Post Reply
Page 2 of 57  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 57 Next
Switch to Forum Live View The reason for all animal cruelty and killing by humans
7 years ago  ::  Mar 16, 2008 - 8:20PM #11
mytmouse57
Posts: 9,782
[QUOTE=Suze_M;360902]there you go again.........You keep bringing "individuals" into discussing of  "practices".[/QUOTE]

Suze, they took a cursory look at a magazine dealing with a subject they obviously know nothing about, and drew a bunch of wild conclusions. That's hysterical and utterly unproffessional to boot.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 16, 2008 - 10:09PM #12
John_T_Mainer
Posts: 1,658
Dominance games are a part of all non solitary animal behavior.  Males are the stronger sex, in general, and thus more successful at physical dominance games.  Women generally play the same games in different ways.  The goal remains dominance, and the level of cruelty remains a constant.

Where women have the physical power, they are as prone to using physical violence to acheive their ends as men.  Winnie Mandella's football club is an example of a woman using men to commit the violence required for her dominance games, but there are plenty of women who find targets weaker than themselves to bully and torment, either through numbers, weapons, or selecting younger or disabled targets.

"When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
and the women come out to cut up what remains,
roll to your rifle and go to your god
A soldier, a soldier of the Queen"

Rudyard Kipling, some centuries ago, but the Russians in the 1980's found it still to be true.  Our troops don't have the same problems today as the insurgents are out of their own tribal territories for the most part, and the local women are not against our troops.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2008 - 12:35AM #13
Suze_M
Posts: 450
[QUOTE=mytmouse57;361287]Suze, they took a cursory look at a magazine dealing with a subject they obviously know nothing about, and drew a bunch of wild conclusions. That's hysterical and utterly unproffessional to boot.[/QUOTE]

Ah! you are so quick to judge! Let us find and read the article first and then we can make a conclusion.
btw, did you say  you have a problem they drew "wild" conclusions? I thought hunters like that word. LOL
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2008 - 12:51AM #14
solfeggio
Posts: 9,550
'Hysterical'?  'Wild'?  Typical male reactions to women positing a theory with which they do not agree.  I don't know about any magazine articles, but my comments at the beginning of this thread were based on a very scholarly BOOK written by a very erudite professional woman who knows exactly what she is talking about.

But, I doubt that you, Mouse, or you, Viking John, do much reading of books by WOMEN!  A woman actually writing a scholarly tract on the very easily proven connection between meat-eating and animal cruelty and male dominance?  Why, that's 'hysterical' and 'wild.'

As Suze so logically points out, saying that all the bowhunters you know are happily married men, yada, yada, yada, is meaningless babble where the specifics of a topic are concerned.

And, as for you, Viking John, I cannot believe you are STILL going on and on and ON about the trials and tribulations of 'warriors,' even to bringing in Rudyard Kipling, for cryin' out loud.  Hey, I can quote Kipling, too.  'You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din.'  Didn't have to look it up, either.

Geeze, man, move on already.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2008 - 8:57AM #15
John_T_Mainer
Posts: 1,658
[QUOTE=solfeggio;361798]'Hysterical'?  'Wild'?  Typical male reactions to women positing a theory with which they do not agree.  I don't know about any magazine articles, but my comments at the beginning of this thread were based on a very scholarly BOOK written by a very erudite professional woman who knows exactly what she is talking about.

But, I doubt that you, Mouse, or you, Viking John, do much reading of books by WOMEN!  A woman actually writing a scholarly tract on the very easily proven connection between meat-eating and animal cruelty and male dominance?  Why, that's 'hysterical' and 'wild.'

As Suze so logically points out, saying that all the bowhunters you know are happily married men, yada, yada, yada, is meaningless babble where the specifics of a topic are concerned.

And, as for you, Viking John, I cannot believe you are STILL going on and on and ON about the trials and tribulations of 'warriors,' even to bringing in Rudyard Kipling, for cryin' out loud.  Hey, I can quote Kipling, too.  'You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din.'  Didn't have to look it up, either.

Geeze, man, move on already.[/QUOTE]

Who would have to look it up?  I had Kipling in my pocket in the Desert and bush for a lot of years.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2008 - 1:54PM #16
SkyWalker53
Posts: 2,235
[QUOTE=solfeggio;361798]'Hysterical'?  'Wild'?  Typical male reactions to women positing a theory with which they do not agree.  I don't know about any magazine articles, but my comments at the beginning of this thread were based on a very scholarly BOOK written by a very erudite professional woman who knows exactly what she is talking about.

But, I doubt that you, Mouse, or you, Viking John, do much reading of books by WOMEN!  A woman actually writing a scholarly tract on the very easily proven connection between meat-eating and animal cruelty and male dominance?  Why, that's 'hysterical' and 'wild.'

As Suze so logically points out, saying that all the bowhunters you know are happily married men, yada, yada, yada, is meaningless babble where the specifics of a topic are concerned.

And, as for you, Viking John, I cannot believe you are STILL going on and on and ON about the trials and tribulations of 'warriors,' even to bringing in Rudyard Kipling, for cryin' out loud.  Hey, I can quote Kipling, too.  'You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din.'  Didn't have to look it up, either.

Geeze, man, move on already.[/QUOTE]

Not only that but not one person can refute the fact that violence is an overwhelmingly male gender activity. The victims; other animals, women, children, other men. Non-human animals being the easiest target. Just as the report reveals in post #1. It is no coincidence that Mainer, mm, cynthia's husband and that dpm thing are all of the male gender and all are actively engaged in violence against animals.  Each of these males with their own subjective reasons and excuses for hurting animals BUT the real biological hormonal reason for their behavior lies hidden!

It would be nice if the female gender would wake up and smell the coffee. We don't have to accept the violent society that the male gender has created. We need a completely new society, one that has been rebuilt from the ground up based on the principals of non-violence and compassion. This will not happen unless the female gender steps in and demands it.  But to do that we have to first recognize the ROOT of the problem.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2008 - 2:31PM #17
Hmmmmmmm
Posts: 722
[QUOTE=SkyWalker53;362832]Not only that but not one person can refute the fact that violence is an overwhelmingly male gender activity. The victims; other animals, women, children, other men. Non-human animals being the easiest target. Just as the report reveals in post #1. It is no coincidence that Mainer, mm, cynthia's husband and that dpm thing are all of the male gender and all are actively engaged in violence against animals.  Each of these males with their own subjective reasons and excuses for hurting animals BUT the real biological hormonal reason for their behavior lies hidden!

It would be nice if the female gender would wake up and smell the coffee. We don't have to accept the violent society that the male gender has created. We need a completely new society, one that has been rebuilt from the ground up based on the principals of non-violence and compassion. This will not happen unless the female gender steps in and demands it.  But to do that we have to first recognize the ROOT of the problem.[/QUOTE]

As Gandalf Parker said, you want a bigger change than is feasible.

I also believe that you would have greater success if you fought smaller battles, as he said.

You need to reevaluate your motivations and your goals.  Finding the ROOT of the problem is not tantamount to widespread destruction of millions of years of cultural influence.

You're a fanatic, plain and simple.  If you start screaming for a equal female treatment you'll get the same response you get when you scream for immediate and total change for animal treatment.  You just don't understand that human psychology will not allow a huge change in a small amount of time, whether for women's rights or equal treatment of women or animals.

look at the speed of women's lib, slow and steady.  Animal rights, will be slow and steady.  No other way is possible with human psychology.  Hate it all you want, but you are powerless to change it.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2008 - 6:43PM #18
Chai008
Posts: 1,056
[QUOTE=SkyWalker53;362832]Not only that but not one person can refute the fact that violence is an overwhelmingly male gender activity. The victims; other animals, women, children, other men. Non-human animals being the easiest target. Just as the report reveals in post #1. It is no coincidence that Mainer, mm, cynthia's husband and that dpm thing are all of the male gender and all are actively engaged in violence against animals.  Each of these males with their own subjective reasons and excuses for hurting animals BUT the real biological hormonal reason for their behavior lies hidden!

It would be nice if the female gender would wake up and smell the coffee. We don't have to accept the violent society that the male gender has created. We need a completely new society, one that has been rebuilt from the ground up based on the principals of non-violence and compassion. This will not happen unless the female gender steps in and demands it.  But to do that we have to first recognize the ROOT of the problem.[/QUOTE]

Sorry but I perfer to have a man for a husband not some nutered wuss. In any case if this were true I wouldn't be married to my husband. If this were true well , he would beat me my kids and our pets. But since this was probably written by someone who probably never knew any hunters, or maybe one cheated on her who knows. It's utter bull based on nothing but opinion.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2008 - 8:39PM #19
SkyWalker53
Posts: 2,235
[QUOTE=Hmmmmmmm;362940]As Gandalf Parker said, you want a bigger change than is feasible.

I also believe that you would have greater success if you fought smaller battles, as he said.

You need to reevaluate your motivations and your goals.  Finding the ROOT of the problem is not tantamount to widespread destruction of millions of years of cultural influence.

You're a fanatic, plain and simple.  If you start screaming for a equal female treatment you'll get the same response you get when you scream for immediate and total change for animal treatment.  You just don't understand that human psychology will not allow a huge change in a small amount of time, whether for women's rights or equal treatment of women or animals.

look at the speed of women's lib, slow and steady.  Animal rights, will be slow and steady.  No other way is possible with human psychology.  Hate it all you want, but you are powerless to change it.[/QUOTE]

You have no understanding of how or when the change from a male gender violent society to a peaceful non-violent society will occur, nobody does. Finding the root of any problem allows for a solution just as it does when the root of an illness is discovered. As of yet, few humans have begun to recognize the huge role of the male biological hormones as the cause of all of the worst problems this society faces. This is because humans still don't understand that they are animals, ape animals to be precise. This information has to come out for the process to begin. Which means...talking about it.  So stop being so afraid of the truth hmmmm, the truth is always shocking.

....oh and truth is not 'screaming' or 'fanatical', maybe in your mind, but not in reality.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 17, 2008 - 8:43PM #20
SkyWalker53
Posts: 2,235
[QUOTE=Chai008;363591]Sorry but I perfer to have a man for a husband not some nutered wuss. In any case if this were true I wouldn't be married to my husband. If this were true well , he would beat me my kids and our pets. But since this was probably written by someone who probably never knew any hunters, or maybe one cheated on her who knows. It's utter bull based on nothing but opinion.[/QUOTE]

well this is part of the problem. Cynthia thinks that a male who avoids to harming others unless in self defense is a "wuss". Sigh.....

Killing defenseless animals or children is the most cowardly thing any human can do, male or female.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 57  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 57 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook