Im not even sure this is directed at me. If it is, thank you.

My parents raised me to not be a 'lazy thinker' so I try to think beyond snippets and soundbytes,,,,,,to what is reasonable and logical,,,

And yet you are a Democrat. So, what went wrong?

absolutely NOTHING,,,

I agree, for example if I were a man who said things about how men should do better it would be different, but since I am a woman I'm labeled a man hater. I can be objective that's all.

Ah, so you gave up on the "reasonable and logical".
I still love you anyway.

Nobody here has labeled you a man-hater because you are a woman.
In case you haven't noticed, there are plenty of other women on this site,
and nobody accuses them of hating men.

Now, how about we talk about the original topic.

I am talking about the original topic. I can be a woman and see the need for men to improve and not be a man hater. These things are not mutually exclusive. And in my case this is true because I know I don't hate men, I believe in them and their potential actually.

Also, maybe other women on here don't see man's potential, they just assume this is how they are meant to be, or they just don't want to waste their time trying to educate men, but I think it is our duty as women to help straighten out the men in the world.

actually Dodo, I have read posts where she has been called that,,lol

just saying,,,, her point about how it would be received differently if she were a man is not untrue,,,

nothing terrible, just how it currently is,, like how men are expected to be sowing their oats, but women doing it are seen(generally) much less favorably

men are able to walk away from kids , but women would be seen much less favorably

men can be assertive and powerful and considered ambitious
women doing the same can end up very hated by men,,,

,,,,,again, not saying whats good or bad, just what is, and how personal perception, stemming from personal values , cab make a huge impact upon how people receive things,,,

,,,,,,,but, lets do get back on topic

I Dont Have Any Clue Of The question..
Therefor I Cant Respond..


Was This A Rant..

I Dont Understand

To the OP: is 'not mutually exclusive' like saying "I support the troops, but am against the war" kind of thing?

As far as saying anything about the racial issues people have with one another it should be an individual thing, strictly based on ones own experiences, but it is often not. Example...I was mugged on the NYC subway by a black man years ago. My friend walked up to her car one morning & found a white guy breaking into it. Neither one of us is blaming the whole ethnic group for our misfortunes & thinking that "they're all the same", but we can & do continue our personal friendships with people of the opposite color, as long as they are not behaving like the people of that group who we had the bad experience with.

Just like in dating/relationships: if you had a real bad RS with a guy who did xyz & now you've met a new guy & he's exhibiting the same behaviors...you will know it's no good for you based on your personal experience. You don't hate all the men, just the men who do xyz, = mutually exclusive, no?

yours is a perfect example

I support the troops, but not the war

,,thank you,,I am glad someone understood it..lol

Does the above sound racist as hell? it should....

But all i did was replace woman with whites, and men with blacks....

No matter what you say, anyone with the above views, is a 'man hater'(your rendition) or a racist(my rendition for analogy purposes)

i'll respond to the actual topic later

more on the reality of how perception impacts life and how we interact in others lives

perhaps, when we hear critique of a group from someone in that group,,, we can only believe that they are either the egotist who feels above the rest(which happens often), or a genuinely concerned member who wants things to be better for their group/family, or they wish to gain favor with a group outside their own which looks down upon them



while, when we hear critique of a group from someone who is outside, its more difficult to believe they have the personal experience to assess and easier to believe its an attempt to place themselves in higher standing than the group being criticized,,,

Merriam-Webster.com

Definition of BIGOT

: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

***

Instead of lingering on what is wrong with how someone thinks, it is often better to name "what is missing", and embrace these qualities instead to cure the affliction.

"Things that are missing in people suffering bigotry":

The ability to see and appreciate the good qualities in people and things, while not being affected by any negative qualities those people and things may possess.

It being necessary to lump things into categories to be able to apply prejudices to them. Simply stop using categories and start judging each individual individually, based on what they present. Look for the good, and be aware of any bad.

Love and Hate are emotions of the heart. When Love is not reciprocated it produces Hate. But love and hate are often in opposition too, so to say you love one thing is to imply that you hate the opposite. So to make use of this idea here; it is by letting go of what you're in love with (your self or your race in this case) and hatred will naturally dissipate. Love is the pathology and hate is the symptom of distress.

You don't create a healthy mind by focusing on mental pathology for long. Name the pathology as a means of seeking what is missing. Embrace these qualities and the affliction naturally dissipates.

Just an idea...

That saying is so asinine. I immediately thought of it as well when I saw the name of this topic. How stupid does the government think the general public really is? "I support the troops but not the war". A perfectly contradictory statement and mutually exclusive indeed.

not at all,, troops are doing a job, they sign up to agree to their orders,, I can totally disagree with the orders they are given, while still supporting their willingness to sign on for the duties and responsibilities that lie on their shoulders,,,,

many troops don't even 'support' the wars they are sent to, but they have agreed to follow orders



Just like I can dislike Mcdonalds( I think their food is crappy) but still support their employees (their rights, their plight, their contribution,,,etc,,)


the employer and the employee are separate entities,,,

I generalize that all wars are evil and destructive. Troops are sent to fight in them. They know exactly what they are signing up for.

I actually agree with msharmony on this particular topic, and not because I don't want to argue with her about it during our first date.