Vent your frustration here

Doesn't "leave of absence" imply a (probable) return?If I recall correctly, Holmes' "condition" was an immigration problem, not a health problem, more way-of-life-threatening than life-threatening.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Oh... is that what you think a feminist is?Interesting.Edited by Jon, : :-)

It's what we know a feminist is, because Nator is one, and so am I.Maybe you could ask us about what we "are", rather than rely on information from misogynists.

Ditto. If more men knew how good that liberation feels, more men would be feminists. I became a feminist at an early age because I saw what happened to my talented and intelligent mother and sisters.What does Jon think a feminist might be? Is he feeling castrated?Balls that hang from inequity are no balls at all.

---

Real things always push back.
-William James Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

Oh, I imagine he thinks it's someone who wants special rights for women, rights like getting paid the same as men for the same work, or not being raped, or having the right to determine what other persons are allowed to live inside your uterus, or to not be sexually harassed at work, you know, all the special rights that men enjoy.

Checkout lines: they take too long!

Speaking as a feminist, I am puzzled as to what your idea of feminism is. Could you clarify what you think (or thought) feminists are?

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

quote:

---

Oh... is that what you think a feminist is?

---

Actually, that is the definition of feminism.According to the National Organization for Women:The purpose of NOW is to take action to bring women into full participation in the mainstream of American society now, exercising all privileges and responsibilities thereof in truly equal partnership with men.According to The Feminist Majority Foundation:Feminism n. the policy, practice or advocacy of political, economic, and social equality for women.According to the Feminist Majority:Our mission is to empower feminists, who are the majority, and to win equality for women at the decision-making tables of the state, nation, and the world. The Feminist Majority promotes non-discrimination on the basis of sex, race, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, religion, ethnicity, age, marital status, nation of origin, size or disability.

​

The purpose of Feminist Majority is to promote equality for women and men, non-violence, reproductive health, peace, social justice and economic development and to enhance feminist participation in public policy. Feminist Majority supports workers' collective bargaining, pay equity, and end of sweatshops. We encourage programs directed at the preservation of the environment.So, what is your definition of "feminism", Jon?Is it similar to those of several major Feminist organizations, or is it quite different? Edited by nator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Checkout lines: they take too long!

---

Spoken like a true American consumer.You never learned patience so you can't bear to wait ten minutes to buy something you probably don't really need, from a store packed to the rafters with an obscene quantity of luxury stuff compared to what is available to most of the rest of the world's population.Quit your whining and be grateful for the abundance.

Modulous responds to me:

quote:

---

If you intend to help I'll need more to go on

---

What is it about "legitimizing" you do not understand?If we're talking about the charge on the electron and someone brings up the conjugation of Spanish verbs, do you question why that was brought up or do you legitimize it by treating it as an appropriate consideration, something that might actually have some influence on the charge of the electron?

quote:

---

I know why he is using that analogy for instance.

---

And yet, you legitimize his position.

quote:

---

I would like to know what this problem actually is - if you'll indulge me.

---

Again, what is it about "legitimizing" you do not understand? Do you not know what that word means?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

As far as I am aware, nothing. Despite my knowledge of the word I would still like a bit more to go on than being told I'm legitimizing an argument. Of course I was legitimizing it - I was explaining why I thought it was legitimate!If the 'problem' I am part of is that I believe that nj's comments were legitimate enquiry about deciding the limits of marital contracts, then I am guilty as charged. What I am asking for is a reason why that is a problem.

Modulous responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

What is it about "legitimizing" you do not understand?

---

​

As far as I am aware, nothing.

---

And yet, here you are asking what it means.You are treating n_j's argument as if it had any sort of logical merit as opposed to being a complete non sequitur. This "legitimizes" the argument. Your responses to the argument are based upon the idea that his argument has merit rather than responding that he has brought up a non sequitur.It doesn't matter that you think his justification for his argument is false. The problem is that you think the entire point has any relevance to the question at hand.

quote:

---

What I am asking for is a reason why that is a problem.

---

Because it is a non sequitur. It is the same as someone bringing up the conjugation of Spanish verbs in a discussion about the charge of the electron.Do I need to explain what a non sequitur is, too?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Am I? I must have been sleep typing - I don't remember doing that. I remember saying: "Of course I was legitimizing it - I was explaining why I thought it was legitimate!" By pointing out why it was a non sequitur? I see. I am happy to contribute to the problem then. Whilst it is a non sequitur and easily shown to be, it had some relavence since it was about marriage. I showed why nemesis was wrong, I started a whole thread to explain why nemesis was wrong and how his conclusion does not follow from his premises.If you regard that as a problematic legitimization of the issue, so be it. Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

Modulous responds to me:

quote:

---

Whilst it is a non sequitur and easily shown to be, it had some relavence since it was about marriage.

---

Um, you do understand that you just contradicted yourself in a single sentence, yes?If it is a non sequitur, that means it has no relevance. If it has relevance, that means it is not a non sequitur. You can't have it both ways.A legitimate point can have a wrong conclusion, but an irrelevant point has no bearing on the subject.I'm reminded of a situation from when I was doing summer stock one year. The audition form asked, as it always does, "What roles are you interested in?" A friend, feeling fey, put down "Hamlet." I hope I don't have to explain that we weren't doing Hamlet.Now, for the directors to respond to that statement with anything other than an underlying intention of "We're not doing Hamlet" legitimizes it as having some connection to how the audition process should go. Perhaps the director is going to use it as a jumping off point to talk to the actor about his work. And perhaps the conclusion is, "You're absolutely wrong for Hamlet." But even if that is the result, the fact of the matter is that it apparently was a legitimate thing to put down for it was treated legitimately.

quote:

---

If you regard that as a problematic legitimization of the issue, so be it.

---

Guess so.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

I guess that is a legitimate source of confusion. I was using it to mean 'the conclusion does not follow from the premise', you were using it to mean irrelevant. The conclusion can be relevant to the topic, but not follow from the premises making it relevant but a non-sequitur.