Rob's House

Dahlin's a system guy. His game doesn't translate to the pros.

They often overcompensate by becoming male feminists.

He's actually 56. And his birthday was on March 30. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MC_Hammer

You gotta be careful with that. If you french fry when you're supposed to pizza you're going to have a bad time.

If you read through my comments you'll see that I didn't. I responded to people who did.

They have nothing to do with it. That's the point.

Half my friends are women. They don't find my views to be particularly offensive at all. In fact, most of them get a kick out of my take on white knights. Jesus, dude. It was just an amusing aside about how the first female President of an NFL team got there on the coattails of a man. It's not that serious.

Re-read the post you quoted. I said it was a pyrrhic victory for feminism, not the Bills. Dubious may have been a better word.

Definition of Pyrrhic : achieved at excessive cost aPyrrhic victory ; also : costly to the point of negating or outweighing expected benefits a great butPyrrhic act of ingenuity

I wish Oprah had bought the team and made Steadman the president.

It sounds like you're the one playing the victim card. If a man with her resume were in her position people would make the exact same points.

As long as she doesn't make any decisions that affect football operations I really couldn't care less what role she takes. I just find it amusing that some portray this like it's some groundbreaking achievement for women. That and virtue signalers piss me off. I didn't bring it up. I responded to someone who did. You took the reigns and ran with it.

Actually, I think the real !@#$s are the virtue signaling white knights who are always trying to inject their divisive views where they aren't applicable and project their attitudes on others. You and your fellow manginas are the only ones who care that she's a female.

Her husband bought her the team. Deal with it.

It's a term that refers to expressions of sanctimony made for the purpose of bolstering the speaker under the guise of righteousness.

Sweet virtue signal.

It's kind of an empty honor. It's not like she worked her way up and got the job. Her husband bought her the team and she appointed herself. A bit of a pyrrhic victory for feminism.

Confront him professionally and calmly, but assertively, and address the elephant. Most likely he'll either tell you what his beef is and yall can squash it, or he'll deny having a problem and back off. Either way you'll have earned his respect.

Are these high level meetings?

If he got fired because they learned he slept with men I'm guessing some here would have to reevaluate their free market view of at will employment.

I disagree. I think the substance of his posts are reasonable. If they were patently unreasonable people would challenge his points instead of tossing insults.

I was hoping you'd at least attempt to identify the "mysogynistic manure" you're speaking of, by I didn't actually expect a rational explanation. I guess the takeaway is unless you're willing to lump every guy who tries to get laid in with those who actually engage in sexual coercion you're a "mysogynist" who supports said coercion. Good to know.

You hit the nail on the head. It's not the correction, but rather the overcorrection where inlies the danger.

Please explain how you drew that conclusion from my post.

You misrepresent the argument. It's not that men have no ability to control their behavior, but rather that much of natural male behavior has been vilified (see "toxic masculinity"). Further, there is an active movement to expand "sexual misconduct" to apply much more broadly so as to include behavior that many don't believe should be treated as such (see Affirmative Consent). Pointing out that this agenda is advanced by third wave feminists doesn't undercut that point at all. It's just stating the obvious.