Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
NH GOP Pol Refers To Women As "Vagina's" In Email  
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11953 posts, RR: 25
Posted (1 year 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2243 times:

Guess what? Another elderly white GOP male legislator making derogatory statements, this time debasing women.

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1090185/thumbs/o-PETER-HANSEN-VAGINAS-facebook.jpg

Here's the quote:

Quote:

“There were two critical ingredients missing in the illustrious stories purporting to demonstrate the practical side of retreat. Not that retreat may not be possible mind you. What could possibly be missing from those factual tales of successful retreat in VT, Germany, and the bowels of Amsterdam? Why children and vagina’s of course. While the tales relate the actions of a solitary male the outcome cannot relate to similar situations where children and women and mothers are the potential victims,” Hansen wrote, according to messages posted online this week by liberal blogger Susan Bruce.


And if you're thinking an apology might be appropriate, think again:

Quote:

Hansen, 70, said Tuesday that he didn’t regret the remark and that critics don’t understand the context.

“My point in the choice of words was twofold: One was shock content and the other was to try to get into the mind of the perpetrator,” Hansen told The Telegraph of Nashua.

Ok, given a second bite at the apple, he says that he feels that perps think of those that retreat as "vagina's"? Huh?

Another legislator so out of touch that he should retire, IMHO.

Something tells me that he just lost any shot at re-election anyhow.

It's amazing to me how the GOP keeps re-enforcing its stereotype as the party of angry old white men.

Aren't these dudes reading the memos?


Inspiration, move me brightly!
38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 1, posted (1 year 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2188 times:

What a nutcase.

Here's the link: http://susanthebruce.blogspot.com/20...04/vaginas-and-children-first.html

Shall we count how many of those who were shedding crocodile tears over Sean Penn's son show up to express their outrage?



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8621 posts, RR: 43
Reply 2, posted (1 year 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2183 times:

I think the photograph illustrates his position within that group really rather nicely.  


Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlinezckls04 From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 1169 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (1 year 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2165 times:

My first thought was "well this means nothing without context". Then I read the link and saw there was no context. Whoops.

I think it's the incorrect usage of the apostrophe which annoys me more though. How anybody can vote for that is beyond me.



If you're not sure whether to use a piece of punctuation, it's best not to.
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11953 posts, RR: 25
Reply 4, posted (1 year 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2154 times:

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 3):
My first thought was "well this means nothing without context". Then I read the link and saw there was no context. Whoops.

I think there was plenty of context, but surely it wasn't hard to find more if you wanted it. Follow the link in reply 1 posted an hour and a half before your post, use google, and so on...

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 3):

I think it's the incorrect usage of the apostrophe which annoys me more though. How anybody can vote for that is beyond me.

The blogger in reply 2 covers that pretty well:

Quote:

I'm pretty sure that when the Titanic was sinking, the captain's instructions were "women and children first, not "vagina's and children first." That the representative chose to describe women as "vagina's" is certainly an affront to half the population. That he failed to properly pluralize the word adds insult to idiocy.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5263 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (1 year 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2153 times:

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
It's amazing to me how the GOP keeps re-enforcing its stereotype as the party of angry old white men.

This is very much a non-story. It appears that because it is a Republican that said it has raised it to a level where it is bad. If you read why he said it and the he was trying for (and failed) it is really no worse that when the Congresswoman used the word vagina on the floor a while back and got so many others upset. Men have penis, women have vaginas. It's OK to say those words to make a point. It's not like the guy always uses "vagina's" to refer to women.....

Simply put, there is nothing wrong with vagina's and quite frankly the guy is right that vagina's and children were indeed not in the situations that he was addressing, only penis' were there. It really is much ado about nothing.

Quote:
During his floor speech on the bill, Vaillancourt gave several examples of situations where he had not needed such a law to protect himself. Hansen said he was arguing in his email that the situations could have been different had a woman with children, and not a man, been in danger.

“What could possibly be missing from those factual tales of successful retreat in VT, Germany, and the bowels of Amsterdam? Why children and vagina’s of course,” Hansen wrote in the April 1 email. “While the tales relate the actions of a solitary male the outcome cannot relate to similar situations where children and women and mothers are the potential victims.”

Hansen said he used the word “vagina” to make a point.

“I used it for, number one, as a factor for shock, and I used that word to bring people into the mindset of a perpetrator” – that is, “of a potential rapist,” he said.

Hansen added, “I only regret my word choice because, one, it is misconstrued and, two, not as effective as I wish it had been.”
http://www.concordmonitor.com/home/5...nonym-for-woman-in-all-house-email

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinezckls04 From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 1169 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (1 year 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2143 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 4):
I think there was plenty of context,

Not really- the quote above comprises almost his entire email. Were it in some lengthier passage about a different topic there may be something to explain why he chose to use that word, but there really isn't anything other than that passage. It is a very random outburst.

Quote:
but surely it wasn't hard to find more if you wanted it. Follow the link in reply 1 posted an hour and a half before your post, use google, and so on...

I believe I read the entire email within about 30 seconds after opening this page. Such detailed research would have afforded me no extra information.



If you're not sure whether to use a piece of punctuation, it's best not to.
User currently offlineSmittyOne From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 1298 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (1 year 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2131 times:

Note to self: do not refer to individuals solely by their dominant reproductive organ.

Next!



We live in an age surrounded by complex machines but the basic knowledge of the average punter is minimal. -GDB
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5263 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (1 year 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2127 times:

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 7):
Note to self: do not refer to individuals solely by their dominant reproductive organ.

What, are you a penis or a mouse?  
  

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 9, posted (1 year 6 days ago) and read 2106 times:

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 3):
My first thought was "well this means nothing without context". Then I read the link and saw there was no context. Whoops.

Sure there's context, it's not well related in the blog post, but it is in context. (I had to read it about 5 times, but I eventually got it.)



International Homo of Mystery
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11953 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (1 year 6 days ago) and read 2095 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 5):
It appears that because it is a Republican that said it has raised it to a level where it is bad.

I disagre - if a Dem said this, it'd probably get more notice. I think the reason it's not getting more notice is that a GOPer said it, and as above, it's consistent with the GOP stereotype. Not saying that sterotypes are good, just saying that they exist, and this fits the pattern.

Quoting tugger (Reply 5):
If you read why he said it and the he was trying for (and failed) it is really no worse that when the Congresswoman used the word vagina on the floor a while back and got so many others upset. Men have penis, women have vaginas. It's OK to say those words to make a point. It's not like the guy always uses "vagina's" to refer to women.....

Actually, that's exactly what he did, and he's admitted he did it for "shock value". He's not referring to the female genitalia itself, he's using the word for female genitalia as a synonym for women. Your reference of choice (which is NH's largest right-leaning newspaper) says:

Quote:

Hansen said he was arguing in his email that the situations could have been different had a woman with children, and not a man, been in danger.

This makes it perfectly clear that he was referring to women, not their anatomy.

Even without the vulgarity, it seems he doesn't know that females as well as males go into harm's way every day in wearing a US Army/Navy/Marine/USAF uniform, not to mention every other kind of first responder.

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 6):
I believe I read the entire email within about 30 seconds after opening this page. Such detailed research would have afforded me no extra information.

Then I'm not sure what your concern about the lack of context is. Plenty of context was provided, and even you are saying more research would not add anything.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5263 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (1 year 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2036 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 10):
I disagre - if a Dem said this, it'd probably get more notice. I think the reason it's not getting more notice is that a GOPer said it, and as above, it's consistent with the GOP stereotype. Not saying that sterotypes are good, just saying that they exist, and this fits the pattern.

I dunno, I saw a lot of people support the legislator that said on the Floor, she said it there for shock value too (I am trying to find the story but not having the time, I am hoping that someone here remembers it). But for some reason it was OK then but not here. He may have used it in a poorly worded way but it is not that great big a deal, it is not a bigger deal than when she used it and many people supported her use of it (and many attacked her for it saying it was "inappropriate" or some such).

Quoting Revelation (Reply 10):
Actually, that's exactly what he did, and he's admitted he did it for "shock value". He's not referring to the female genitalia itself, he's using the word for female genitalia as a synonym for women. Your reference of choice (which is NH's largest right-leaning newspaper) says:

I do know that he said it for "shock value", and I am OK with that. He does not use it as a regular term for women so I think that trying to equate that he used it in this instance to that he was using it to mean and denigrate and reduce women is incorrect. That women were absent from the events being noted does in fact mean that vagina's were also absent. I do not find it degrading in this instance (unlike things like "legitimate rape" or God's intent" which are relatively absolute statements, inexcusably stupid statements).

Tugg

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineSmittyOne From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 1298 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (1 year 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2030 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 8):
What, are you a penis or a mouse?  
  

Tugg

Depends who you ask LOL!



We live in an age surrounded by complex machines but the basic knowledge of the average punter is minimal. -GDB
User currently offlinezckls04 From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 1169 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (1 year 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2026 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 10):
Then I'm not sure what your concern about the lack of context is.

Where did I say I was "concerned"? I just pointed out that (unlike many stories one hears such as this) there wasn't any context which one could defend the legislators choice of words with; I don't see why you find that so controversial.

I am mystified as to what we're disagreeing about here.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 9):
Sure there's context, it's not well related in the blog post, but it is in context. (I had to read it about 5 times, but I eventually got it.)

What is the context? I can't see anything in his email or the circumstances surrounding it which would excuse his choice of words.

[Edited 2013-04-17 15:44:19]


If you're not sure whether to use a piece of punctuation, it's best not to.
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11953 posts, RR: 25
Reply 14, posted (1 year 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1999 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 11):
I do know that he said it for "shock value", and I am OK with that.

Ok I'm in sync with you, and of course don't agree, it's a damn poor choice of words at best.

Quoting tugger (Reply 11):
He does not use it as a regular term for women

Assuming facts not in evidence? I doubt any elected official uses such vulgarity casually, but we don't really know how he speaks in less guarded moments, and the fact that he'd use it at all is poor judgement (which he now admits as well).

We now have tapes showing that Nixon and LBJ both swore like crazy, so it's hard to say what goes on in a pol's head.

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 13):
I just pointed out that (unlike many stories one hears such as this) there wasn't any context which one could defend the legislators choice of words with;

Ok, now we too are in sync.

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 13):
I don't see why you find that so controversial.

Because when I write a post I try to put in enough context so that I don't get tons of SOURCE PLEASE responses, yet don't bore everyone to tears with too much detail. In short, I was confusing the idea that I'm not posting enough context vs the story didn't include enough context.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5263 posts, RR: 8
Reply 15, posted (1 year 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1970 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 14):
it's a damn poor choice of words at best.

I definitely agree with you there.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 14):
Assuming facts not in evidence? I doubt any elected official uses such vulgarity casually, but we don't really know how he speaks in less guarded moments, and the fact that he'd use it at all is poor judgement (which he now admits as well).

I am thinking that if he did use it normally, as a standard term in discussions, that we would have heard about it so I am using a lack of evidence as an indicator. I also agree that that it was poorly thought out to use it, especially in today's climate, without vary intentional clarifications as to how and why he was using the term etc. But I just think it was more a thoughtless moment and nothing that deserves castigation etc. for (I think the same for the recent hubbub about the teacher in Albany that assigned students to defend Nazi propaganda that Jews were evil).

Quoting Revelation (Reply 14):
We now have tapes showing that Nixon and LBJ both swore like crazy, so it's hard to say what goes on in a pol's head.

I do understand what you are saying and I doubt we are that far apart on this, just on different sides of the "what is acceptable/despicable" line. For me on this I can't really judge someone on what i may think is in their head. If we do that then almost everyone is guilty and to me it is actions and truthfully scale and consistency of actions that really mean something.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineMSPNWA From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1832 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (1 year 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1950 times:

To me the people with a problem here and the ones having an issue with what he said. There's context there, and I can understand why one would say that. Making a big deal out of this accomplishes nothing.

User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11953 posts, RR: 25
Reply 17, posted (1 year 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1884 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 15):
I am thinking that if he did use it normally, as a standard term in discussions, that we would have heard about it so I am using a lack of evidence as an indicator.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. We really don't know much about this guy and given that the forum of discussion was an internal NH legislator's email list it very well could be that he's made other similar statements in the past or in this one case he let his guard down.

Quoting tugger (Reply 15):
I also agree that that it was poorly thought out to use it, especially in today's climate, without vary intentional clarifications as to how and why he was using the term etc.

Indeed. Note that the "C word" is printed far less than the "N word". I'm not sure I understand why, but it's a fact borne out by statistics.

Quoting tugger (Reply 15):
But I just think it was more a thoughtless moment and nothing that deserves castigation etc. for (I think the same for the recent hubbub about the teacher in Albany that assigned students to defend Nazi propaganda that Jews were evil).

In both cases I have to wonder if such extreme thoughtlessness means the person should not reconsider what career they are pursuing because they seem ill suited to it.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 16):
To me the people with a problem here and the ones having an issue with what he said. There's context there, and I can understand why one would say that.

The context is that, after the vulgarities, his statements still say that men would act differently when women and children needed to be defended, but he doesn't say a thing about the case where it's women doing the defending, which is sexist. We through our elected officials send women into harms way to defend others all the time. The legislator was born seventy years ago. He needs to come to the realization that women from his own district are right now in the military and are first responders and are defending others, or he should consider if there isn't something else to do with his time.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 16):
Making a big deal out of this accomplishes nothing.

So says you. I say that the man is out of touch and he really should resign.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineRussianJet From Kyrgyzstan, joined Jul 2007, 7638 posts, RR: 21
Reply 18, posted (1 year 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1858 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
NH GOP Pol Refers To Women As "Vagina's"

He referred to women as belonging to a/the vagina?? Doesn't make much sense at all. I'd say the vagina belongs to them.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5263 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (1 year 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1846 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 17):
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. We really don't know much about this guy and given that the forum of discussion was an internal NH legislator's email list it very well could be that he's made other similar statements in the past or in this one case he let his guard down.

I understand that however the quote you start with is a complete anathema to the standards of how our our law and values are applied (or supposed to be applied) in our country. I really can't think that you would countenance using such a standard on people as a norm, even this situation.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 17):
Indeed. Note that the "C word" is printed far less than the "N word". I'm not sure I understand why, but it's a fact borne out by statistics.

Well you are right about statistics..... I'll put it this way: Females make up half the human population....

Quoting Revelation (Reply 17):
In both cases I have to wonder if such extreme thoughtlessness means the person should not reconsider what career they are pursuing because they seem ill suited to it.

I think there is often too much rapid condemnation of what people that have no real connection to the situation perceive to be wrong.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 17):
he really should resign.

And here we definitely differ. I just think he should offer a simple apology for any offense and everyone outside of his region (well most everyone else) should let it be. He will have consequences he must face anyways from his own constituents if they are sufficiently offended.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11953 posts, RR: 25
Reply 20, posted (1 year 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1776 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 18):
He referred to women as belonging to a/the vagina?? Doesn't make much sense at all. I'd say the vagina belongs to them.

He used female anatomy to represent the females in the analogy he was trying to construct, and used incorrect spelling to do so. It's the same as if I referred to a bunch of guys as penises instead of men, and typed it as "penis's".

Quoting tugger (Reply 19):
I understand that however the quote you start with is a complete anathema to the standards of how our our law and values are applied (or supposed to be applied) in our country.

It is the standard of jurisprudence, but in day to day life we talk about our suspicions and inferences all the time. If the way a person speaks when amongst his peers is different than the way he speaks in general my suspicions are definitely raised. In reality I take a few hits because my public language is more coarse than average, but I do that because I don't want it to be said that I am two-faced or a hypocrite.

Quoting tugger (Reply 19):
I think there is often too much rapid condemnation of what people that have no real connection to the situation perceive to be wrong.

I see that point, but the man said he was trying to emphasize a point which to me means he put some thought behind it. It wasn't a spontaneous utterance, it was an email that he had to type in and presumably spent some time as he was typing it in. In his favor it was something he expected would be kept confidential and perhaps was more expressive than he would be otherwise, but on the other hand that's also suggestive that he perhaps is more expressive when talking to his peers which some people would judge as being two-faced or hypocritical.

Quoting tugger (Reply 19):
And here we definitely differ. I just think he should offer a simple apology for any offense and everyone outside of his region (well most everyone else) should let it be.

What we have gotten from him is “I only regret my word choice because, one, it is misconstrued and, two, not as effective as I wish it had been.”. Not an apology in my book. I see how his word choice has proven to be ineffective, and the real issue isn't that the vulgarity is leading to the statement being misconstrued, it's that the statement itself is sexist and represents archaic thinking about the roles women he represents perform.

Quoting tugger (Reply 19):
He will have consequences he must face anyways from his own constituents if they are sufficiently offended.

Indeed. I live in a town bordering his district, and it will be interesting to see how this plays out. IMHO his ongoing comments shows little regard for 50% of his constituents and I'm sure that will be noticed. On the other hand, he is something of a hero to that demographic that is so central to the GOP, angry white men, because he successfully held off a trespasser to his home at gunpoint.

Politically NH used to be a bastion of Republicanism through the Reagan years but has shifted left from the Clinton years onward, mostly due to folks from Massachusetts moving in due to lower housing prices and no state income tax. His district adjoins the MA border, the folks in his district are overwhelmingly white, with the folks being here a while mostly being middle class and the newcomers being mostly upper middle class yuppies or better. NH's only known billionaire according to Forbes lives in the main town in his district.

I could see a political opponent using these statements against him with much effect. It'll be interesting to see if he decides to run for re-election.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 21, posted (1 year 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1729 times:

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 13):
I can't see anything in his email or the circumstances surrounding it which would excuse his choice of words.

Re-reading the post of yours which I quoted, I don't understand your comment here. Your earlier post simply stated that you didn't understand the context, not whether you thought it was appropriate or not. I got the context after a couple of re-readings, but nowhere did I state that it was appropriate.

Regardless, it now sounds like Hansen has apologized for his statement:

New Hampshire Republican Peter Hansen Apologizes: It Was 'Stupid' To Refer To Women As 'Vaginas'



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineflyguy89 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1850 posts, RR: 10
Reply 22, posted (1 year 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1699 times:

  Do we get make a thread now for each of the gems that Joe Biden has dropped on us over the years?

Quoting Revelation (Reply 10):
This makes it perfectly clear that he was referring to women, not their anatomy.

Even without the vulgarity, it seems he doesn't know that females as well as males go into harm's way every day in wearing a US Army/Navy/Marine/USAF uniform, not to mention every other kind of first responder.

Well slap me down, drag me through the woods and color me surprised, you mean that politicians actually say stupid things sometimes??


User currently offlineRussianJet From Kyrgyzstan, joined Jul 2007, 7638 posts, RR: 21
Reply 23, posted (1 year 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1692 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Revelation (Reply 20):
He used female anatomy to represent the females in the analogy he was trying to construct, and used incorrect spelling to do so. It's the same as if I referred to a bunch of guys as penises instead of men, and typed it as "penis's".

No, because that would also make no grammatical sense whatsoever. You obviously missed the point. Perhaps you could read up a bit on usage of the apostrophe.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11953 posts, RR: 25
Reply 24, posted (1 year 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1668 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 21):
Regardless, it now sounds like Hansen has apologized for his statement:

  

This:

Quote:

"I want to apologize to my constituents, my colleagues and women, especially those in my life, for the blatantly offensive, insensitive and, frankly, stupid language I used in my email with House members regarding the Stand Your Ground legislation," Hansen wrote in an emailed statement.

"I am embarrassed, to say the least. There is no place or need in the public discourse for the words I used. The people and the process deserve better than that."

is an apology. “I only regret my word choice because, one, it is misconstrued and, two, not as effective as I wish it had been.” is not. I think he went too far in the underlined section because we should be able to use the word when referring to anatomy, but I'd rather see him go too far rather than come up short.

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 22):
Do we get make a thread now for each of the gems that Joe Biden has dropped on us over the years?

It's a discussion forum. Feel free!

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 23):
No, because that would also make no grammatical sense whatsoever.

That has already been pointed out, namely:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 4):
The blogger in reply 2 covers that pretty well:

Quote:

I'm pretty sure that when the Titanic was sinking, the captain's instructions were "women and children first, not "vagina's and children first." That the representative chose to describe women as "vagina's" is certainly an affront to half the population. That he failed to properly pluralize the word adds insult to idiocy.

...

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 23):
You obviously missed the point.

Since we are all friends here, feel free to tell me what point I am missing.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 23):
Perhaps you could read up a bit on usage of the apostrophe.

Since we are all friends here, feel free to tell me what aspect of the usage of the apostrophe that I should read up on.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinebhill From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 928 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (1 year 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1663 times:

ok, how about this one....A person public servant...ahem...DUMB enough to put it in writing...and email....probably lacks enough common sense to govern...


what a tool...



Carpe Pices
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 26, posted (1 year 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1660 times:

Quoting bhill (Reply 25):
what a tool.

  

And we're still waiting for all those who shed crocodile tears in the thread about Sean Penn's son to post their outrage.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineRussianJet From Kyrgyzstan, joined Jul 2007, 7638 posts, RR: 21
Reply 27, posted (1 year 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1658 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Revelation (Reply 24):
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 23):
Perhaps you could read up a bit on usage of the apostrophe.

Since we are all friends here, feel free to tell me what aspect of the usage of the apostrophe that I should read up

Hadn't noticed if it had been pointed out previously, but "vagina's" is the possessive form of "vagina". The correct plural is "vaginas". Same applies to penises. For example: Women have vaginas; The vagina's shape.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11953 posts, RR: 25
Reply 28, posted (1 year 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1646 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 27):
Quoting RussianJet

Got it, thanks!



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineRussianJet From Kyrgyzstan, joined Jul 2007, 7638 posts, RR: 21
Reply 29, posted (1 year 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1635 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Revelation (Reply 28):
Got it, thanks!

Splendid. Sorry for being a little sarky - call it a pet peeve!  



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 30, posted (1 year 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1542 times:

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 3):
How anybody can vote for that is beyond me.
Quoting tugger (Reply 5):
Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
It's amazing to me how the GOP keeps re-enforcing its stereotype as the party of angry old white men.
Quoting tugger (Reply 5):
Simply put, there is nothing wrong with vagina's and quite frankly the guy is right that vagina's and children were indeed not in the situations that he was addressing, only penis' were there. It really is much ado about nothing.

What short memories you have ! So a Republican lawmaker dares to stand up in public and utter the word, "vagina" , and all,of a sudden he's "old"......needs to "retire", must be "nuts", blah, blah, blah;

Meanwhile........just a few short years ago, a well know liberal female, so-called "actress" writes an entire play, advertises it on TV, in magazines, on bill boards, .........and the name of the "play"........"The Vagina Monologs" ! I didn't go see it, but I'm told that the "main point" of the so-called play, was this so-called "actress" saying VIGINA, VAGINA, over and over again, then describing what viginas look like, who has them, and so on, and on, and on.......ad nauseum.

My point being...........no one (least of all any liberals), were the least bit upset by all of this repetitive "vagina" nonsense.

but......once again........just let a dreaded Republican say the word ONE time......Oh.....he's "old"....he better retire.....better yet.....let's not wait..........let's kick him out, NOW !

Do you kind of see how VERY "one sided" this all sounds ? ( I'm addressing the question to everyone, not just democrats)


IMO, the use of human genitalia as the primary topic of conversation is ill-advised, in extremely poor taste, and more often than not, is done by some simpleton attempting to see just how much he / or she can get away with;

But I would have to add to that.....if democrats can do it, so should republicans be able to ! (without ridicule)



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11953 posts, RR: 25
Reply 31, posted (1 year 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1536 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 30):
So a Republican lawmaker dares to stand up in public and utter the word, "vagina" , and all,of a sudden he's "old"......needs to "retire", must be "nuts", blah, blah, blah;

The problem isn't that the word was used, the problem was that he chose to use it inappropriately, and he himself admits that:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 24):
"I want to apologize to my constituents, my colleagues and women, especially those in my life, for the blatantly offensive, insensitive and, frankly, stupid language I used in my email with House members regarding the Stand Your Ground legislation," Hansen wrote in an emailed statement.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 32, posted (1 year 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1536 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 30):
My point being...........no one (least of all any liberals), were the least bit upset by all of this repetitive "vagina" nonsense.

There's a huge gulf of difference between calling part of your own anatomy by its proper name and a member of the opposite sex using that same piece of anatomy as a name in which to refer to you as a person, especially when it's a sexual organ.

But you knew that. You didn't fool anyone.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 33, posted (1 year 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1529 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 32):
There's a huge gulf of difference between calling part of your own anatomy by its proper name

First of all,.........It wasn't me that called "part of my anatomy" anything..........I don't happen to HAVE a "vigina", (and I'm pretty sure YOU know THAT !

Secondly..........I said exactly what I intended to say, (whether you were able to understand my point or not, is beyond my control );

Maybe you'll get a little farther arguing with Tugger, as he didn't agree with you either.



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5263 posts, RR: 8
Reply 34, posted (1 year 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1520 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 20):
I could see a political opponent using these statements against him with much effect. It'll be interesting to see if he decides to run for re-election.

Yes, I am sure it will be used at some point. But as I have noted, I do hope that people "get over it" as I (and I know others disagree) don't think it is that big a deal (and he did apologize didn't he).

Quoting Revelation (Reply 20):
Indeed. I live in a town bordering his district,

Then what you think does matter, it affects your community (at least somewhat).

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 21):
New Hampshire Republican Peter Hansen Apologizes: It Was 'Stupid' To Refer To Women As 'Vaginas'

Yeah, I would say it was. But for me at least, I still don't think it was a terribly awful career ending thing.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 28):
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 27):
Quoting RussianJet

Got it, thanks!

I'll join in the "Thanks, got it crowd". Thanks for clarifying.   

Quoting Geezer (Reply 30):
What short memories you have !

Yes, you may have noticed I have been mentioning that.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 30):
but......once again........just let a dreaded Republican say the word ONE time......Oh.....he's "old"....he better retire.....better yet.....let's not wait..........let's kick him out, NOW !
[...]
Do you kind of see how VERY "one sided" this all sounds ? ( I'm addressing the question to everyone, not just democrats)

You didn't actually read my posts did you.....

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 35, posted (1 year 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1519 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 33):
I don't happen to HAVE a "vigina", (and I'm pretty sure YOU know THAT !

Honestly, I'm beginning to wonder! Regardless, I used the word "anatomy" not "vagina" or "penis", as what I said would apply equally coming from a male or female regarding the other's anatomy.

But you knew that. You aren't fooling anyone.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 33):
Maybe you'll get a little farther arguing with Tugger, as he didn't agree with you either.

Oh really. Hmm, where would that be. When he answered you here?

Quoting tugger (Reply 34):
You didn't actually read my posts did you.....



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5263 posts, RR: 8
Reply 36, posted (1 year 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1511 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 35):
Oh really. Hmm, where would that be. When he answered you here?

Quoting tugger (Reply 34):
You didn't actually read my posts did you.....

Posts are crossing up but my general comment to Geez was that it appeared he lumped me with others and appeared to claim we were all the same, when we most certainly aren't. In the other post, he did note there were differences so I am some what confused. In general I am in the middle here on this, it was nothing all that awful, others have used the word vagina to make a point and others have said it without it being decried. To me at least it is not that big a deal. But it was poorly chosen wording, especially in today's climate and it has bought him to a point he otherwise needn't have been if he has put his thoughts down with a bit more care. But again, a momentary lapse (of this level) does not a bad person make.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinecws818 From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1171 posts, RR: 2
Reply 37, posted (1 year 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1501 times:

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 22):
Do we get make a thread now for each of the gems that Joe Biden has dropped on us over the years?

No, because that is not remotely relevant to the topic at hand.



volgende halte...Station Hollands Spoor
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11953 posts, RR: 25
Reply 38, posted (1 year 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1461 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 34):
he did apologize didn't he

I think the proper apology does matter, a lot, even though it took him a day or two to come to it, and even if it was coerced (which I have no way of knowing).

Before he was coming across as pig-headed, now at least we know he can change his mind. His earlier statements left some doubt to that.

Based on the apology, I truly believe he'd choose different words to express what he was trying to express now, ones that wouldn't be demeaning to half his constituents.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
GOP Group Wants To Bash Gays In Ohio-Again posted Sun Oct 1 2006 18:17:25 by Falcon84
Judge Sentences Two Ohio Men To Dress As Women posted Sun Oct 28 2001 20:45:20 by Iainhol
Alex Trebek To Retire From Jeopardy In 2016 posted Wed Mar 27 2013 08:46:29 by 1337Delta764
Solutions To Reduce Healthcare Costs In The U.S. posted Fri Nov 9 2012 00:19:40 by Pyrex
Mercedes To Sell Electric B-class In USA In 2014 posted Mon Jul 2 2012 17:41:34 by stasisLAX
What To Do During Diwali In India? posted Wed Nov 3 2010 21:13:45 by Marcus
Palin Willing To Give It A Shot In 2012 posted Fri Sep 17 2010 15:27:03 by mt99
NYC To Try Banning Smoking In Parks And Beaches posted Wed Sep 15 2010 22:13:10 by TheCommodore
Fired Teachers To Be Re-hired In R.I. posted Sun May 16 2010 21:03:39 by WarRI1
FL Gov. Crist To Run As Independent posted Wed Apr 28 2010 14:27:20 by Ken777