Sun Tzu said:
The more intelligent among us recognize that it is folly to elicit "advice and perspective" (as you put it) from atypical females who do not accurately represent the female perspective at large.
I can't think of a way to simplify it any further for you. Chew on it for a while and the light bulb might go off.
What? Because you have a few more decades under your belt you have an omniscient perspective of women? From what I've read thus far it's quite the contrary. Your ignorance is tantamount to insolence. You care for your own and won't tolerate another. How's your light bulb?
At the very least,
listening, to all points of view gives one a much wider range of perspective than censoring those views, especially those you oppose.
I'm done with you.
Now onto my man Obsidian:
You're still impressionable so I'm leaving room for you to see the error your ego is throwing out young brother.
Obsidian said:
It's not censorship to filter certain arguments out of an organization's internal debate.
It's not? Call is absurd machismo then. It sounds better.
Would it make much sense to let Satanists and Islamists speak at church on Sunday, or to let a strong conservative address the Democratic national convention?
If you want constructive criticism you do, yes. If you want to promote intolerance and bigotry then, no.
Does the Great Pook allow feminists to post hateful comments on his blog? Let's be smart about this.
This gets me everytime. How do any of you know "he" is in fact a "he"? Does your fearless leader share in your misogyny or would "he" have a hard time swallowing this bile as much as mature men do?
SoSuave isn't supposed to be a free society; it's supposed to promote DJism, with certain room for debate about minor variations.
So DJism is an attempt to gain a singular, irrational perspective? If that's true I want no part of it.