Well, I'm taking a break from composing, and thought I'd check the threads. Why is it the wee hours are when a lot of artists seem to get their best work done.
Could it be that since sound carries better at night, then ideas flow better? I'd like to think so.
Anyway this is interesting.
Debates should be opportunities to learn, but not when the other party wants to change the rules to suit there agenda when convenient.
What are the "
rules" and what
change is being made? What is the "
agenda" What "
party? Who decides the "
rules".
Do you see how you make statements, but say nothing specifically in your point? That's like if I said,
"Music can't be played properly if certain people won't play the music right". (Did I state that with clarity? No. Somebody will surely ask, "What do you mean exactly?) All I did was just made a vague statement/accusation that lead nowhere. Now if I were more specific by saying something like,
" This composition can't be played properly if the drummer can't keep the tempo, the pianist keeps substituting the wrong chords in measure six, and the singer won't sing in tune", then I would actually be pinpointing the exact problem instead of hinting, or talking around the issue. Why "talk around' what you really want to say?
This type of communicative habit is not really effective and it is a convoluted way to express your ideas. This isn't the Da Vinci Code here, just come out and say exactly what you want to say.
Asking for clarity isn't an accusation, it is simply asking to understand someone's point clearly. I think that is allowed in a debate. Throughout the debate on this thread, you've made vague statements and refused outright to clarify your points when asked.
I simply mean that a woman would do well to concentrate more on self-refinement and improvement in regards to how she is perceived by her prospective mate
I woudn't be surprised if candidness was permitted, that they were often annoyed by the little effort some of the women would put into making sure they worthy of the courtship, time, energy, and resources they "EXPECT" from what they call "real" men.
I asked for clarity to these two statements you made:
Thanks Vance for your response. Can you be more specific about the self-refinement and improvement? You're giving me answers but they are still broad and somewhat vague, self-refinement and self improvement in what exactly?
What do you mean by making sure women are worthy of the courtship, time, energy and resources? What in your opinion and experiences, do you consider that women must do, act, say etc... in order to be worthy?
You said this in response to my questions requesting clarity:
and Vance is saying he's not interested because the women on this site are combative and condescending...
You also said:
And the subsequent responses only vindicate Vance's initial position. Most if not all of you sisters either can't or refuse to see things outside your warped sense of entitlement. Anyone with an iota of comprehension skill can see that the mere SUGGESTION that women be accountable for anything that doesn't validate just THEM, is met with combative and condescending responses.
So I asked after you posted this:
Vance what have I posted that is combative and condescending? What have I posted that shows my refusal to see things outside of my (according to you), warped sense of entitlement? How have I shown that I'm entitled? And what am I supposed to be entitled to?
Can you please be specific instead of making blanket statements?
Are you going to answer the questions (instead of using the reasons that women are too combative) for you to elaborate on your statements?
Can you be more specific about what you mean regarding the self-refinement and improvement you want to see in women?
What do you mean by making sure women are worthy of the courtship, time, energy and resources? What in your opinion and experiences, do you consider that women must do, act, say etc... in order to be worthy?
To which you didn't answer but you came back to make yet another vague statement couched in innuendoes:
Legacy just like I suspected before coming back, some things never change around here. I have to hand it to you bruh you have more faith than I do. These exchanges are proof positive of the "larger" reality. I think you know where I'm going.
To which I said:
You sure speak in vague terms without any clarity. You say a lot without really being precise. You never would answer my questions. Yet you make general statements and accusations, but are unwilling to support these statements
Then you came back with your latest post which is still vague and now couched in sarcasm.
Whatever you say sis. You're 100% right and I'm so unclear. There you go it's solved. there is a reason i didn't want to respond to you the first time. Now that I seem so unclear and clearly possess all these other attributes YOU say I do, there really is no need to go on. You combine all that with my own observation of the same divisive contrary just to be contrary arguments coming from the usual suspects AND NOW YOU; there really is no need for us to further exchange opinions or ideas
You are not trying to give clarity but you are still making statements and accusations. You are accusing the women who are speaking up for themselves and stating their opinions, (which is the right of people engaged in a debate), of "being contrary just for argument's sake". (Just as Legacy did). You also say that women are being divisive. (Of course you fail to exactly state how we are being divisive. Is it because we are stating our opinion? Because we are disagreeing with certain points that Legacy is stating? What exactly is it about us that is so divisive?
It seems as I said before, you and Legacy don't want women to state their opinions. You just want us to agree and shut the hell up. Because as guys, you think you're entitled to be right and women shouldn't 'spute what you say. This is the traditional role you guys want. (This is what I'm 'reading into what you wrote). Now I could be wrong, but since you don't ever come out and state precisely what you want to say, then I have to put the pieces together.
Even now, when you had the opportunity to answer questions, you refused. It seems to me, your lack of clear communication skills causes divisiveness. If you're unwilling to speak up with clarity, to say exactly what you mean, then you aren't adding anything to this debate. You shouldn't be making blanket accusations if you are unwilling to provide clear points to back up what you mean. At least Legacy will make an effort to say what's on his mind; whether I agree or not, I can at least grasp what he is trying to say (some of the time.
). This subtle form of passive way you have of communicating is not at all effective.
I wouldn't say I don't understand you if I understood. I'm not being facetious either. Usually after I read something you wrote I'm scratching my head going huh
Now, you "seem to be saying that I'm being contrary by asking you for clarity. You sure are good at flipping that script. I ask for clarity, I'm being contrary, combative, argumentative etc... It can't simply be what it is. I'm asking for clarity because I want to understand. Believe me, if I were any of those things, I would just come out and say it. I wouldn't need to couch my communication in inuendoes, and codes. I'm much too plain speaking for that. Well back to the music.
