Jenn wrote:

In article .com,
wrote:

Jenn wrote:

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

Right Jenn, according to you if anybody but Middius does it, it is a bad
thing. If Middius does it, it is a good thing. Have a nice day!

Why do believe that I support any kind of abuse?

Assuming there's a "you" in there somewhere, Arny has a point, because
I've noticed the same thing. I believe you support "any kind of abuse"
because I saw you chumming it up with George in a thread where he
titled a post "JamieBitch****"

WHere was that?

Right under your nose, apparently. In the thread, "Middius The
Misogynist (Or "Question for Jenn: Pt. 2")", you, me, Morein and
Middius were the only contributors to it. Right after your post,
Middius posts a vitriolic misogynist diatribe entitled: "Shovels the
Jamie-Bitch****". Right after getting that title, I just noticed this
little gem myself that he added. You can comment or not on it, but I
don't think it deserves to go unnoticed, because I don't see anyone
here spewing hateful crap against women like this on the group. Not
even George's big love, Psycho Bob Morein, who recently advocated
putting a bullet in my head:

Middius the Misogynist wrote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Title: It's Jamie's time of the month...
From: George M. Middius - view profile of this misogynist
Date: Mon, May 8 2006 9:59 pm
Rated: M for Misogeny

Damned PMS. Even a "man" like ****face Shovels suffers.

" Shovels the Jamie-Bitch**** "

Should that be "Jamie the Shovels-Bitch****"? Please elucidate, you
filthy dripping harridan.

As a woman, do you have any comments on it, and as you claim to have a sense of ethics, why are you talking to George here like he's your best friend, and not condemning him for bringing the group down to the level of where it is now acceptable to write such hateful misogynist things?

Boy, that is one dumb question. You must really be desperate to bait
people, Shovie.

If everyone were as much of a sick lowlife as George as to write such violently distasteful things about women on this group, how much longer would you stay here?

blush

Is your IUD rusted or something, ****face? You seem even crankier than
usual.

-- A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

In article .com,
wrote:

Jenn wrote:

In article .com,
wrote:

Jenn wrote:

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

Right Jenn, according to you if anybody but Middius does it, it is a
bad
thing. If Middius does it, it is a good thing. Have a nice day!

Why do believe that I support any kind of abuse?

Assuming there's a "you" in there somewhere, Arny has a point, because
I've noticed the same thing. I believe you support "any kind of abuse"
because I saw you chumming it up with George in a thread where he
titled a post "JamieBitch****"

WHere was that?

Right under your nose, apparently. In the thread, "Middius The
Misogynist (Or "Question for Jenn: Pt. 2")", you, me, Morein and
Middius were the only contributors to it. Right after your post,
Middius posts a vitriolic misogynist diatribe entitled: "Shovels the
Jamie-Bitch****".

Again, what you don't understand is that I don't read posts with titles
like that.

Jenn wrote:

In article .com,
wrote:


Right under your nose, apparently. In the thread, "Middius The
Misogynist (Or "Question for Jenn: Pt. 2")", you, me, Morein and
Middius were the only contributors to it. Right after your post,
Middius posts a vitriolic misogynist diatribe entitled: "Shovels the
Jamie-Bitch****".

Again, what you don't understand is that I don't read posts with titles
like that.

It isn't the post that's all that offensive, it's in fact the title. So
not reading the post doesn't stop you from voicing your opinion if you
find that title objectionable. But since you haven't stated any
objections with that title or any of the other misogynist remarks that
George has made recently as far as I can see, I don't think anyone is
ever going to mistake you for a feminist. Note that not voicing your
objection to George on this after being aware of it means that you have
voted in your acceptance for his new standard of degrading women on
RAO. Especially since you don't seem to have a problem having friendly
discussions with George recently that have nothing to do with audio or
music.

wrote:

It isn't the post that's all that offensive, it's in fact the title.

Do you *have* to crosspost this drivel to r.a.p ?

In article .com,
wrote:

Jenn wrote:

In article .com,
wrote:


Right under your nose, apparently. In the thread, "Middius The
Misogynist (Or "Question for Jenn: Pt. 2")", you, me, Morein and
Middius were the only contributors to it. Right after your post,
Middius posts a vitriolic misogynist diatribe entitled: "Shovels the
Jamie-Bitch****".

Again, what you don't understand is that I don't read posts with titles
like that.

It isn't the post that's all that offensive, it's in fact the title. So
not reading the post doesn't stop you from voicing your opinion if you
find that title objectionable. But since you haven't stated any
objections with that title or any of the other misogynist remarks that
George has made recently as far as I can see, I don't think anyone is
ever going to mistake you for a feminist. Note that not voicing your
objection to George on this after being aware of it means that you have
voted in your acceptance for his new standard of degrading women on
RAO. Especially since you don't seem to have a problem having friendly
discussions with George recently that have nothing to do with audio or
music.

Thanks for your "opinion".

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Jenn wrote:

In article .com,
wrote:


Right under your nose, apparently. In the thread, "Middius The
Misogynist (Or "Question for Jenn: Pt. 2")", you, me, Morein and
Middius were the only contributors to it. Right after your post,
Middius posts a vitriolic misogynist diatribe entitled: "Shovels the
Jamie-Bitch****".

Again, what you don't understand is that I don't read posts with titles
like that.

It isn't the post that's all that offensive, it's in fact the title. So
not reading the post doesn't stop you from voicing your opinion if you
find that title objectionable. But since you haven't stated any
objections with that title or any of the other misogynist remarks that
George has made recently as far as I can see, I don't think anyone is
ever going to mistake you for a feminist. Note that not voicing your
objection to George on this after being aware of it means that you have
voted in your acceptance for his new standard of degrading women on
RAO. Especially since you don't seem to have a problem having friendly
discussions with George recently that have nothing to do with audio or
music.

Thanks for your "opinion".

You're welcome, but I gave you no "opinion". I only gave you facts.
Facts like the fact that you made unprovoked character attacks against
me (starting off with mockery and graduating to ad hominem insults).
Facts which you were unable to successfully refute, because they were
true. Thanks for showing there is no one on this group who can be named
as an exception to my "rules" (my exposition of the lack of morals and
honesty by all members of this group).

In article .com,
wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Jenn wrote:

In article .com,
wrote:


Right under your nose, apparently. In the thread, "Middius The
Misogynist (Or "Question for Jenn: Pt. 2")", you, me, Morein and
Middius were the only contributors to it. Right after your post,
Middius posts a vitriolic misogynist diatribe entitled: "Shovels the
Jamie-Bitch****".

Again, what you don't understand is that I don't read posts with titles
like that.

It isn't the post that's all that offensive, it's in fact the title. So
not reading the post doesn't stop you from voicing your opinion if you
find that title objectionable. But since you haven't stated any
objections with that title or any of the other misogynist remarks that
George has made recently as far as I can see, I don't think anyone is
ever going to mistake you for a feminist. Note that not voicing your
objection to George on this after being aware of it means that you have
voted in your acceptance for his new standard of degrading women on
RAO. Especially since you don't seem to have a problem having friendly
discussions with George recently that have nothing to do with audio or
music.

Thanks for your "opinion".

You're welcome, but I gave you no "opinion". I only gave you facts.
Facts like the fact that you made unprovoked character attacks against
me (starting off with mockery and graduating to ad hominem insults).snip

In your opinion. Thanks for playing.