Quote:
Originally Posted by dalmations202
So you are going to say that Women's suffrage was won without the gun- I agree, but not with what I said, which was MEN gave them this right.
I also said that they could have won this right with the gun, but I did not say that they did get this right with the gun.
|
I could sort of humor your rhetoric until you get to the point where you say men 'gave' women the right to vote. It sure sounds like you're kind of man-glossing over 70+ years of suffrage history in the U.S. alone, where women organized politically and fought politically--yes, all without the right to vote. But men didn't 'give' women anything, nor would they have if the women hadn't organized and applied political pressure. I wonder how many husbands were denied their 'husbandly prerogative' before they understood that women were serious about being treated equally. (Pudenda > Pistol. )
Beyond that, though, you seem to be conflating wildly disparate concepts-- what can be achieved via political power and organization, versus what can be taken by violent means, versus a person's right/ability to defend him/herself-- into some sort of male supremacist screed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalmations202
You see a gun in the hands of my wife make her more powerful than any man until the bullets run out. That is my point. Would you like to find out?
|
And then you end up challenging me to fight your wife in order to prove your point?
You sure sound like a keeper, man.