Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That was a great response by Warren and funny. But inherent in her answer is why people care so dearly what other people are doing, marry whoever you want but please shut up.
That sounds pretty sexist of her. I'm pretty sure many men in this SJW-era have been taken to task for "assuming" things about women. But then again the SJW crowd is filled with blatant hypocrites and straight-man haters.......
Its a pretty good assumption although it could be a woman asking the question, the smart money says its an old white male evangelical. We have heard this question a few times before.
So guys (is that term legal anymore?) who get accused of sexism for "jokes" in the workplace should be immune too, right? You know, they are just "jokes." Typical hypocrisy.
That was a great response by Warren and funny. But inherent in her answer is why people care so dearly what other people are doing, marry whoever you want but please shut up.
I thought it was hilarious. Good for her. and yes that is exactly the point that she was making!
I don't understand why people can't live their lives and just let other people live their lives.
Remember men, when women make a sexist joke about men it is just a harmless joke and sarcasm. But when men make a sexist joke about women, well then it is #metoo time and also time to get sued and fired.
Could she have said that because in order to mention the opposite sex, she had to assume something about the person asking the question?
Without the qualifier, she couldn't get in that she thinks the person should marry someone of the opposite sex, so she had to identify the questioner as something.
She sounds like a snarky broad with that comment. The question was pertinent and with a thoughtful answer she possibly could be persuasive to a voter on the fence about her. But no, she had to sound like a man-hating witch instead.
Could she have said that because in order to mention the opposite sex, she had to assume something about the person asking the question?
Without the qualifier, she couldn't get in that she thinks the person should marry someone of the opposite sex, so she had to identify the questioner as something.
That's my guess.
You guessed wrong. It was a joke, but only for those of us who don’t believe that marriage is only for one man and one woman. And yeah, it’s at their expense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
