Why? Because you know why.

Hey, Asta! I finally got Colors! 3D!

Also, can I have your friend code again, please? My new one is in my signature.

Also, is there a way I can view your works in the gallery?

I agree with your taken on it. Her arguments stem from wanting to abolish marriage altogether, but denied the possibility of us changing the meaning of marriage and actively opposes same-sex marriage, despite knowing her goal is unrealistic.

beautiful reply Asta (:

Somebody put that lion's eye out.

-hug- <3

Anything for my Astacat! <3

http://www.zeldauniverse.net/forums/...ml#post4903761

Thanks. I laughed

Yeah And you still have an eyepatch.

Hah, I noticed you've still got all the rrrrrr's in your name.

I love that we can disagree sometimes, but are always buds <3333

*thumbs up*

I ask "exactly" and you give me an area of almost a million square km? Jerk

The reason is I'm actually going to Australia (Melbourne, also Sydney) in November, I'll be there for about a month. Sooo... if it's at all possible we should meet up. And I can stalk you IRL

Hey, just a question of curiosity... where in Australia do you live exactly?

I am glad we had this conversation!

No no no, I'm not saying you guys do that, I am saying that asking us to ignore the seemingly non-issue of minority sexist feminism, when no one ignores the non-issue of minority extreme religious folk (in discussions just about the faith is a double standard.

If that isn't afforded to religious folk, then it shouldn't be afforded to feminist's either. I don't like the degree that it is brought up either.

(I have no idea, it hurts to think if he is not, but I just can't help my self, must bite bait)

My point was far more to do with the double standard. People are fine with saying that Christianity and Islam have their roots in anti-intellectualism and that practitioners of the faith are actively holding back the human race. That's pretty insulting.

I've seen that, and continue to see that attitude on ZU and on the internet proper. I agree there is a huge misconception about feminism. I challenge it, Lysis challenges it, John challenges it Lly, Liah and your self all challenge it pretty hard too whenever the topic comes up.

Yeah, the misconception of feminism being a kind of inverse sexism is very very common, but why should we not talk about that? That is what John was saying, that we don't need a thread on extreme feminism. Well why not show the same courtesy to extreme forms of faith?

If that's not what you're suggesting, then why are we disagreeing? I don't like it when people say feminism is about getting women in power either, I don't see why we disagree if we both agree that it should be open for discussion.


But why isn't it relevant, on the one hand you have a very important movement trying to acquire equal rights on the basis of sexual minorities/gender. But on the other hand you have a faith which can be so important to individuals is literally defines part of who they are. They're both touchy subjects,but also important ones depending on the individual.

Well, in regards to John's second post:

No productive discussion ever happens because people spend so much time rallying against (or patting themselves on the back for not being) the extremist fringe. It just gets tiring.

It's also often used as a distraction tactic by anti-theists. They don't have to defend their views if they can derail the topic and if, in so doing, they associate "militant" theists with the normal ones in people's minds, all the better.


The point is, open discussion is open discussion. I don't like the double standard. So what is more acceptable, that we ignore the extreme end of feminism, AND we ignore the extreme end of theists, or we let people talk about both, and we contribute to the discussion and challenge misconceptions?