What Is It About Powerful Men That Attracts A Harem Of Floozies? (stats, premium)
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.
Some seem to bring polictics into everyhting. I am just disappointed because of who he represents. I'd not bat a eye at another poltician ;entertainer or business man at the top.I think he might not be court marshall for adultery since he retired tho.
Read the entire thread. It's only 2 pages. You can do it!
I've read the entire thread. Maybe you point out the post where you used a derogatory name for Petraeus like you did for Paula Broadwell. If she's a "floozie" what label did you put on him?
Read the entire thread. It's only 2 pages. You can do it!
I did. And it's pretty clear that even though you now say you're "not giving him a free pass", you really emphasize the blame, to say the least, on the women over the man. And initially, you started by giving him a 100% free pass until you were pushed on it by other posters. The fact that you didn't even recognize how troublesome your premise was from the start speaks volumes about your perspective on the sexes, and, when aggregated across many other conservative white males, it's precisely what sunk the GOP this past election. It's not the early 1900s anymore where men were always mischievous heroes and women were the whores when it comes to this stuff. We live in a world now where most people recognize that: (1) the old Adam/Eve premises that marginalize women (consciously or otherwise) against men are not valid, and (2) adults who choose engage in illicit sexual behavior should equally share responsibility and scrutiny for their conduct.
Political or economic power is just another form of "mass."
The more massive a planet, for example, the stronger its gravitational force which is strong enough to bend space-time. The same is true for stars but certain stars become so massive that they literally can't contain their "mojo" any longer...
Some quotes:
Quote:
According to current theories about the formation of the Universe, all of the original material in the Universe was hydrogen and helium, with very slight traces of some other materials. All the stuff we, and the Earth around us, are made of, like iron and oxygen and carbon, has come from that initial material being fused to form heavier elements in the cores of stars. But the heaviest elements, like iron, are only formed in the massive stars which end their lives in supernovae. Our blood has iron in the hemoglobin which is vital to our ability to breath. So without supernovae, most forms of life on Earth, including us, would not be possible. And much of the material the Earth is made of would not exist.
My idea is that every specific body strives to become master over all space and to extend its force (--its will to power and to thrust back all that resists its extension. But it continually encounters similar efforts on the part of other bodies and ends by coming to an arrangement ("union") with those of them that are sufficiently related to it: thus they then conspire together for power. And the process goes on--
from The Will to Power, s.636, Walter Kaufmann transl.
Quote:
[Anything which] is a living and not a dying body... will have to be an incarnate will to power, it will strive to grow, spread, seize, become predominant - not from any morality or immorality but because it is living and because life simply is will to power... 'Exploitation'... belongs to the essence of what lives, as a basic organic function; it is a consequence of the will to power, which is after all the will to life.
from Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil, s.259, Walter Kaufmann transl.
Well yeah but why are they floozies while the General is given a pass? He's committing adultery they are not! He's paying for dinners and nights out for the compensation of sexual dalliance.
What do those things make him?
You cannot use a user. Both parties were getting what they wanted. Neither is lilly white.
Let me think for a second, did I ever say the General gets a pass? Nope.
I did. And it's pretty clear that even though you now say you're "not giving him a free pass", you really emphasize the blame, to say the least, on the women over the man. And initially, you started by giving him a 100% free pass until you were pushed on it by other posters. The fact that you didn't even recognize how troublesome your premise was from the start speaks volumes about your perspective on the sexes, and, when aggregated across many other conservative white males, it's precisely what sunk the GOP this past election. It's not the early 1900s anymore where men were always mischievous heroes and women were the whores when it comes to this stuff. We live in a world now where most people recognize that: (1) the old Adam/Eve premises that marginalize women (consciously or otherwise) against men are not valid, and (2) adults who choose engage in illicit sexual behavior should equally share responsibility and scrutiny for their conduct.
See, this is where liberalism and grand emotions get in the way of rationality. You make the assumption that I was forced into acknowledging that Patraeus did wrong. This couldn't be further from the truth. I KNOW that Patraeus ****ed up. Why do I need to state the obvious? Where i'm apparently more intelligent than you is that I can compartmentalize the many different issues and bring about logical debate as it pertains to the women in this case. Just because I don't equalize the topic by berating General Patraeus doesn't mean I hold him to a lower standard than I do the women.
It's a real shame you wasted so much time making an irrelevant point. Perhaps next time you can raise the bar for yourself and actually leave the emotions out of your rant. Deal?
Let me think for a second, did I ever say the General gets a pass? Nope.
Just a guess but after thinking for a second neither did you attribute any derogatory to him but rather confirmed the o/p's opinion that it is the women only, deserving of the negative moniker "floozies".
Just a guess but after thinking for a second neither did you attribute any derogatory to him but rather confirmed the o/p's opinion that it is the women only, deserving of the negative moniker "floozies".
You're right, its just a guess, a stupid, uneducated, unsubstantiated one...and you couldn't be more wrong.
See, this is where liberalism and grand emotions get in the way of rationality. You make the assumption that I was forced into acknowledging that Patraeus did wrong. This couldn't be further from the truth. I KNOW that Patraeus ****ed up. Why do I need to state the obvious? Where i'm apparently more intelligent than you is that I can compartmentalize the many different issues and bring about logical debate as it pertains to the women in this case. Just because I don't equalize the topic by berating General Patraeus doesn't mean I hold him to a lower standard than I do the women.
It's a real shame you wasted so much time making an irrelevant point. Perhaps next time you can raise the bar for yourself and actually leave the emotions out of your rant. Deal?
Her point was not irrelevant at all. And as much as you like to pat yourself on the back for your supposed "intelligence" in being able to "compartmentalize the many different issues and bring about logical debate as it pertains to the women in this case" your OP post was neither intelligent or logical. How is it logical to separate the moral values of these women and leave out the moral values of the men involved in these kinds of scandals? Where is the intelligence in using derogatory verbiage to describe Broadwell and Kelly in the same post where you used complimentary words to describe men like Petraeus and Allen? i.e. your OP post, if you need reminding:
Quote:
What is it about powerful men that attracts a harem of floozies? Paula Broadwell and Jill Kelley represent the Floozie Class™ of women that exist in society. In the history of man, there has always been a woman who can't resist the mix of power, charm, money, and influence that comes with certain men. What is it with powerful men that brings these worthless whores out of the woodwork? Do they have no dignity?
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.
