A World Without Men?

[Sculptor]

The Key to UNLOCKING ALL the mysteries of Life, which 'you', human beings, still had, in the days when this written.

We can unlock anything you want except your cell.

.... and I don't mean your phone

[vegetariantaxidermy]

How about a world without pacifists?

Instead of eliminatin' violent men, let's just eliminate those who object to violent men, and violence in general.

There are far fewer pacifists than violent men: logically, gettin' rid of pacifists would be far easier.

Well that would reduce the world's population by about three people.

[henry quirk]

How about a world without pacifists?

Instead of eliminatin' violent men, let's just eliminate those who object to violent men, and violence in general.

There are far fewer pacifists than violent men: logically, gettin' rid of pacifists would be far easier.

Well that would reduce the world's population by about three people.

HA!

[Age]

Perhaps if you tried reading and understanding what we write before you tear the sentences apart and treat them as unrelated you would be less of a needy, obliviouos, ignorant, obnoxious cock end.

OR, maybe I will just find MORE things that NEED CORRECTING and/or POINTING OUT.

Also, I do NOT need to read a WHOLE POST, a WHOLE PAGE, nor a WHOLE THREAD to find what I consider False, Wrong, and Incorrect.

The words used, mostly speak for themselves, so it does NOT take long at all to find fault and flaws. As can be CLEARLY SHOWN in your sentence above here.

Be that way then. Your inability to connect small pieces of information together into a cogent whole will never be fixed if you don't even try though.

Will you PROVIDE ANY example of where you think or BELIEVE that I have NOT "connected small pieces of information together into a cogent whole"?

If no, then WHY NOT?

Also, just because I read, and reply, when I do, this does NOT necessarily mean that I am MISSING the WHOLE, NOR does it mean that I am NOT connecting small pieces of information together into a cogent whole.

If you want to continue to BELIEVE that I am doing what you CLAIM here, then I suggest putting forward some ACTUAL evidence or proof to back up and support YOUR CLAIM.

Otherwise you are just doing what the "others" do here when they make a CLAIM about 'me' about doing or not doing something or thinking and seeing or not thinking nor seeing some thing, BUT NEVER provide ANY ACTUAL PROOF for their CLAIMS.

You are FREE to ASSUME, and even FREE to BELIEVE, that I am doing what you CLAIM here. But, without evidence you are REALLY SAYING NOTHING AT ALL.

Without PROOF what you are, essentially, saying and doing here is; Egotistically, CLAIMING that 'you' understand MORE than 'I' do, and that 'you' are BETTER than 'I' am.

Egomaniacal jibber jabber.

I was expecting more of comeback something like, "A world without 'me'", would be a MUCH BETTER PLACE.

That effort was lame. I don't need you to write material for me.

Okay.

[Age]

The future's rosy then.

That ALL DEPENDS.

I have corrected what I said here.

Simple logic Age. If my future happiness relies on you looking like a complete idiot, I thank you in advance for your tireless effort.

YOUR WELCOME.

At least some one did, in the days when this was written.

[Age]

The Key to UNLOCKING ALL the mysteries of Life, which 'you', human beings, still had, in the days when this written.

Take that key and shove it up your ass to unlock the mysteries there... 'cause that's what you're talking out of.

LOL

Talk about an ACTUAL PROVE of just HOW SHUT and CLOSED some human beings used to be, in those days, when this was being written.

There is NO wonder at all now WHY they took SO LONG to CHANGE, for the better.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

That ALL DEPENDS.

I have corrected what I said here.

Simple logic Age. If my future happiness relies on you looking like a complete idiot, I thank you in advance for your tireless effort.

YOUR WELCOME.

At least some one did, in the days when this was written.

'YOU'RE' WELCOME.

[Age]

Simple logic Age. If my future happiness relies on you looking like a complete idiot, I thank you in advance for your tireless effort.

YOUR WELCOME.

At least some one did, in the days when this was written.

'YOU'RE' WELCOME.

THANK YOU SO MUCH for your CORRECTION. I need all the help I can get.

My APOLOGIES for, AGAIN, being INCORRECT.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

YOUR WELCOME.

At least some one did, in the days when this was written.

'YOU'RE' WELCOME.

THANK YOU SO MUCH for your CORRECTION. I need all the help I can get.

My APOLOGIES for, AGAIN, being INCORRECT.

YOU'RE WELCOME i.e. YOU ARE WELCOME

[Age]

'YOU'RE' WELCOME.

THANK YOU SO MUCH for your CORRECTION. I need all the help I can get.

My APOLOGIES for, AGAIN, being INCORRECT.

YOU'RE WELCOME i.e. YOU ARE WELCOME

Yes I did understand, when you CORRECTED me. That is WHY I apologized for, AGAIN, being INCORRECT.

Also, you could also NOTICE, once more, that I was, in that last sentence, AGAIN INCORRECT, from YOUR perspective of things.

But learning how to please EVERY one, ALL of the time, is a journey.

And, this partly explains WHY learning how to communicate correctly, or better, with 'you', human beings, can be a very lengthy process.

By the way, the reason WHY, if it has NOT YET been NOTICED, I do NOT use apostrophes to contract words, like 'you are', is because words, and their meanings, and thus language, itself, is ALWAYS EVOLVING and CHANGING. So, what is right and correct to some of 'you', human beings, in one day, is, or can become, wrong, incorrect, or just plain old 'out of date' to "others", in the same day, or in another day.

In other words, what is being written, in these days, when this is being written, can be LOOKED AT and SEEN DIFFERENTLY, in the days, in the "future".

[vegetariantaxidermy]

THANK YOU SO MUCH for your CORRECTION. I need all the help I can get.

My APOLOGIES for, AGAIN, being INCORRECT.

YOU'RE WELCOME i.e. YOU ARE WELCOME

Yes I did understand, when you CORRECTED me. That is WHY I apologized for, AGAIN, being INCORRECT.

Also, you could also NOTICE, once more, that I was, in that last sentence, AGAIN INCORRECT, from YOUR perspective of things.

But learning how to please EVERY one, ALL of the time, is a journey.

And, this partly explains WHY learning how to communicate correctly, or better, with 'you', human beings, can be a very lengthy process.

By the way, the reason WHY, if it has NOT YET been NOTICED, I do NOT use apostrophes to contract words, like 'you are', is because words, and their meanings, and thus language, itself, is ALWAYS EVOLVING and CHANGING. So, what is right and correct to some of 'you', human beings, in one day, is, or can become, wrong, incorrect, or just plain old 'out of date' to "others", in the same day, or in another day.

In other words, what is being written, in these days, when this is being written, can be LOOKED AT and SEEN DIFFERENTLY, in the days, in the "future".

Pathetic. 'Your' and 'you're' have completely different meanings. If you use one in place of the other it makes you look like a moron and renders whatever you wrote meaningless. People who don't have a clue about grammar and punctuation always use the old 'but language is evolving' excuse The way it's used might change, but the rules don't. Do the rules of physics change because some people are incapable of understanding them? Or the rules of music? You have to understand the rules in the first place to be able to mess around with them.

[Age]

YOU'RE WELCOME i.e. YOU ARE WELCOME

Yes I did understand, when you CORRECTED me. That is WHY I apologized for, AGAIN, being INCORRECT.

Also, you could also NOTICE, once more, that I was, in that last sentence, AGAIN INCORRECT, from YOUR perspective of things.

But learning how to please EVERY one, ALL of the time, is a journey.

And, this partly explains WHY learning how to communicate correctly, or better, with 'you', human beings, can be a very lengthy process.

By the way, the reason WHY, if it has NOT YET been NOTICED, I do NOT use apostrophes to contract words, like 'you are', is because words, and their meanings, and thus language, itself, is ALWAYS EVOLVING and CHANGING. So, what is right and correct to some of 'you', human beings, in one day, is, or can become, wrong, incorrect, or just plain old 'out of date' to "others", in the same day, or in another day.

In other words, what is being written, in these days, when this is being written, can be LOOKED AT and SEEN DIFFERENTLY, in the days, in the "future".

Pathetic. 'Your' and 'you're' have completely different meanings.

I WAS GOING TO POINT THIS OUT and MAKE IT CLEAR. But I thought/ASSUMED, "there will be NO NEED TO because SURELY this person will NOT MAKE THIS MISTAKE of thinking that this "your" and "you're" I had NOT YET REALIZED and/or was 'trying to' "justify" in using the "your" word.

BUT, this is ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE of WHY it is MUCH BETTER to NEVER ASSUME absolutely ANY thing AT ALL.

I KNOW 'your' and "you're" have COMPLETELY DIFFERENT MEANINGS. AND, that is WHY as SOON AS YOU CORRECTED ME, I THANKED YOU for CORRECTING ME.

If you use one in place of the other it makes you look like a moron and renders whatever you wrote meaningless.

I would NOT go as far as, "looks like a MORON", but I ADMITTED that what I wrote WAS INCORRECT, and WRONG, and even THANKED YOU for CORRECTING me. What else do you WANT from me?

I also KNOW, to some, if "another" does NOT write in the EXACT SAME WAY that they like, then to them, the "other" appears to be a "MORON". As you have CLEARLY EXPRESSED 'your' views of "others" when they do NOT write in the EXACT SAME WAY that you would like them to, or EXPECT them to.

People who don't have a clue about grammar and punctuation always use the old 'but language is evolving' excuse

REALLY?

Is this what ALWAYS happens by 'us', who do NOT have a clue about grammar and punctuation?

I have NEVER OBSERVED very young children, or ANY one, using the excuse "language is evolving" when adults inform them of:
"YOU DO NOT HAVE A CLUE ABOUT GRAMMAR AND PUNCTUATION".

And REALLY do those who do NOT HAVE A CLUE about grammar and punctuation, really that evolved "themselves" to even know about or even be able to speak or write about the FACT that 'language DOES evolve'?

I REALLY and Truly SUGGEST, and hope, that you REREAD what I wrote, and then, HOPEFULLY, you do NOT see what you first saw and ASSUMED I was saying and meaning.

I was CLEARLY NEVER using the 'language is evolving' FACT for an EXCUSE for absolutely ANY thing, including writing 'your' instead of 'you are' . I was just EXPLAINING the reason WHY I do NOT put apostrophes to contract words together.

Is NOT doing this REALLY that MUCH OF A CRIME or a BAD THING?

I have ALREADY ADMITTED that I wrote "YOUR" INCORRECTLY and that I should have written 'YOU ARE' INSTEAD.

SERIOUSLY, I suggest just reading what I wrote AGAIN, and this time with this NEW PERSPECTIVE, I hope you have just GAINED.

If you do, PLEASE INFORM 'us' if you are STILL SEEING the EXACT SAME thing as you did BEFORE.

Because if you are, then I will TRY another way to EXPLAIN things MORE CLEARLY here.

The way it's used might change, but the rules don't. Do the rules of physics change because some people are incapable of understanding them? Or the rules of music? You have to understand the rules in the first place to be able to mess around with them.

Is there A RULE that one MUST write "YOU'RE" instead of 'YOU ARE'?

If there is, then WHERE is this RULE, EXACTLY?

Now, I will, AGAIN, MAKE IT CLEAR that there was ANOTHER SENTENCE that I wrote, which would be INCORRECT, to 'you'.

Did you NOT mention this FACT because you did NOT NOTICE that INCORRECTNESS "yourself", even though I forewarned you about it, or, did you just NOT want to talk about and mention that INCORRECTNESS, that time?

Also, PLEASE INFORM 'us' if you can NOT find it, so that I can POINT IT OUT, to 'you'. That is; OF COURSE ONLY if you are Truly INTERESTED.

[Dubious]

In a world without men, women, without having, let's say, an opposite to contend with, would very likely become more like men. Put another way, without having a relationship to something else which determines the type of reactions natural to one, personality as a whole, adjusts itself accordingly. Women may not devolve into a male psyche, but they also won't be able to maintain the one they had when the male of the species was still around.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

.

[FlashDangerpants]

OR, maybe I will just find MORE things that NEED CORRECTING and/or POINTING OUT.

Also, I do NOT need to read a WHOLE POST, a WHOLE PAGE, nor a WHOLE THREAD to find what I consider False, Wrong, and Incorrect.

The words used, mostly speak for themselves, so it does NOT take long at all to find fault and flaws. As can be CLEARLY SHOWN in your sentence above here.

Be that way then. Your inability to connect small pieces of information together into a cogent whole will never be fixed if you don't even try though.

Will you PROVIDE ANY example of where you think or BELIEVE that I have NOT "connected small pieces of information together into a cogent whole"?

You can barely piece together a cogent sentence, let alone multiple related sentences on any topic that doesn't simply devolve into a shapeless rant. My case proves itself, you will not repsond with a cogent post.

Similarly, you are incapable of addressing any topic other than yourself and your own immense importance. This thread was discussing someone else's weird self-hatred of his own penis, yet somehow it became about you. The "what is philosophy" thread became a discussion of you. No matter what the topic of discussion may be, you always turn it into you and your "THeeEEHEEeEE ACtuAl tRUTh" obsession.

You simply don't have the discipline to generate a cogent whole of anything at all.