Human males are sinking the world

[titan1968]

No Gillette, I am not suggesting that Queen Isabella was able to foresee every action, I am suggesting that she knew what the outcome would be. The Non-Catholics had been deemed a threat to the Roman Catholic Church and the Spanish Crown, and that threat had to be removed , hence the Spanish Inquisition. The goals of the Inquisition were the consolidation of power of the Church and the power of the Crown.

1. Yes she gave her blessing. By some accounts some two years after the papal bull was made available to her, after being given reports, confirmed by Torquemada, that "conversos", those jews or muslims who had converted to christianity but who were believed to still be practicing their original faith, were actively weakening catholic political aims. As presented and authorized the inquisition only had authority with regard to the conversos and had none over those practicing their original faith. What you are suggesting is that Isabella was able to forsee every action that every inquisitor would ever make once it was begun. That's preposterous.
.

However, Columbus was made viceroy (i.e. governor) of all the lands he 'discovered'. In other words, all the lands he discovered-- inhabited or not, became property of the Spanish Crown. Yes, they all did it.

My point is that greed-- the strong and selfish desire for power and wealth, is not limited to one sex, and no matter how hard one tries to rationalise it, greed is still greed.

.[/quote]
2. Right. First off, the only indigenous peoples they expected to find were Asians since Columbus' voyage was intended to find an alternate route to the silk road. The initial purpose was trade not conquer. Second, please keep in mind her greed was for the purpose of strengthening her country, the people for whom she was directly responsible. Can you show me a single ruler of the time who gave a rat's ass about indigenous people when there was land to be had. I still contend the only thing that makes her stick out is the fact she was a woman.[/quote]

 

[Mr. Snakey]

Yeh Danny...those 2 choice of thread tittles maybe seen as 'anti male' to some...but its not. But I think men are so scared to find or feel themselves impotent or between their legs or in their lives that some are not getting what I vented here.

The frustration that I feel because it seems things are out of control and there are powers so great in this world that makes people hopeless and they will not go away. For exemple drug traffic, is not because I do not consume or sell it I dont feel the effects all over in my neighboorhood. Crimes, gangs, families dealings with that etc. As much people in law inforcement etc is trying to to whatever it seems the next popular street drug is getting more powerfull etc.

My problem is because I feel too many stuff at same time and dont know how to organize as explaining into neat "files". Plus when I think I tend to expand my thinking not only locally but globaly and I dont have local mindset to although I'm living in US for a while I still carry with me my cultural stuff and etc etc.

I do feel impotent because I cant fix the world off course, I can help improve somethings really to my own family that is it. But there are people in higher functions that can improve many families and peoples lives but it seems even if they want to that is a system working agaisnt it.

I dont ever want to become cynical, fatalist or bitter...I do have hope some how because I'm like that inside me. But even optimistic people can feel impotent and anger sometimes. I still trust there will be a housecleaning all over the place and fixing where is leaking, broken etc. but as said here is difficult to fight with powers so out of reach and strong...and some up there may even promiss they will do something but years goes by still the same. And many conform and just go with the flow.

Again, I'm not anti men, because I see majority of men in this world in way or another may feel impotent as me, and not even can improve their own family lives or worry about their future. Even sexual impotence may lead to anger etc imagine impotence as frustration of things is out of your control even when you are doing you part and your best...and those feelings inside individual men pops ups different I supose.

Well..that is it.

Good morning.:smile:

My sweet Gisella. I sense you are watching the news too much as i once did. You cant walk around with the weight of the world on your shoulders. The news will allways show you bad things in the world. Stop watching so much and you will see as i have there is still good in the world. :smile: You know i love ya!

 

[Knockernail]

What I remember from our books KN is that our guys used home advantage. You didn't appreciate the double tide system of the Solent around Portsmouth and the Isles of Wight. Whilst your enormous galleons were floundering against an eight knot tide, our smaller ships were with it and harried your fleet. I don't know how many were sunk or disabled, but you had to get the hell out of there and ended up on a course around the north of the the British Isles, (cut off from your European allies and continuously harried by us), where the remainder of the fleet was hit by a massive storm and met a watery grave off the coasts of northern Scotland and Ireland. So began the predominance of the British Navy under Liz I.

:smile:
I was just kidding, Lord. Like DC says (and i said it too, in the anti-americanism thread), it all depends on the writer of the book.

I know that a storm wasn´t the reason of the defeat. I have searched two versions on google: Invincible Armada in english and Armada Invencible in spanish. Both tell the fact with many differences. I find it funny.

Don´t get seriously all the things i say to you, Lord. I like your elegance and so i like to tease you. :redface:

 

[Lordpendragon]

:smile:
Don´t get seriously all the things i say to you, Lord. I like your elegance and so i like to tease you. :redface:

I'm looking at your Avatar and I'm thinking Chorizo :smile:

 

[Matthew]

I'm looking at your Avatar and I'm thinking Chorizo :smile:

Funny - that's what I think of when I look at his gallery.

 

[Knockernail]

Gisella is simply asking why men are the way they are, and points out instances that she has seen and/or experienced of man's injustice to man. The umbrage that most of the male posters have expressed is shown in their characteristic adoloscent retort that "women are just as bad, if not worse than men".

While there is no simple answer, beyond the Freudian view that not being breast fed will stir the savage in the beast, you can simply state your opinion without the misogynist meandering retort that most have resorted to.

Gisella has amply demonstrated her love for the male of the species, I doubt very seriously that you could honestly lable her with your "misandry" title. Perhaps you are confused by her colorful use of the English language with terms such as "orangotango". Gisella has a charming, inventive English language structure that may make it more difficult for some to understand her concerns, questions and desire to share with LPSG her views and desire to understand.

You are pretty kind, Love-it. One of the hardest handicaps we all find learning another language, is the construction. We tend to translate our way of talking directly.

It´s appreciated when people make the effort to understand. :smile:

 

[Gisella]

My sweet Gisella. I sense you are watching the news too much as i once did. You cant walk around with the weight of the world on your shoulders. The news will allways show you bad things in the world. Stop watching so much and you will see as i have there is still good in the world. :smile: You know i love ya!

:tongue: Danny...your sensing me is based in your experiences of your own sensing. Some people may see only on the news what is going on in reality bcause maybe they live in a more peaceful place, they dont have to struggle etc as the peoples they see on the news are...is not their realities.

Like we in the US are at war but we see the war far away from here...is different to some to see casualities if they do not have a love one there at war zone fighting. We may sympatize but is not part of our family etc. As we can feel safe because there are people protecting our borders and the war do not come near us. But there are other kinds of wars violence too going on in many neighboorhoods here, and people may feel frustrate and have no peace in their own homes too. As others are struggling day by day to make ends meet is not reality of many who does not live by paychecks and have more stable financial life etc.

As much I believe in love one another etc to love come to reality it must involve Love+Action and practical things not just sending love vibes all over the place because love can be neutral and just a simple word. The world is becoming more and more as a village to me, there is not much excuses or make sense when we choose to close our ears and at same time indirectly affect others peoples peace and lives by our choosings and avoidances. There are somethings we can avoid but others we cant by just not watching too much news. Because the news is happening around us. Anyways we have to be informed really an go beyond what we are being feed by local news on tv and the local analists give to us already made and make our own conclusions. And be aware of distractions because the same box brings news and circus and people get distracted from real issues and not much get really done.

Some may dont see large picture of things and world system and dont feel part of it .. I do feel for sure a part of it as much I can do good in my own life I know if "they" dont do well soon or latter I will be affected to that one way or another: or by their struggles, suffering or by violence and etc will come up from inside them...and we can even see this frustration and desperation near by us too, in small dosages compared with bigger wars, conflitcs etc

 

[B_big dirigible]

The jews and muslims expelled were from the the area of Grenada which was the last to be won back from the Turks as it was feared they would welcome and assist a return Ottoman invasion.

Turks? Ottomans? The invaders of al-Andalus were Berbers. The Ottomans were the other side of the problem, at the other end of Europe. Suleiman the Magnificent besieged Vienna some 40 years after Ferdinand consolidated Granada. The two campaigns were unconnected, except that Ferdinand was free to send a contingent of arqbusiers to the defense of Vienna. Europe displayed a rare spirit of cooperation on that occasion, sending forces to fight under the command of an old Bohemian knight, the Graf Nicolas zu Salm-Reifferscheidt - a name the Euros would remember better today if they had any sense. Unfortunately the Graf Nicolas sent the civilian population of Vienna away for safety - a bad move, as the Turks caught them and massacred them all.

Suleiman was the last Ottoman of any consequence, and he was very consequential indeed - for a while. But he finally met his match at the walls of Vienna. When Suleiman's Janisseries broke down one part of the wall, they might encounter Bohemian knights, or Swiss halberdiers, or Ferdinand's Spaniards. They were badly mauled by all of them, and finally broke. Suleiman gave up, and the Turks retreated - though not before massacring all the prisoners (threw them on the camp fires, I believe). The only lasting accomplishment of the invasion was a legacy of virulent hatred which has not dissipated to this day.

The Turks tried again a century and a half later. That time they were crushed primarily by Polish knights under Jan Sobieski.

As for the Ottomans, Suleiman had a very capable son. But one of Suleiman's wives, a Russian whose name escapes me at the moment, had her eunuchs assassinate him so that one of her sons would inherit the Caliphate. The dynasty was inconsequential after that, although it didn't finally skip out of the country until the early 1920s.

 

[Gisella]

[/b]


You are pretty kind, Love-it. One of the hardest handicaps we all find learning another language, is the construction. We tend to translate our way of talking directly.

It´s appreciated when people make the effort to understand. :smile:

:biggrin1: :tongue:

Yep..I do agree.. even talking mother tongue I still make some people laugh/surprised with my choice and was of expressing myself...beware!

And hope people notice that although is not good practice to some I dont care much as how I'm expressing as long I'm expressing. I dont pay attention or know much how to correct myself if I stop to research etc will take long time and I'm kind of impatient, what is not good thing to be. Rush..rush..rush... :biggrin1:

 

[B_big dirigible]

Agreed that her being female wasn't remarkable in itself but it is the reason she is highlighted amidst her contemporaries. I agree with the reasons you gave for expansion into the new world. But I can't see the point of blaming Islam for it. Why stop there? Why not the Romans or Macedonians or Egyptians or Babylonians? Subjugating native cultures is hardly a new theme.

It's obvious. Spain suffered centuries of warfare solely because of Islamic expansion. That warfare left Spain without the economic infrastructure which made it possible for the rest of Europe to take part in the formation of the modern economic world - little craftsmanship, even less industry, no efficient argiculture - only fighters and the most virulent branch of the Catholic Church. Without the baleful Islamic influence, Spain would almost certainly have developed more along the lines of France, Burgundy, or the German or Italian states - plenty of warfare, to be sure, but sporadic rather than endemic. As it was, all they had was astonishing military capability. That reputation survived the reality. Europe actually expected Spain to win the Spanish-American War of 1898. As it turned out, it was no contest, but the surprise was extreme; not least in Spain, where the war was called "The Disaster" (although the actual physical damage to Spain was negligible - even the severe naval defeat at Santiago resulted in relatively few casualties, as the sinking ships of Cervera's squadron ran ashore so that the men could be taken off more easily by Spanish and American boats).

 

[B_big dirigible]

Said the pot calling the kettle jet black.

Feeble.

If you have an argument to present, go to it - it's not like you're being charged by the word.

 

[Shelby]

One would think, due to the 'gentler' nature of women, that domestic violence rates would be greatly reduced among lesbian couples.

Unfortunately it's not true.

 

[Ethyl]

Feeble.

If you have an argument to present, go to it - it's not like you're being charged by the word.

It wasn't an argument but a statement. Here's an argument: If you read through Gisella's previous posts, she makes it perfectly clear how much she loves men and this thread was her rant for the day. It doesn't mean she doesn't like men. She was obviously having a "men piss me off" kind of day. On the other hand, i've yet to read much of anything positive about women from your posts. You've already stated that women are more capable of violence than men, yet in another thread say they can't be understood and in your words men "can't grasp anything beyond the superficial issues" when it comes to women. So riddle me this, grumpus... how do you know what we're capable of if you can't grasp how we fundamentally operate?

 

[Knockernail]

:biggrin1: :tongue:

Yep..I do agree.. even talking mother tongue I still make some people laugh/surprised with my choice and was of expressing myself...beware!

And hope people notice that although is not good practice to some I dont care much as how I'm expressing as long I'm expressing. I dont pay attention or know much how to correct myself if I stop to research etc will take long time and I'm kind of impatient, what is not good thing to be. Rush..rush..rush... :biggrin1:

:tongue: I know. I use to need between 15 and 30´ to build a message like this; and even so i do many mistakes.:biggrin1: :biggrin1:


Coming back into the thread´s topic, there is another evidence of the male behaviour. The domestic violence (here we call it gender´s violence). Many women around the world are murdered by their couples. Much more suffer the daily violence, verbal and physical. Many girls, much more than boys, are kidnaped, raped and killed by strange men. It´s true that there are also women doing these things, but in a ridiculous proportion comparing to men.

I will never say we are the bad ones, but there is something around. Isn´t?

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

:biggrin1: :tongue:

Yep..I do agree.. even talking mother tongue I still make some people laugh/surprised with my choice and was of expressing myself...beware!

And hope people notice that although is not good practice to some I dont care much as how I'm expressing as long I'm expressing. I dont pay attention or know much how to correct myself if I stop to research etc will take long time and I'm kind of impatient, what is not good thing to be. Rush..rush..rush... :biggrin1:

I find it endearing. Or maybe that's just the cute bunny in your avatar.

 

[B_big dirigible]

It wasn't an argument but a statement.

Obviously enough. More to the point, it's ad hominum twaddle.

Here's an argument: If you read through Gisella's previous posts, she makes it perfectly clear how much she loves men and this thread was her rant for the day. It doesn't mean she doesn't like men.

No, also obviously enough. But explain away the title - "Human males are sinking the world." The post under that heading makes clear (so far as I can tell) that it's not a joke or droll comment on some current issue. Lacking a coherent justifying argument, it surely looks like a good dollop of bigotry - more specifically, misandry. Men are to blame for whatever-it-is because .... they're men. This is not negated by protestations elsewhere. That's too much like "some of my best friends are black", a favorite line of limousine liberals of some thirty years ago until it was laughed out of the daily lexicon. Or perhaps Gisella is just being weird. You see another possibility?

On the other hand, i've yet to read much of anything positive about women from your posts.

More ad hominem irrelevancies. I'm under no obligation to help puff up anyone's egos. I should think that women would get a bit tired of guys panting after them and telling them how fabulous they are. We have enough of that here without me playing "me too".

You've already stated that women are more capable of violence than men,

Not quite, but if you prefer that interpretation, I'll let it slide. It's not too important in this context.

yet in another thread say they can't be understood and in your words men "can't grasp anything beyond the superficial issues" when it comes to women. So riddle me this, grumpus... how do you know what we're capable of if you can't grasp how we fundamentally operate?

That's the key point (though not for this thread), and one which you persist in missing. I believe that anyone of either gender who claims to understand the other in anything but superficial or phenomenological ways is delusional. They can understand the other empirically. I can understand that if anniversaries aren't accompanied by crummy little gifts, there's hell to pay. Empirical experience tells me that's so. But I am not able to understand why anyone would willingly jeopardize a lifelong relationship over anything so trivial. I don't have to understand why to know that it's real. Behavior which strikes my XY-addled brain as self-destructive may make perfect sense in the female world - even if I don't understand it, or can't understand it.

This is a more general principle, applicable to more than the gender divide. I don't understand wife-beaters either, even though they're as male as I am. But I don't deny that they exist just because I don't understand them.

The technical term is "black box theory". All physical phenomena are mysterious black boxes inside other mysterious black boxes. You can be "pretty good" with computers - use programs, write and debug your own, etc - just by fiddling with the inputs (keyboard, mouse) and outputs (monitor, D/A converters), and still have not the foggiest idea what's inside the case. The case is a "black box". Or you can know what's inside the case, and know which board goes where and what it does, but not have any idea of how it does it. The boards are then "black boxes". Or you can be a whiz at boards, and know which chips do which jobs, but know nothing at all of logic gates. The chips are then "black boxes". Or you can get into logic gate-level stuff, but still be totally ignorant of the physics which makes some electons make one junction a logical "1" and another a logical "0". And if you get inside that "black box", you still may not know much about electrons, and in fact may not even be able to spell "Schroedinger wave equation."

The parallels should be clear. At some level, both men and women are "black boxes" to the other.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

"some of our best cutaways are to ni- I mean black people"
~RNC production coordinator

 

[B_big dirigible]

"some of our best cutaways are to ni- I mean black people"
~RNC production coordinator

Like, to the Secretary of State?






__________

Bugger, over 1000 posts. Memo to self - devote more time to your hobbies, turkey

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

Like, to the Secretary of State?




_________

Bugger, over 1000 posts. Memo to self - devote more time to your hobbies, turkey

haha.. sometimes, yes. hey, every good team needs a mascot right?

Just trying to keep things fair and balanced.

 

[Ethyl]

Obviously enough. More to the point, it's ad hominum twaddle.

That's your opinion.

No, also obviously enough. But explain away the title - "Human males are sinking the world." The post under that heading makes clear (so far as I can tell) that it's not a joke or droll comment on some current issue. Lacking a coherent justifying argument, it surely looks like a good dollop of bigotry - more specifically, misandry. Men are to blame for whatever-it-is because .... they're men.

Talk about missing the point. It's a rant. People on this site do this all the time to get things off their chest. There's been plenty of misogynist bullshit on this site, (let's remember the population is mostly comprised of men) and the few women here can handle themselves fairly well despite the disparity in numbers between men and women.

More ad hominem irrelevancies. I'm under no obligation to help puff up anyone's egos. I should think that women would get a bit tired of guys panting after them and telling them how fabulous they are. We have enough of that here without me playing "me too".

I have no idea why you're here but this is the Large Penis Support Group. Ego-stroking is the name of the game in places like this. You do, in fact, have a gallery here so you have something to prove as well.

Not quite, but if you prefer that interpretation, I'll let it slide. It's not too important in this context.

I quoted you verbatim. What's to let slide?

That's the key point (though not for this thread), and one which you persist in missing. I believe that anyone of either gender who claims to understand the other in anything but superficial or phenomenological ways is delusional. They can understand the other empirically. I can understand that if anniversaries aren't accompanied by crummy little gifts, there's hell to pay. Empirical experience tells me that's so.

If not "crummy little gifts" what should accompany anniversaries, empirically speaking?

This is a more general principle, applicable to more than the gender divide. I don't understand wife-beaters either, even though they're as male as I am. But I don't deny that they exist just because I don't understand them.

This is true. The point of trying to undestand one another is to gain more knowledge. I would think you of all people would appreciate that.

The technical term is "black box theory". All physical phenomena are mysterious black boxes inside other mysterious black boxes. You can be "pretty good" with computers - use programs, write and debug your own, etc - just by fiddling with the inputs (keyboard, mouse) and outputs (monitor, D/A converters), and still have not the foggiest idea what's inside the case. The case is a "black box". Or you can know what's inside the case, and know which board goes where and what it does, but not have any idea of how it does it. The boards are then "black boxes". Or you can be a whiz at boards, and know which chips do which jobs, but know nothing at all of logic gates. The chips are then "black boxes". Or you can get into logic gate-level stuff, but still be totally ignorant of the physics which makes some electons make one junction a logical "1" and another a logical "0". And if you get inside that "black box", you still may not know much about electrons, and in fact may not even be able to spell "Schroedinger wave equation."

The parallels should be clear. At some level, both men and women are "black boxes" to the other.

If someone wants to know how the internal mechanisms and physics in the "black boxes" work, they can learn. It may take some time but it can be done. Sometimes it takes someone else to explain it to them, just as you've done with me. Or they pick up a book and read about it or take a class. In any case, you're right. The parallels are very clear.