Author
|
Topic: Women buycott on Oct 19 th
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718
|
posted 19 October 2004 09:30 AM
quote: Originally posted by Crimson: I'll give it a shot anyway. I've got backup cotton nappies, powdered milk and hopefully enough gas for the day.
It does say "Well, OK, you are allowed to buy necessities, such as food and medicine." But apart from that, such one-day boycotts have no economic impact at all. The rate of participation is insignificant and since everyone just makes their purchases a bit sooner or later, it has no impact on any business's sales. Rain (or an unusually nice day that makes people go out and have fun) has a much bigger impact on sales. What these things do accomplish is making a small group of armchair activists think they're doing something worthwhile. They're not, unless one considers boosting one's self-image to be worthwhile. There was recently a national gay boycott day in the United States where people were supposed to not go in to work, not open their businesses and not make any purchases, in order to demonstrate the economic influence of the community. Curiously, while you'll find articles publicizing it on Google, you won't find any about the day itself and how it went. Those national "don't fill up your car" to protest high gas prices are similarly absurd. It just isn't that easy. A boycott needs to be ongoing, with more and more people joining it and making others aware they're joining it. These one-day things that 99% of the population never hear about are worthless. Let your kids have real milk. You're a single mom and, as you say, broke. You and your kids don't have to make phoney statements about women's economic status. You ARE a statement about it, and you're living it every day.
From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560
|
posted 19 October 2004 10:52 AM
Maybe someday when I have enough disposable income to buy frivolous purchases all the time, I'll participate in a day like this. But as it is, since I practically never spend money on anything other than necessities (except for the occasional movie theatre or coffee shop outing with friends, which I won't be doing tonight), I probably won't bother feeling guilty if I notice that I'm out of something or other and buy it today.This is a great exercise, however, for people who do make a lot of frivolous purchases. It used to be me, so I'm no saint, and probably would be me still if circumstances were different. P.S. Happy anniversary, Mr. and Ms Oldgoat! You're an inspiration. [ 19 October 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Kristy
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7140
|
posted 21 October 2004 09:21 PM
"Stat No. 1: Eighty-five percent of all purchases in this country are either made or influenced by women." Oh please! Just where is this "broad" getting her information from? Oprah's Book of the Month Club? If Janet Hanson had any real balls at all she take her so-called "boycott" to the advertisers and maketinng executives who push this shit (whatever THAT may be and who MAY BE women themselves) upon the female populace in the first place..but wait, what's this...
" Stat No. 2: Just eight CEO- ships, 13.6 percent of board seats and 15.7 percent of top executive jobs in the Fortune 500 are held by women." Oh no! Well, I'm sure it's the CEO's and board seat members who hire the advertisers and marketing executives who obviously target women in the first place and no, we wouldn't want to rock the boat that sinks us, do we? Not when we want a better job so we can look good at the "table" in those Armani and Gucci power suits with all our "intellectual firepower" that are so obviously pushed upon us. Janet Hanson's real problem is she shouldn't have credit care or a checkbook in the first place when living in a consumer-driven society all because she doesn't have a parking space with her name on it. Is this how women are "disrespected" and "not treated right"??? Oh no, indeed. Janet, you are an asshole I glad that I (and most women in general) don't have your mindset in this women-crushing, male-dominated world where their own 15% of purchasing power is limted to the stereotype of power tools and shaving cream. Look, I'm sorry your parents-bought college degree didn't get you want they told you it would. In the meantime, quit using the power of pussy as a front to bash men all because your so unhappy with your own personal greed.
From: Boulder, Colorado | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Kristy
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7140
|
posted 21 October 2004 10:12 PM
You banning me? Just because I think that this woman is full of crap?Wow! I knew that Canada was under-educated and racist (I know, I lived there for over 16 months) I didn't know how oppressive it was, too! [ 21 October 2004: Message edited by: Kristy ] [ 21 October 2004: Message edited by: Kristy ]
From: Boulder, Colorado | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718
|
posted 21 October 2004 10:22 PM
My WHAT isn't worth your time?Or did you perhaps mean "you're." Contraction of "you are," not "your," which is a possessive pronoun. And no, I'm not banning you. Just consider me a psychic who can predict the future.
From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014
|
posted 21 October 2004 10:31 PM
quote: No, you uneducated moron. I meant "your" as in plural response (since more then one person responded to what I said and there was no need to use a personal pronoun), denoting that I was speaking to more than just you and your annoying ego.
Eh? What the fuck's that? Dada grammar? ... [ 21 October 2004: Message edited by: Hinterland ]
From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064
|
posted 21 October 2004 10:49 PM
quote: You see, I live in a country where my government doesn't pay for everything I want.
In what country does the government pay for everything people want? Not Canada. Students pay to go to college or university here. They're often paying for a very long time after they graduate. quote: Besides, what I said about Canada being racist is true. I've seen it myself.
Of course there's racism here. There's racism everywhere. Are you telling us there's none in the US? quote: As for the Canada-bashing, get a life. This site, like Canada itself is full of American bashing.
There's much about Canada to criticize, as there's much about the US to criticize. Most people here try to do it from an informed perspective. You might try it sometimes. Anyway, people who come on here and say "Americans are all ignorant racist fucks" and similar usually get slapped down for it. [ 21 October 2004: Message edited by: 'lance ]
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718
|
posted 21 October 2004 10:56 PM
quote: Originally posted by Kristy: No, you uneducated moron. I meant "your" as in plural response (since more then one person responded to what I said and there was no need to use a personal pronoun), denoting that I was speaking to more than just you and your annoying ego.
Um, no. You said "Your really not worth my time." That was just plain wrong. You are not really not worth my time. You're not really worth my time. Both are correct whether singular or plural and are the only correct ways to express what you wanted to say. "Your" is never anything but a possessive pronoun. Period. You were wrong. Totally. Learn the basics of English grammar.
From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064
|
posted 21 October 2004 11:06 PM
quote: Tell me again, what was it I heard most Canadians call the native Indian population again...? Oh yeah, "prairie niggers." and "the fucking scum of Canada."
"Most" Canadians? I know I plonked you on the other thread, Kristy, but you're both a liar and a fool. quote: And you call yourself a "feminist" fighting with other feminist who just happen to have credit cards and their ability NOT to use them.
I don't call myself anything of the kind. Please to keep in mind who exactly you're ranting at. *re-plonk*
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Kristy
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7140
|
posted 21 October 2004 11:10 PM
"Both are correct whether singular or plural and are the only correct ways to express what you wanted to say. "Your" is never anything but a possessive pronoun. Period.""Your" is not a possessive pronoun. But "yours" is. There was no possessive case form to reply to other then in third person. So, anyway...I'm stupid. Ban me. I don't care, I'd rather be banned then spend another minute on a quasi-facist web forum where the rule is to shut up and agree with us on EVERYTHING we say. Gee, how 1939 Germany is that? I guess if you can't successfully threaten someone, you just tattle-tale on them. Can't say it's been nice. But you have a nice day now in your oppressive little world. "Wow. I've never even heard of that epithet before. Maybe Kristy hangs around the wrong sorts of people, both south AND north of the border." The "wrong people" is it? I'd say a LARGE percentage of the populace of the city I was living in. Funny how you overlooked the whole Amnesty Interantional icidient and instead focused upon your egos instead. Bye. [ 21 October 2004: Message edited by: Kristy ]
From: Boulder, Colorado | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014
|
posted 21 October 2004 11:13 PM
quote: She does bring up a good point about the Amnesty report though - am I wrong in saying it has pretty much disappeared from the media?
Kristy can start a thread on that. Are you stopping her? ...Meanwhile, to this: quote: Gee, how 1939 Germany is that? I guess if you can't successfully threaten someone, you just tattle-tale on them.
Just fuck off. [ 21 October 2004: Message edited by: Hinterland ]
From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718
|
posted 21 October 2004 11:21 PM
quote: Originally posted by Kristy: "Your" is not a possessive pronoun. But "yours" is. There was no possessive case form to reply to other then in third person.
Yes it is. And a possesive pronoun was not called for, because the only possession in the sentence was time. YOUR time. Not ours. Look, it's very simple. What you wanted to say was "You are not worth my time." The proper contraction of "you are" is "you're." If you take nothing else away from your mercifully brief sojourn here, take that with you. [ 21 October 2004: Message edited by: RealityBites ]
From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014
|
posted 21 October 2004 11:56 PM
Actually, Janet Hansen used the term "broad" in the article, so I don't think Kristy's use was out of line.And, I respect Audra dislike of a pile on. ...but again, how much of this is useful to Babble?
From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|