TrueVolsGBOInsider
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 1,971
- Likes
- 3,824
I don't agree that it's not feminism. I think it's more of a stealth campaign. An illusion of purpose. Her purpose really is to talk about women because she was in a domestic abuse case before, but to make sure she brings up a few words like "kings" to get them on board, make them think that she's really concerned about them, when she's really just concerned about how they treat and view women. I was raised to respect women, but when I grew up I saw the reality of it. That men that treat women with respect get stepped all over. I have lots of experience with this, because I was that guy. The girl that abused me got mad at me over me not giving her enough money...only one with a job. She pinned me up against a wall and was slapping and punching me in the face. And when we later broke up, she told my friends that she was only with me because I had a car and some money. That how "kings" get treated. Feel free to disagree, but I think she should stick to broadcasting. If it's so important that both sexes be treated equally, then they would address both women and men...not just men.
We live in a world where parents can legally kill a baby if they don’t want to raise it. Parenting is not glamorous, and many don’t choose to be involved in the life of their child. Classes like this are absolutely necessary.Just exercise common sense and common courtesy in every facet of life and you'll be OK.
If you need a lecture to learn that, then your parents did a poor job.
Now I just wish someone would teach women how to treat men. They need a little help themselves. I almost lost my left eyeball from domestic abuse. The worst thing is, most people think it's funny or something when a man is abused.
Sounds like you should consider therapy and a lesson on female selection. Can’t let one crazy woman distort your mind bro.I don't agree that it's not feminism. I think it's more of a stealth campaign. An illusion of purpose. Her purpose really is to talk about women because she was in a domestic abuse case before, but to make sure she brings up a few words like "kings" to get them on board, make them think that she's really concerned about them, when she's really just concerned about how they treat and view women. I was raised to respect women, but when I grew up I saw the reality of it. That men that treat women with respect get stepped all over. I have lots of experience with this, because I was that guy. The girl that abused me got mad at me over me not giving her enough money...only one with a job. She pinned me up against a wall and was slapping and punching me in the face. And when we later broke up, she told my friends that she was only with me because I had a car and some money. That how "kings" get treated. Feel free to disagree, but I think she should stick to broadcasting. If it's so important that both sexes be treated equally, then they would address both women and men...not just men.
I vehemently disagree with this sizzling hot take. Sorry the abuse happened to you, but "...men that treat women with respect get stepped all over..." is simply not even 1% true. GBO.I don't agree that it's not feminism. I think it's more of a stealth campaign. An illusion of purpose. Her purpose really is to talk about women because she was in a domestic abuse case before, but to make sure she brings up a few words like "kings" to get them on board, make them think that she's really concerned about them, when she's really just concerned about how they treat and view women. I was raised to respect women, but when I grew up I saw the reality of it. That men that treat women with respect get stepped all over. I have lots of experience with this, because I was that guy. The girl that abused me got mad at me over me not giving her enough money...only one with a job. She pinned me up against a wall and was slapping and punching me in the face. And when we later broke up, she told my friends that she was only with me because I had a car and some money. That how "kings" get treated. Feel free to disagree, but I think she should stick to broadcasting. If it's so important that both sexes be treated equally, then they would address both women and men...not just men.
I think you misinterpreted what I meant. I was raised in a small town in the South. I was raised to treat everyone the same way to include women. I was raised to say, yes sir and no sir, yes ma'am and no ma'am no matter the age of the person I was talking to.
I was just stating it is sad that you have to teach this to kids today and that they don't get it growing up. I contribute a lot of that to the pop culture of today where sexual things are the norm.
I am glad we are teaching our players this and that Coach Pruitt and Staff are supporting it.
This concept is something that we as older people take for granted. You treat women as women.....with respect. I was taught to open doors, say yes ma'am and no ma'am, thank you, etc. That is now gone. Most of the kids that get into trouble didn't have parents that taught, some, no parents at all. Many no father figure or one that was a good example. Society as a whole has failed these young men. The feminist (for lack of a better term) movement has gone a long way to furthering the issue. Self sufficient women that don't need a man to raise a child, have their own careers, don't need a man's help, free to have sex with anyone they want, free to put on what previously were considered masculine airs. Society does everything to tell these young men that women are just like them. Party hard, screw everything, wake up in the morning and do it again.......right up until someone gets embarrassed and cries foul.Just exercise common sense and common courtesy in every facet of life and you'll be OK.
If you need a lecture to learn that, then your parents did a poor job.
It was a different type of situation then. There was abuse, rape, violent rape, date rape. However, the date rape was not as prevalent. There were girls that would and girls that wouldn't in the town I grew up in. There were young ladies and girls that you would now call sluts. Everyone knew the difference and who was who. However, that was back in the stone age when teen pregnancy was all the rage either.Yeah because women were never abused or treated poorly 20-50 years ago
Nah just shotgun weddings and divorces in your 40s after your judgmental aunts and uncles all passed awayThis concept is something that we as older people take for granted. You treat women as women.....with respect. I was taught to open doors, say yes ma'am and no ma'am, thank you, etc. That is now gone. Most of the kids that get into trouble didn't have parents that taught, some, no parents at all. Many no father figure or one that was a good example. Society as a whole has failed these young men. The feminist (for lack of a better term) movement has gone a long way to furthering the issue. Self sufficient women that don't need a man to raise a child, have their own careers, don't need a man's help, free to have sex with anyone they want, free to put on what previously were considered masculine airs. Society does everything to tell these young men that women are just like them. Party hard, screw everything, wake up in the morning and do it again.......right up until someone gets embarrassed and cries foul.
Millennials laugh about us old farts talking about how things were. Well, one of the good parts of how things were was that we didn't have an epidemic of drunken group sex and morning after allegations.
I dont have an exact date to give you. Back when woman weren't seen as equal to man, when it was mostly men who brought home the bacon and the wives were more traditional. "Back then" woman had less of a platform to speak because the man spoke for them. I mean, if you want me to do a whole cultural evolution research paper, I will.When was back then exactly?
Lol if you are teaching this to these guys why would you wear spandex pants.... I'm just saying.....
Anyways, it's a good class for them to have but kind of ridiculous that you have to teach kids this nowadays.....
What the hell is this supposed to mean? She can wear whatever she wants, no?
Thank you. I logged in to say this. The fact that someone who says its ridiculous to have to teach this turns around and criticizes the woman for what she chose to wear is ironic. Women are not going to feel like they belong if they can't wear spandex pants around a group of men without feeling vulnerable in some way.
She CAN wear whatever she wants but dont be surprised if the attention is all on her instead of what she is trying to teach.. I think that is what he is sayingThank you. I logged in to say this. The fact that someone who says its ridiculous to have to teach this turns around and criticizes the woman for what she chose to wear is ironic. Women are not going to feel like they belong if they can't wear spandex pants around a group of men without feeling vulnerable in some way.
So you are saying back then that the "Ho" culture was prevalent, girls went to parties to get drunk and hook up as just like the guys, screw 2 or 3 guys in a night, acting like a slut was a way of life? I don't think you actually know what "back then" was like. Not saying there wasn't spousal/domestic abuse. What I am talking about is the situation that produced the 3 and a half year long AJ Johnson saga. Back then, that **** just really didn't happen.I dont have an exact date to give you. Back when woman weren't seen as equal to man, when it was mostly men who brought home the bacon and the wives were more traditional. "Back then" woman had less of a platform to speak because the man spoke for them. I mean, if you want me to do a whole cultural evolution research paper, I will.