not mean that you have
ever met a shrink or received treatment from one. It only states
that you know more about them.

 Based on other
elements of this thread, some of your experince with
shrinks comes from reading or watching Dr. Phil.

<yawn>

Bored again? Why are you still here, then?

Since I have no desire to become a psychologist, I'll
remain calm in the face of your superior experience.  Since I
like my day job, I plan to keep it.  Are you planning to keep
your day job, or is THIS your day job?

Wouldn't you like to know ?

Yes I would.  (Or was that one of the 80% of questions that is
a statement according to your authority.)

I have AbZero obligation to tell you about my personal life, and
I am wholly uninterested in the details of yours.

True. Lack of information doesn't eliminate curiosity.

Because unlike the girlyboi that YOU are, the personal aspects
don't matter to me. Thank you for further confirming your
adherence to said "wimmin's way of knowing".

You're the one that brought up the topic of my day job.

 It seems that we can't trust your
reactions, because they constructed to reflect your disdain---
and not to show your true feelings---or lack of such.

I'll take my Emmy then.

Seriously, so what ?

How is the rest of the world to know what is acting and what
is real?

<Laughs> You are so EASILY played, Big Daddy. Once again,
you ASSume that what I said years ago MUST still govern my
EVERY interaction.

 Or does it really matter----you can be whoever you
want to be on the internet.

And, that that applies equally to you once again wooshes
well above your widdle pointed head...

That's five...
Responding to yourself again.

 It seems that you've decided who
you want to be on soc.men.  Is it the same person who speaks
at the conventions?

Pay the money and come out and see for yourself. It's more than
clear that nothing short of that counts as a means to knowing for
you, anyway.

That's six...

Responding to yourself again.

"Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am
large, I contain multitudes." Walt Whitman.

Literary merit aside, you share with Walt the fact that your
contradictions are interesting.

Once again, that is but a one way street.

That mixed, or incomprehensible, metaphor, is the reason for the
"literary merit aside..." part of the previous comment.

Meaningless word salad, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

A mixed quote at best. I like the original from Macbeth better.

I am far more interested in what I know, and what I therefore,
think. It is very telling that YOU are the one all wrapped up
about feeulings uber reason and knowledge. In that, I
rather like that one of my life models is Pierre Trudeau.

Let's see.  Law degree, three children by wife 22 years his
junior, one child out of wedlock after divorce, election to
public office. Worked as law professor, politician, and
lawyer.  Quite a life to emulate.

Well, that certainly proves that there is no lack of "self
esteem". Even among folks who aren't esteemable...

Who is it that doesn't lack self esteem?  You, or Pierre?

Neither, oh clueless gob; That was you.

Ah. See what happens when you depart from declarative prose
into flights of fancy.

 I think you've got a bit
of catching up to do.  But, thenm as  Browning said, "A man's
reach should exceed his grasp".

"My only response was that I had been called worse things by
better people." Trudeau on when it was reported to him that
President Richard Nixon had called him an "***" (1971).

Pierre did have quite a life.  Not a bad model to emulate if
you're interested in law and politics.

Or, life; If you had any class, you'd read what his eldest son,
Justin, said of him at the funeral.

http://www.clevernet.net/pierre_trudeau/justin_trudeau_eulogy.html

Anyone who wants to know how great an influence on a child's
life a single dad can be, even when he has a rather busy job,
they should read that. I watched him deliver it live.

If you want to relive that experience, it is availabe as a
video at: http://archives.cbc.ca/on_this_day/10/03/

Justin is quite a good speaker.

Here's a taste:

"But more than anything, to me, he was dad.

And what a dad. He loved us with the passion and the devotion
that encompassed his life. He taught us to believe in ourselves,
to stand up for ourselves, to know ourselves and to accept
responsibility for ourselves.

We knew we were the luckiest kids in the world. And we had
done nothing to actually deserve it.

It was instead something that we would have to spend the
rest of our lives to work very hard to live up to.

He gave us a lot of tools. We were taught to take nothing for
granted. He doted on us but didn't indulge.

Many people say he didn't suffer fools gladly, but I'll have you
know he had infinite patience with us.

He encouraged us to push ourselves, to test limits, to
challenge anyone and anything."

I can also honestly say the same about my father.

I loved and admired my father too. It was he who inspired me
to study chemistry and oceanography.

"Let us overthrow the totems, break the taboos. Or better,
let us consider them cancelled. Coldly, let us be intelligent."
Approaches to Politics (1970)

Once again: Sux to be you.

Will your first book be "Catching up with Pierre"?

Why ? Will yours be "Trying To Catch Up To Andre" ?

A better one for you would be "Other Kooks I Have Emulated",
dedicated to PJR...

Even better might be "Collected Wisdom of Soc.Men".  I
could start with the Giganews archive.  That would give
me all the posts for the last 5 years or so---whether or
not they had X-NoArchive set.  But a good editor would
probably condense it down to three pages!

Well, there you go, again. That's because you are a BDSG
pussyboi, who views men as being loathsome.

Just to name a few names still around, I would say that,
whatever else some of my topical differences with folks
such as Mark S., Jill and Society might be (Especially
in politics!), just the three of them have provided many
tens and hundreds more of wisdom laden pages than your
cow*** diss claims.


Yeah, but there's a lot of duplication of the good stuff.

So, if in all those years, you believe that there have only
been three pages worth of good material ever posted here,
then why are YOU wasting your time here ? Because I'm
NOT the one claiming that there's essentially zero good
material here on any given day; That's YOUR claim.


No it's not. It's my claim that a lot of the good stuff
is duplication and repetition.
Naw.... No more book writing in my future.  I gave up writing books
when I found that I could make a lot more writing computer code
than I could by writing about computer code.  (You can still get
a used copy  of 'A BASIC Programmer's Guide to Pascal'  through
Amazon for about a buck plus shipping.  Don't worry about
funding my extravagant lifestyle, though.  The royalty
agreement expired long ago.)

Well, there are a lot of bad books that have been published; I
prefer a better measure and taste level.

And, I have plenty of actually interesting books here.

Not to mention six concessions from you...

None of which seemed to refer to any statements other
than your own.

Oh, well, at least when you talk to yourself, you have
an interested audience.


Mark Borgerson

.