[001]
contradictioninterms
Current Version
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
That people like really violent comedy, but hurting a woman is often regarded as morally wrong, so guys are used. Both this and the idea that guys are supposed to tolerate women feeds into the \
to:
That people like really violent comedy, but hurting a woman is often regarded as morally wrong, so guys are used. Both this and the idea that guys are supposed to tolerate women feeds into the \\\"guy is hurt by girl and it\\\'s funny\\\" type of AbuseIsOkayWhenItsFemaleOnMale.
Like, socially, which of the following seems like the solution to \\\"man is hurt by woman\\\":\\\\\\\\
a) Gently, but firmly, restrain woman.\\\\\\\\
b) Put up with it, you can deal with it.
It\\\'s b)! b) is the socially acceptable way of dealing with provocations by women. Therefore, my explanation is at least closer than the one that\\\'s there now, since that one predicts a).
\\\'\\\'Alternatively, why don\\\'t you explain what is bothering you about the page?\\\'\\\'
The theoretical framework is bothering me! Still. I think that there are a lot of unsupported gender theory-type assertions. It\\\'s not even like \\\"Socially, X is viewed as Y. In Q theory, this is because Z.\\\" It\\\'s like \\\"Z causes jargon, resulting in X being viewed as Y. I neither have nor need proof of that.\\\"
Like, socially, which of the following seems like the solution to \\\"man is hurt by woman\\\":\\\\\\\\
a) Gently, but firmly, restrain woman.\\\\\\\\
b) Put up with it, you can deal with it.
It\\\'s b)! b) is the socially acceptable way of dealing with provocations by women. Therefore, my explanation is at least closer than the one that\\\'s there now, since that one predicts a).
\\\'\\\'Alternatively, why don\\\'t you explain what is bothering you about the page?\\\'\\\'
The theoretical framework is bothering me! Still. I think that there are a lot of unsupported gender theory-type assertions. It\\\'s not even like \\\"Socially, X is viewed as Y. In Q theory, this is because Z.\\\" It\\\'s like \\\"Z causes jargon, resulting in X being viewed as Y. I neither have nor need proof of that.\\\"
