Originally posted by: notfred
Originally posted by: DearQT
Originally posted by: notfred
If you've never once in your life had the urge to injure someone else, you must be more highly evolved than the rest of the world, because most of us have, at one time or another, felt that way. That's the way humanity is, except for you, apparently.
Really, go start a poll if you don't beleive me. It is perfectly normal for people to feel violent when they're angry. What seperates moral people from criminals is thier ability to keep from acting on those feelings.
*Chuckling!* You were so confident that it's a common thing
It's not a common thing? Are you sure?
Yeah, Notfred, I love the way you take your statistics. I'm sure it's logical to go to a completely skewed forum for a general idea of what is a common thought. First off, one whole gender is almost absent, but, of course, in the first place you have no regards for the opinion of females. :roll: So that is understandable that you would think statistics from a skewed forum is acceptable and the arbiter of common thoughts. Even the way you framed the linked question would get a very different response from asking if one's ever "really wanted to slap [one's] SO". One question is about "someone", the other is about a significant other; not to speak of the fact that the tools for statistics here is not particularly scientific.
If you think logic isn't my forte, you must of missed the fact that I'm a computer programmer. I went to college to learn to understand logic. I am often teased by fiancée for being too logical about things all the time. She probably doesn't know what she's talking about though, because you, as a world renowned black square with no name, are obviously a much more qualified judge of my reasoning abilities.
Your second response further proves that it isn't at all. Of course you could fool someone who isn't in that field of study that you are, so to your SO it would seem like you are logical. However, one with a background in that field knows that you are not, as your performance in statistics and use of a weak analogy has just proved. I wouldn't happen to know your academic or work performance in that field either, so your attempt to qualify yourself in that field at this point is insufficient and pointless.
As far as resorting the the *thought* of violence to resolve an issue, the whole idea is absurd. No one ever resolved anything with a thought. You can think about violence all day long and it's not going to hurt anyone, and you can think about peace all you want but it's not going to stop people from dying in Iraq. Issues are resolved or escalated by actions, not thoughts. Do you remember all the way back to the first post when I said what action I took? In case you don't: none. I did nothing.
No, that is not what I said. My statement and yours have two different meanings. Again, if you knew logic, you would know better than begging the question and ambiguity to achieve your point. If you still need help for me to break that statement step-by-step to you, let me know.
I could go into how you're whole paragraph about Mexico/California is completely racist, but I don't really think that's the way you feel. You're just not good enough at trying to make yourself sound smart to come up with anything believable, and the best you could do ended up making you sound like a bigot. You don't seem to have noticed, though. Maybe you should proof-read your rants.
LOL! It's amazing how you've pulled the race card at your convenience. ROFLMAO! The sad thing is that you didn't even know what you were doing, and it looks and sounds like it. First off, Mexico is not a race, nor is her citizens. Mexico is a nation, and a native of the country is a national. I explicitly said a native of Mexico, for instance. The reason I said that is because they come from a culture where it is "normal" and acceptable to slap their female significant others. The same is true for many third-world nations. Because this is their culture, they come to the USA, sometimes having no knowledge of the law and continue with their belief systems put into action. They don't even pause to think of it. Their wives/gfs reluctantly accept it too. And even if the men have knowledge of the law, the culture of domestic abuse is ingrained in them that it is hard for them to relinquish of that belief system. They may begin thinking of the consequences at this point, though. This is such an issue that some counties in California have made particular programs to address this issue. But of course you would have no knowledge of it because you don't care. If you did have this knowledge, then you would not pull the race card fast.
And the next paragraph, you call my fiancée physically and emotionally weak. Have you met her? No? So you just know for a fact that she's weak because I got mad at her
Yeah, I'm sure all you felt was anger toward her. You never had the desire to slap her. :roll: And you would "really want to slap your SO" if she were strapping, and then speak of it as though you would expect no defensive response from her?
And you're accusing me of being bad at logic? And then you're telling me that I'm either abusive, or that I was raised in an abusive home? Do you have any evidence of either? No, you're just pulling sh!t out of your ass again, trying to sound smart and important.
Yes, I am saying that. Statistically, it would lean toward that. Are you denying the conjunctive statement? Please be my guest. Be explicit about it, but remember that absence of evidence does not prove that it is not the case. It simply means that it is inconclusive. The conclusion in this case was reached from your behavior matching *gasp* "common characteristics".... I haven't forgotten some of your posts, including the sink incident.
As far as the "ass pic" goes, it was posted with her permission. Of course you would know that, because you were over at our house when I took it.
Yeah, and that stops it from being pot calling kettle black with such explicit title as "girlfriend ass pics".
You really think that the only reason I haven't hit my fiancée is because there's a law against? A few sentences ago didn't you say she's too weak to do anything about it, and she's not likely to call the police? Your psychological profiling skills are so great, aren't they? You've got me fearing the police that she would obviously be too weak and afraid to call. If you had the slightest idea what you were talking about in the last paragraph, why in the hell would I care about the law?
Yes, I think so. It seems to me you do not know the difference between probability and affirmation. Someone is less likely to do something is not the same as someone definitely and with complete certainty not doing something. Even if your premise were true, of course again you don't or pretend you don't understand the law too well. You wouldn't happen to know that even with your gf's reluctance in the event that you struck her, the law in California has made it possible for the DA to prosecute the matter in spite of her objection or refusal to cooperate. You have forgotten that the health care providers are obligated to screen for domestic abuse and report to the police if suspicious injuries are found. You've also forgotten that a witness to your action could call the cops on you and testify against you in the event of a trial. I wouldn't hesitate to do so if I saw you do that to her. This reminds me of a case of jealousy that I witnessed at a show. Some guy gets really upset that his gf was talking to another guy, albeit a casual chat with a photographer. Next you knew, he was like "Who the f*** were you talking to?" He stood up as if to slap her and then walked out angrily. My gut feeling is that the guy's hit that woman before. I was upset about it. If he had done anything to her in the public, you bet he would be in trouble.
Here is your city's service for domestic violence, including threat management:
Domestic Violence Unit. I think it might be of help to you when you realize your problem. :roll:
Facebook
Twitter