Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Over 45  > It looks like POF has already made some changes.      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 adventurejoe70
Joined: 3/1/2013
Msg: 176
view profile
History
It looks like POF has already made some changes.Page 8 of 10    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10)

Joey, It depends on the Local Laws, & this is a place where online, some LEO's make a mistake in their answers....

In My State you're only required to provide ID, if you're operating a Motor Vehicle or Under Arrest...... If I travel to Nevada, that all changes......

True, but I stated as my 1st sentence:

Cops in many jurisdictions have to do warrant checks on EVERYONE they stop


So I covered myself from the above online bias you are mentioning. But if THEY are being told they need to do warrant checks than obviously ID presentation is required. I will also be bias in assuming the majority of residents of any large city knows a fraction of the procedures required by gov't in police interactions. That isn't to say that many don't overstep their bounds. But that is when articulation of reasonable suspicion comes in hand!


If they want the OT, sometimes, some will look the other way, because they don't want the OT & it's a minor offense....


LOL-- I put qualifiers in my answers and said USUALLY. If it was called in, they could have asked around to see who WANTS OT. I myself, usually would only take felonies, if I can help it! And if there is a quota system, the supervisor will find some body who is short to take it, or even as punishment if it is a bad collar.

We had this Lt(was IAB as a Sgt) who warned cops that he would take them out and find DIRTY collars if they didn't get their month collar.

I was smart enough to get mine! Others weren't so lucky! He would go on the train with his driver, pull out some smelly homeless guy who had a shopping cart full of VALUABLE possessions( crack pipes, dirty clothing, used condoms, needles,etc) and assign the collar to the cop! Skell collars often meant lots of rubber gloves, lots of skell gel and typing up multiple vouchers on an old typewriter for EVERY possession the homeless guy had! It doesn't get much worst than that!


I've alway's said if what the police do irritates so much, vote different people in. They're the ones making the rules.


Yep, yep...that has become my motto actually! Also vote the ones who increase pension payouts :)


I turned the corner and saw that I probably would have thought it was a dope deal and checked you out.


Exactly...Reasonable suspicion!


But they all defend the actions of terrible cops.
Not sure how you arrived at that conclusion......but no, they all don't.


Exactly CC..you beat me to it! How does he know how many defend the actions of terrible cops? Was a survey mailed to each officers home? Saying ALL is a large jump in logic.

But even a better question...how do YOU, a layperson civilian, get to decide what a terrible action is? I am going to assume, like most people, you get your info. from the media. Well NEWS FLASH , media makes up stories, lies, and just out of incompetence, a great many times get things wrong. And certainly cops should defend their members right to a fair trial..something many of them D'ont get when the story becomes sensationalized.

I can tell you stories that made it to print that WEREN'T even half true. I am talking about event s where I was at the scene. In today's world many times the media monitors police bands and write up their stories from trying to decipher the limited radio exchanges and then go do interviews after the police are done. Gee whiz- yeah you are going to learn a lot from an interview with some stranger in the street.

Sadly, I have seen the international news coverage be almost as spotty recently. I kind of remember on CNN they pointed to Pakistan on the map when "attempting" to point to Ukraine..lol. They accused Putin of a plot to back Dmytro Yarosh in the Ukrainian elections. Apparently, the journalist/correspondents didn't REALIZE who Mr. Yarosh was! (rolls eyes).


Professionals and/or union members will generally not speak out publicly against each other. That's not their job.

Exactly, and the unions job is too make sure procedures are being followed to make sure their members are being treated fairly. They are the one who pays for the legal team after all. TBH it would be a conflict of interest to speak out against the officers. Same way a defense attorney can't speak out against their clients.


As a member of the public, YOU have the right to make a complaint. You'd actually have to have legitimate , specific information, though. You can't report gossip.


Yep please do. Most civilian complaints are BS . I PROUDLY received over half a dozen of them, PROUDLY. We are told from the academy that the only officers who get NONE are sitting behind a desk for 20 yrs doing nothing. So please go rat them out. I am sure they will be happy to receive the OT when they show up in front of the PITA civilian board lol. Usually it meant a tour change for me where I had a 7-3 day , drank free coffee, ate free bagels and got out early and went home that day!

Yeah I know I sound BAD---but getting BS complaints were such a pita that we had to find a ways to make it a fun day!

PS--since I didn't know any cops on the take or doing any crime I had nothing to report or defend. Sorry if a cop breaks work rules and extends his meal period, that isn't MY BUSINESS , it is a work rule violation. It isn't corruption...GET A GRIP! LOL
 SunshineGirl__
Joined: 10/7/2014
Msg: 177
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/25/2015 4:24:44 PM

Most were of the domestic violence type where the male was was discovered to be cheating, staying out late and coming home intoxicated etc.


Implying she started it.


Sometimes for suspicion of cheating, others where they just came home drunk and when the wife/girlfriend said something they went off. There were a few where the guy simply said that she would'nt shut up, constantly nagging him


Again….implying she started it.

So….the female violence against men was motivated by the same things male violence against women was motivated by? I’m not inclined to believe that every domestic violence incident was so neatly explained away. “oh I came home late and drunk and she thought I was cheating…” said no batterer ever.

I’m sure they each had their own version of the truth. I doubt the guy admitted physical violence against his woman because she “nagged” him…wouldn’t he claim she started it? And she would claim he did so I wonder how you decided who to believe.

Although as previously noted she either starts it or asks for it, but if she resorts to violence against him it’s “more violent.” Maybe it takes “more” for a woman to defend herself against a man.
 CrookCatcher
Joined: 7/14/2014
Msg: 178
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/25/2015 4:42:27 PM
@Sunshinegirl

You're looking for a fight where there is none.

Regardless of what the motivation was my job was to make a case when violence was commited.

I charged the primary assailant with the appropriate charge and prepared my case file for the DA'S office. If the ada wanted to nol pros the case, reduce the charges whatever, that's up to them.

I only described what my experience was. I'm not in anyway suggesting the woman was actually the real instigator alway's or even half the time or the actual catalyst for the assault. But sometimes they were. Relax, I don't have a gender agenda.
 ohenryx
Joined: 3/12/2010
Msg: 179
view profile
History
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/25/2015 4:54:48 PM

adventurejoe70
They probably became scumbags in your opinion because they had to use authority to get you to comply since you kept NOT following legal orders (ex. name, address, give id, etc). I am going to take THEIR side based on how YOU explained the story. I bet CC will agree with me here.

I hate to go all legal on you, but you are assuming facts not in evidence. When I saw the police car turn the corner, I knew I was in for some shit. I pulled out my billfold, removed my drivers license, and had it in my hand by the time the police car stopped in the street at the end of the driveway. I handed the office my drivers license, and said, “Officer, I live here, this is my home, I was paying this gentleman for some work he did for me.” His took the drivers license, took the drivers license from my neighbor (who also had his already out), handed them to his partner. The first words out of his mouth were, “Assume the position”.

This is wrong on so many levels I truly cannot fathom how you can attempt to defend it.


adventurejoe70

I should let you know that in many of these cases where the person is known the witnesses refuse to cooperate. Perhaps your neighbor decided he didn't want another neighbor ANGRY at him? just saying ;P

Perhaps you didn’t actually read the reference that I provided the link to? No followup of any kind was ever performed. And there were 20,000 other cases in Houston, in one year, where no followup of any kind was ever performed. It most definitely was not a case of the witness recanting, no one ever spoke to the witness. Period none.
 CrookCatcher
Joined: 7/14/2014
Msg: 180
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/25/2015 5:08:24 PM
@Ohenry

In all fairness you're now giving a more detailed account of what happened. I can't say that's exactly appropriate to attack his statement with new information.
 adventurejoe70
Joined: 3/1/2013
Msg: 181
view profile
History
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/25/2015 5:12:02 PM

I hate to go all legal on you, but you are assuming facts not in evidence. When I saw the police car turn the corner, I knew I was in for some shit. I pulled out my billfold, removed my drivers license, and had it in my hand by the time the police car stopped in the street at the end of the driveway. I handed the office my drivers license, and said, “Officer, I live here, this is my home, I was paying this gentleman for some work he did for me.” His took the drivers license, took the drivers license from my neighbor (who also had his already out), handed them to his partner. The first words out of his mouth were, “Assume the position”.

This is wrong on so many levels I truly cannot fathom how you can attempt to defend it.


I can only go by WHAT you said and the details or lack of, as presented by you in that post. But look from my view, if he had REASONABLE SUSPICION to start an interaction with you things will go down by HOW cops handle such things in your city. I don't know Houston police procedures. But if he is required to do warrant checks on every interaction where initially assumed, suspected or guessed that something could be happening than EVERY part you mention seems reasonable EXCEPT maybe the frisking.
In NYPD we have a "stop, question and Frisk" situation that has gotten out of hand and I think a judge recently here said it must be changed. But perhaps they are doing the same in Houston?

Here it was even worst! Rookies would pat down building residents because bosses required them to do a certain number per tour. They would pat down innocent people just because they were walking in/out of a building in a high crime area. Seems in your situation they expected some kind of deal might b going on, and at least had some primary suspicion.

Again they are/were following police procedures ordered to them from the top in NYPD. Perhaps they were ordered to do the same in Houston? That doesn't make them bad! It makes the system bad, made by those you vote for :)


PS- with reasonable suspicion,the standard of proof of patrol officers in the field, there doesn't have to be evidence.

*I hope I don't get reported here now lol, just j/k.


Perhaps you didn’t actually read the reference that I provided the link to? No followup of any kind was ever performed. And there were 20,000 other cases in Houston, in one year, where no followup of any kind was ever performed. It most definitely was not a case of the witness recanting, no one ever spoke to the witness. Period none.


NOPE..I was writing my post and posting before I ever saw your edit! I also didn't read it, yet.

But I would suspect this is a top down situation again, probably due to a lack of available resources and the severity of the crimes. But I say blame the system, I support you there. Just don't blame private Ryan, the lowly cops have VERY little control there.It is similar to my explanation of higher ups lower charges to LOOK good.

 dragonbytes
Joined: 12/25/2014
Msg: 182
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 7:47:44 AM
adventurejoe, msg 163
When was this, as in what decade? In NYC cops would probably just go into the projects and radio housing cops to help search the common areas. They would also use the viper camera's to see what happened. Problem in the projects is that the description you give would apply to a large amount of the young ones hanging out from height, color, and dress.


Just don't tell me the same thing my wife says, which is, "that was before I was born!". It was 1972. So no camera's.

I couldn't have given a very good description, at least I don't recall if I could have. The main reason I fought was that it was close to the IIT campus and I know squad cars patrol their often, I was hoping to they would see us.

I don't think there was anyone hanging out, it was pitch dark and I heard glass breaking not too far away.

As far as the cop TV shows, I was just curious how former police officials felt about these shows. Thanks for letting me know your POV.
 2ufo
Joined: 2/28/2015
Msg: 183
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 10:28:42 AM

Oh FFS, how old are you? Is reading comprehension an issue? Do you twist everything?...
I'm not even going to comment on the last line of your post as you've proved you're too dense to comprehend a response without twisting into whatever pleases your simple little brain.


Is there any particular reason you're trying to belittle me personally?

quote] Please, tell me where I said rape is a non- issue.

Msg 126 -
...how about focusing on the women you know that WEREN'T raped ...far, far more women are not raped than are raped. And I'm sure that is the experience of most of us. So change the focus.

In other words... don't pay attention to the women who were raped.


What I said was quit turning every thread into a He vs. She and turn every topic into a rape/abuse topic.

I have never turned any thread into He vs. She. I was answering your misquoting of my words in another thread (where I didn't introduce the subject there either). I believe that the words and actions of men could do the most to stop sexual assault by simply showing their disapproval and condemnation of actions conducive to sexual harassment. Yet, many men want to blame the victim by the way they dress, where they are, the activities they pursue rather than say something like 'that's considered sexual assault in a court of law' or 'I find what you just said demeaning to woman in general'.

Yes, I saw the article that Dragonbytes posted but haven't had a chance to read it. My first reactions are to wonder the social class and notice the context is within romantic relationships... which has little to do with sexual harassment/assault/rape... but I haven't had the chance to read it through yet. It could be an interesting riff off the concept that in predator groups (wolves, lions, killer whales, hyenas) the female is usually the dominant partner. The same is true of some large non-predators (elephants, horses) where the female is dominant over the group while the male is concerned most with dominance over other males (usually chasing them away) or is absent in the group. But, that's only me playing with evolutionary biology.

ETA - Ohenryx is right about many/most/maybe all police officers in Houston. Been there, done that, and moved away.
 07songsungblue
Joined: 7/10/2015
Msg: 184
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 1:14:14 PM

Maybe you should change your focus a bit. Instead of focusing on the three women you know that we're raped, how about focusing on the women you know that WEREN'T raped. I know two women that were raped, one by her brother and one by an uncle. This is two women too many. But, in my experience, few women are raped and in that I mean...far, far more women are not raped than are raped. And I'm sure that is the experience of most of us. So change the focus.


Again you have reading comprehension issues. How about the whole paragraph? Please note "This is two women too many". You just want to wear blinders and cherry pick pieces of sentences to suit your thoughts and perceptions.

Please note how you admit you haven't read the post by Dragon yet you have a "first reaction" and then babble on about your take on it all....you haven't friggin read it yet you have an opinion. Really??? Blinders and a preconceived opinion.
 2ufo
Joined: 2/28/2015
Msg: 185
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 3:29:44 PM


Maybe you should change your focus a bit. Instead of focusing on the three women you know that we're raped, how about focusing on the women you know that WEREN'T raped. I know two women that were raped, one by her brother and one by an uncle. This is two women too many. But, in my experience, few women are raped and in that I mean...far, far more women are not raped than are raped. And I'm sure that is the experience of most of us. So change the focus.


Again you have reading comprehension issues. How about the whole paragraph? Please note "This is two women too many". You just want to wear blinders and cherry pick pieces of sentences to suit your thoughts and perceptions.


The little dots mean that the entire piece has NOT been quoted and indicates there is more to the sentence if the reader wishes to know the entire quote although they only had to look back a few posts.

However, while I doubt it will make you happy I have quoted the entire paragraph above. Shall I re-phrase what you seem to be saying?
Since I only know two women who were raped (and what a pity) and I'm absolutely sure that no one else I know was raped, women being raped really is a non-issue so let's concentrate on women who haven't been raped.


Please note how you admit you haven't read the post by Dragon yet you have a "first reaction" and then babble on about your take on it all....you haven't friggin read it yet you have an opinion. Really??? Blinders and a preconceived opinion.


Perhaps it is your reading comprehension lacking.

Yes, I saw the article that Dragonbytes posted but haven't had a chance to read it....(little dots here mean there is more, but I am not including it)


Although, it is apparent that you have many blinders and preconceived opinions, as well as being insulting to people you don't know for no reason more than they disagree with you or provide factual information such as my rejoinder to your 'gossip' about me in Msg 126.

There are a great many people here that I disagree with but I do try not to be insulting; whether or not I like them and whether or not I agree or disagree with a particular post or a particular subject.
 07songsungblue
Joined: 7/10/2015
Msg: 186
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 3:48:26 PM
Please don't add little dots and please don't re-phrase as what you re-phrased was pure bullshit and shows lack of intelligence on your part plus it's just damn rude. I stand by my paragraph as a complete paragraph and not one or two sentences picked apart by someone with their own agenda. You make it very hard NOT to belittle. When someone puts words in my mouth under the guise of "Shall I re-phrase what you seem to be saying?" I get a little defensive at the stupidity of the poster.

But go ahead, add little friggin dots and make shit up, misinterpret, believe what ever your little heart desires. It doesn't make you right.
 2ufo
Joined: 2/28/2015
Msg: 187
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 3:57:16 PM

Please don't add little dots and please don't re-phrase as what you re-phrased was pure bullshit and shows lack of intelligence on your part plus it's just damn rude. I stand by my paragraph as a complete paragraph and not one or two sentences picked apart by someone with their own agenda. You make it very hard NOT to belittle. When someone puts words in my mouth under the guise of "Shall I re-phrase what you seem to be saying?" I get a little defensive at the stupidity of the poster.

But go ahead, add little friggin dots and make shit up, misinterpret, believe what ever your little heart desires. It doesn't make you right.


LOL!! You call me 'rude'? Stand by your paragraph where you don't want to focus on raped women and stand by your paragraph where you said I made up data, and stand by your insulting comments where you whine about getting defensive at my so-called stupidity.

Do whatever you like. Have fun insulting people. It appears to be what you enjoy the most.
 07songsungblue
Joined: 7/10/2015
Msg: 188
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 4:22:57 PM

Do whatever you like. Have fun insulting people. It appears to be what you enjoy the most.


And you continue to misread, re-phrase, make stuff up, misinterpret, add little dots, put words in someone's mouth, discard and dismiss what displeases you.

And just so that you know for sure - IMO, ONE rape is ONE rape too many. I know it, you know it and the majority of men know it.
 2ufo
Joined: 2/28/2015
Msg: 189
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 4:53:04 PM

And you continue to misread, re-phrase, make stuff up, misinterpret, add little dots, put words in someone's mouth, discard and dismiss what displeases you.

What bothers me the most is your accusation that I make stuff up. If you repeat it often enough, someone may actually believe it. Fortunately for me, all anyone has to do is read a few random postings of yours.


And just so that you know for sure - IMO, ONE rape is ONE rape too many. I know it, you know it and the majority of men know it.

So kind of you to actually acknowledge that.

You may have the final word in this discussion.
 2ufo
Joined: 2/28/2015
Msg: 190
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 4:53:14 PM

And you continue to misread, re-phrase, make stuff up, misinterpret, add little dots, put words in someone's mouth, discard and dismiss what displeases you.

What bothers me the most is your accusation that I make stuff up. If you repeat it often enough, someone may actually believe it. Fortunately for me, all anyone has to do is read a few random postings of yours.


And just so that you know for sure - IMO, ONE rape is ONE rape too many. I know it, you know it and the majority of men know it.

So kind of you to actually acknowledge that.

You may have the final word in this discussion.
 Behind-Blue-Eyes_53
Joined: 12/19/2011
Msg: 191
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 5:23:22 PM
2ufo,
I use multiple periods to break up sentences, within a Paragraph....... To make it easier to read on a electronic devise... If I want to show I have clipped a quote, I use '...snip...' This is Like they used STOP, instead of a Period in Telegraph Messages...

I also use the enter key to break down the paragraphs into different thoughts.....

Big blobs of words are harder to read on a Computer screen, than on a sheet of paper.... I don't know why this is, but I know others have the same Problem....

VVVV Online many use (...snip...) instead of ( . . . )
 newoldgirl
Joined: 4/16/2015
Msg: 192
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 5:37:30 PM

But go ahead, add little friggin dots and make shit up, misinterpret, believe what ever your little heart desires. It doesn't make you right.


The use of the ellipses is standard writing practice. It's not something 2ufo made up to piss you off!

" An ellipsis is a set of three periods ( . . . ) indicating an omission. Each period should have a single space on either side, except when adjacent to a quotation mark, in which case there should be no space.
Ellipses are most useful when working with quoted material. There are various methods of deploying ellipses; the one described here is acceptable for most professional and scholarly work." ThePunctationGuide

Also, you have definitely misquoted or misinterpreted me before. I merely pointed out that the article about the study in question alluded to the fact that some violence may be caused by retaliation, and you then said that I said any woman who hits a man must "have been driven to it" which is not what I said at all.


I get a little defensive at the stupidity of the poster.


2ufo has disagreed with you several time without mentioning your "little brain" or stating or implying that you are "stupid".

Can you not make your points without using insults?
 2ufo
Joined: 2/28/2015
Msg: 193
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 5:45:53 PM
Behind Blue Eyes - That's the problem with English, it's not a dead language. Computers have added an entirely new dimension in the use of language and grammatical punctuation marks like ellipses. I do try to make what I write both legible and understandable but, sometimes I fail.

I heard somewhere that the reason words are harder to read on a screen is because the pixels are not fixed, but ever moving. I have no idea how true that is, but at work they like us to take a break from the computer every 45 minutes or so. If I see a large block of rambling text, I tend to skip over it.

ETA: Sorry for the double post.
 tinkerbellcgy
Joined: 9/17/2005
Msg: 194
view profile
History
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 5:48:13 PM

The little dots mean that the entire piece has NOT been quoted and indicates there is more to the sentence if the reader wishes to know the entire quote although they only had to look back a few posts.




But go ahead, add little friggin dots and make shit up, misinterpret, believe what ever your little heart desires. It doesn't make you right.




The use of the ellipses is standard writing practice. It's not something 2ufo made up to piss you off!

" An ellipsis is a set of three periods ( . . . ) indicating an omission. Each period should have a single space on either side, except when adjacent to a quotation mark, in which case there should be no space.
Ellipses are most useful when working with quoted material. There are various methods of deploying ellipses; the one described here is acceptable for most professional and scholarly work." ThePunctationGuide


I totally agree that "..." is the correct way to cite something wherein you are not setting out all of the cite but merely the pertinent part to the discussion. This is commonly used in the legal field and the poster who took issue with this ought to know this. She spent many occasions telling the world of her vast experience in the legal field in Edmonton albeit in the accounting department of a law firm! ROFLMA
 07songsungblue
Joined: 7/10/2015
Msg: 195
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 6:15:17 PM
The whole point of the dot, dot thing is that she took two sentences out of a paragraph and twisted it. Then she took it upon herself to "re-phrase" the two sentences which changed the meaning and inten to change it to her liking. She knows it and I know it.

And yes, I work in a law office and no, I have never alluded to being a secretary, legal assistant or a lawyer and yes, I've worked in accounting for 30 years, 23 in a law office. I don't draft documents, I do all things financial. Do you have a frigging problem with that? Did I pick on your occupation?
 Peas_
Joined: 5/2/2015
Msg: 196
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/26/2015 7:33:18 PM
OMG, are you people arguing about domestic stuff still?
 rearguard*2
Joined: 2/8/2008
Msg: 197
view profile
History
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/27/2015 12:48:23 PM
What you have here is:
1) A bunch of men and women, some of whom spent years dealing with situational violence, others who have researched various and numerous studies and presented the results of such studies, all of whom showing support at various levels for the concepts that rape is relatively rare and the females are pretty much as prone to violence as men.
2) One poster that has stated that she believes otherwise, questions the bases of studies, and comes up with anecdotal evidence for her position while not supplying any studies or other third party facts to support her case.

You can't get anywhere discussing things with a believer. Its characteristic of believers that they are not influenced by fact. The people who believe in a flat earth are resolute in their convictions. Of course, they have no satellite photos of a flat earth and will argue that photos of round planets are a hoax, trick photographs, or are the result of some very unusual optical effects affecting satellites. They will gladly explain so using their cell phones while driving their cars guided by their GPS systems.
 newoldgirl
Joined: 4/16/2015
Msg: 198
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/27/2015 2:46:51 PM

1) A bunch of men and women, some of whom spent years dealing with situational violence, others who have researched various and numerous studies and presented the results of such studies, all of whom showing support at various levels for the concepts that rape is relatively rare and the females are pretty much as prone to violence as men.


BS. Please show me where I said rape was common.

YOU, on the other hand seem to think it is practically unheard of!

Women are NOT as prone to violence as men. The vast majority of violent acts are committed by men. There was a study that suggested that within the context of a relationship women were as likely as men to strike out violently against their mates. I have valid reasons for questioning that study, but I don't suppose you read or understood them. By all means, accept the one study as hard evidence that supports whatever you want to believe.


2) One poster that has stated that she believes otherwise, questions the bases of studies, and comes up with anecdotal evidence for her position while not supplying any studies or other third party facts to support her case.


Yes, my beliefs differ from ALL the half dozen posters in this thread who think women are as violent as men! Such controversy.

You want to talk about anecdotal evidence ? YOU know rape is very rare because NONE of the women you know have told you they were raped. That is anecdotal evidence, or maybe lack of it. It's also an exceedingly presumptuous and egoistical thing to say, but that's besides the point.

Your other piece of anecdotal evidence you gave was when I said that female on male random violence by strangers was practically non-existent, which it is , BTW. But, surprise! That exact thing happened to you. You were simply minding your own business, and a random woman attacked you out of nowhere. Wow. That makes you sound SO credible!
 Peas_
Joined: 5/2/2015
Msg: 199
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/27/2015 3:05:25 PM

Women are NOT as prone to violence as men. The vast majority of violent acts are committed by men. There was a study that suggested that within the context of a relationship women were as likely as men to strike out violently against their mates. I have valid reasons for questioning that study, but I don't suppose you read or understood them. By all means, accept the one study as hard evidence that supports whatever you want to believe.


Proven fact, that when a woman defends herself, no matter whether being provoked or not, this is what most often gets her killed. Fact.

I guess some just don't believe what's in writing unless you have been in that situation. I have broken noses right back. I was also lucky to keep my life in the end.
 Behind-Blue-Eyes_53
Joined: 12/19/2011
Msg: 200
It looks like POF has already made some changes.
Posted: 7/27/2015 3:33:21 PM

Women are NOT as prone to violence as men. The vast majority of violent acts are committed by men. There was a study that suggested that within the context of a relationship women were as likely as men to strike out violently against their mates. I have valid reasons for questioning that study, but I don't suppose you read or understood them. By all means, accept the one study as hard evidence that supports whatever you want to believe.


How do You know whom started a DV case? Many Women think it's perfectly fine for them to Slap, Hit, or Kick a Man..... But, as men are typically bigger/stronger than Women, when they respond to those Assaults, they do more Damage...... There are Men who think it isn't 'Manly' to have their SO Arrested, so they will take the blame in some Cases....

As for Sexual Assaults, I've told of being Sexually Assaulted by Drunk Women in Bars.... No, I didn't Report it, it was part of the Bar Scene, when I was active in it, In My Twenties.....

I've also had them Physically Assault me, too... I've been slapped or hit on the Arm, by some Drunk Women..... They were attracted & trying to get My Attention... I didn't Report those, Either..... They were Drunk & didn't really Hurt me.....
Show ALL Forums  > Over 45  > It looks like POF has already made some changes.