The night witches

[Tigeress]

Originally posted by lazs2
I did read it and you are really saying that men and women are different.

You seem to want to ignore that fact when it suits you and claim equality.  there is no equality.

You also claim that women understand men.   that is either untrue or.. women are really really stupid.  women  have no clue as to what drives and makes a man.  women marry men on death row... women have wanted me when I was at my worst..

women would not try to change men if they really did understand them.. look at the way men interact with other men... they DO understand.. women have no clue.  even if they get a glimmer..   they ignore it and go with what they want men to be instead of what they really are.   Women get it wrong every time.

oh.. and I was trying to reply to 3 different people.. it may have caused some confusion but...

I think it odd that us not being able to communicate seems to prove my point more than yours.

lazs

I put in a link for the word empirical... meaning... we know men by observation. I am following your posts and reading them carefully

Tossing in "women marry death row inmates" is like me tossing in "men rape babies".

I don't marry death row inmates and I trust you dont rape babies.
I am like most other women and I trust you are like most other men.

Yes some women marry death row inmates and some men rape babies.
Do you understand the gaussian curve, meaning the bell curve?

I am not trying to change the you of you... that is not possible. I learned that years ago as I told you before, dear.

I am simply communicating.

TIGERESS

[lazs2]

well... you observe a man killing and butchering entire groups and then marry him on death row...

you see a man is scum and you ignore it and assign womens traits to him saying that "deep down" he is a woman like you...  he is not.   he is the guy the men know him to be... not the man women want him to be.

mothers tend to overlook the fact that their son is a sociopath... a real sociopath not the kind you defined in another thread.

lazs

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Tigeress
Otherwise the discussion turns into one person blocking and talking over the other one in an effort to dominate.

There is no need for effort. Men dominate. Always have, always will.....despite the hormonal breakdowns of women.

Otherwise, if that is how its going to be, there is no point in my continuing.

 Yathink.

[Tigeress]

Originally posted by Jackal1
There is no need for effort. Men dominate. Always have, always will.....despite the hormonal breakdowns of women.

 

 Yathink.

Danged if you didn't hit the nail square on da hed!!!!!!!!!!!!

luv it!!!!!!!!!

And you and Lazs is a perfect examples!

ya think??? teehee

And you've seen my hormonal breakdown in action. lol

(I do not believe Lazs actually reads my posts... he interprets them into some kind of female wah wah wah. Like the Peanuts cartoons on TV tuning out adults hahahahaha)

We understand men well enough to live with them and love them... regardless of what he thinks in that adorable male-Lazs mind of his! hahahahaha

Jackal, you are a guy, what's your opinion? Think Lazs thinks I am trying to change him?

He is so utterly classically male, as are you, I can hardly contain my mirth!!! and can't help but like you both.

He is not about to let me lead him around by the nose as I have been trying to do.

I try; he refuses; its classic.

TIGERESS

[Tigeress]

Lazs dear?  Jackal dear?

With all kidding aside...

Why do you two feel women need to be obedient to their men and stay away from war?  

That is to say, stay home and let you men protect us rather than us going off driving fighters and bombers and tanks into harm's way side by side with our men?

You both know we can actually do it... it is a fact of history.

I don't understand men the way you understand yourselves... I can't...  not possible ...please explain.

Seriously... I mean the real reason... the male reason... deep down... in the gut.  ...not that typical cop out stuff about men are men and women are women stuff. The REAL REASON.

I can only make educated guesses at it based on research...

Is it because you don't want the enemy (other men) to kill or get possession of us? your women?

...that you would rather ensure your possession of your women by keeping us away from the enemy (other men)?

...and instead deprive those men of their women by either killing their women or copulating with them?

...perhaps taking their women home with you?

...and have more two or more women at your beck and call?

...for your personal usage?

...to increase your offspring count?

...thinking as a male tribe dominating another another male tribe?

...whoever gets all the women effectively kills the blood lines of the other male tribe?

What greater male-on-male ownage can there be????

...by letting the surviving enemy (the other men) live in the knowledge you deprive them of
their women and instead possess their women?

I have absolutely seen this sort of thing all over the history books and depicted in movies and documenteries.

Any truth to that stuff???

You two are men, you should know. No fair copping out... the truth!

TIGERESS

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by Tigeress
...snip

I loves Google

Personally I dislike google because it makes it too easy for too many people to fake knowledge. But maybe thats just me...scarred as I am by too many forum discussions with retarded people.

But to answer your questions.

There is a world of difference between an active IR optic on a Panther tank, and some sort of passive thermal sight that you seem to be asking about.

Basically the Panther tank had an IR searchlight that illuminated stuff at night via invisible IR-light that could only be seen through the IR optics.

I suppose it is theoretically possible to incorporate something like that in an aircraft. It would require said IR searchlight though, which rapidly makes this a losing proposition. Especially when one considers that this type of IR device cannot see through clouds or bad weather in any form.

I think you have some sort of mental image of a thermal sight of sorts, where any warm surface is sort of glowing in the dark when viewed through the optics. That sort of invention would come later, not during ww2 though.

I don't have any interest in esoteric stuff such as German WWII IR technology. boring....

Hrm. Not to all of us.

[Tigeress]

Originally posted by Hortlund
Personally I dislike google because it makes it too easy for too many people to fake knowledge. But maybe thats just me...scarred as I am by too many forum discussions with retarded people.

But to answer your questions.

There is a world of difference between an active IR optic on a Panther tank, and some sort of passive thermal sight that you seem to be asking about.

Basically the Panther tank had an IR searchlight that illuminated stuff at night via invisible IR-light that could only be seen through the IR optics.

I suppose it is theoretically possible to incorporate something like that in an aircraft. It would require said IR searchlight though, which rapidly makes this a losing proposition. Especially when one considers that this type of IR device cannot see through clouds or bad weather in any form.

I think you have some sort of mental image of a thermal sight of sorts, where any warm surface is sort of glowing in the dark when viewed through the optics. That sort of invention would come later, not during ww2 though.

 
Hrm. Not to all of us.

Hi Hortlund,

Thanks for the reply... I think its conclusive, the bit about German Thermal detection of bombers in flight by night fighters was a reach by the author of that piece. Good Catch!

I tend to agree with you about tards.

Tard-ness of tards quickly reveals itself for what it is... one way or the other. Not even Google can help a tard not be a tard.

I mentioned Google so that you would know... where my information was coming from... and not to pretend I owned that knowledge.

I work in a NO BS Zone



TIGERESS

[lazs2]

tigress.. I am not all that fond of the way you put words into my mouth and... don't answer questions.

Do you think that a man should be able to beat up a woman who insults him just as he would another man?   If a woman hits or slaps me should I be able to beat her up?

All this equality stuff and civilized stuff and "we are not cavemen anymore" stuff is fine... fine until the crap hits the fan.

When there is a disaster.. a riot.. a famine.. whatever... even here with something as mild as a hurricane or a riot over a verdict..

Well.. then thousands of years of instinct take over.. and the civilized  veneer leaves.. women revert to their role and men to theirs.

It is the civilized veneer that is false not the instinct.

lazs

[Tigeress]

Originally posted by lazs2
tigress.. I am not all that fond of the way you put words into my mouth and... don't answer questions.

Do you think that a man should be able to beat up a woman who insults him just as he would another man?   If a woman hits or slaps me should I be able to beat her up?

All this equality stuff and civilized stuff and "we are not cavemen anymore" stuff is fine... fine until the crap hits the fan.

When there is a disaster.. a riot.. a famine.. whatever... even here with something as mild as a hurricane or a riot over a verdict..

Well.. then thousands of years of instinct take over.. and the civilized  veneer leaves.. women revert to their role and men to theirs.

It is the civilized veneer that is false not the instinct.

lazs

tigress.. I am not all that fond of the way you put words into my mouth and... don't answer questions.

Goodness Lazs! Sorry! Didn't realize I was doing that. Not right.

Where did I put words into your mouth?
If I'm doing that I need to take a look at that cause I don't mean to.

On these particular questions, I thought they were rhetorical...

Do you think that a man should be able to beat up a woman who insults him just as he would another man?

I don't think its ok to beat up a woman or a man for an insult.
But especially not a woman. I can not defend myself with my hands and feet from a man.

If a woman hits or slaps me should I be able to beat her up?

I think a woman who hits a man is risking getting beaten up.
I would never do it.

I don't think you should beat her up but defending yourself from blows is reasonable. I don't think it is ok for a woman to slap or hit anyone unless she is physically defending herself or someone else from physical attack.

I would be tempted to hit someone beating you up if I though you needed the help.

Thinking about it... I don't recall slapping or hitting anyone since I was a teenager... that was a defense to a physical assault on my body situation.

All this equality stuff and civilized stuff and "we are not cavemen anymore" stuff is fine... fine until the crap hits the fan.

When there is a disaster.. a riot.. a famine.. whatever... even here with something as mild as a hurricane or a riot over a verdict..

Well.. then thousands of years of instinct take over.. and the civilized  veneer leaves.. women revert to their role and men to theirs.

It is the civilized veneer that is false not the instinct.

I agree with your statements as far as they go.

My living reality is something you can't possibly know first hand...
but I am very sure you know of it second hand to a degree having been married to a woman. And, you say you know yourself and what you and other men are capable of.

All of us women live on a thin edge between a civilized veneer and aggressive male instincts.

We are targets... always have been... always will be.

Even to the point of needing to close the blinds after dark to keep men from focusing on the house or me. I live very close with the threat of male instincts day and night... virtually all women do. I keep my doors locked, always and have a several weapons.

I believe most civilized men would not act on their instincts under "normal"conditions... but any man is capable of it under the right conditions and I can't tell by looking at a man if he is civilized.

I have reason to trust other women... most all of us do... and tend to look out for each other even if we don't know each other.

I do not look at men who are in cars beside my car... doing so invites a real problem.

Don't believe for one single second that we don't have a working understanding of what men are capable of. This information is passed down from mother to daughter... sister to sister ... friend to friend.
It always has been.

We live side by side with the Beast and manipulate the Beast to both love one of them and to protect ourselves from him and the rest of them.

We start working on the beast while they are very young. When an old beast tells a young beast to be nice to girls and women... likely it is old tapes from old beast's mother when he was young.

If you don't think we have working knowlege of what men are capable of... you are dreaming.

Far as I am concerned we civilized you men to what ever level you may be, otherwise this would still be a caveman-esque knock us in the head and drag us off by our hair reality. I have had men try that approach sort of after they have been drinking, it's not fun.

For you... what are the real no BS "only a man knows" reasons you don't want women in combat? And the "we can't emotionally/physically do it" I consider BS.

TIGERESS

[Tigeress]

As an add-on to the previous post: Verifiable and consistant honesty in a man is the something very important I look for. If I can't trust him, I walk away. It's about survival and possible romance.

TIGERESS

[lazs2]

"Why do you two feel women need to be obedient to their men and stay away from war?"

I did not say that at all.. you put those words into my mouth.

Again.. you are proving my point.. I would agree that both men and women have a working knowlege of each other.. how could they not and survive.. but that does not by any means say we understand each other.

How can we be equal if I can beat up a man who insults me in a vile way but not a woman?

How can we be equal given crime stats?  that is the uncivilized elephant in the room... that is what is under the thin and delicate veneer of civilization..

even in the most civilized nations on earth.. a simple disaster or riot brings us right back to our instincts... what makes you think that combat won't?   it is simply a bad idea.

lazs

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Tigeress
With all kidding aside...

Why do you two feel women need to be obedient to their men and stay away from war?  

That is to say, stay home and let you men protect us rather than us going off driving fighters and bombers and tanks into harm's way side by side with our men?

Dang it woman, put down them hotsy totsy, high falutin` magazines that`s filling your head with all them silly notions...................... ...........and go cook me some taters.

Seriously... I mean the real reason... the male reason... deep down... in the gut. ...not that typical cop out stuff about men are men and women are women stuff. The REAL REASON.

Seriously I think we have seen more than enough to see what happens when women are put in combat situations. For example, we have seen what happens to women when they are captured. Not pretty. Not pretty at all.
It can also get real complicated , real fast, in tight situations of war.
When the poo hits the fan, then the males involved alongside of the women feel that they not only have their backs to watch, but also the women. Complicating and dangerous. It takes attention away from the situation at hand at the worst of times. That`s just the way it is.
Men feel a need to protect women in dire situations. That`s our job so to speak.
We also saw enough from Nam to see what can happen if women are used to fight against you. One blink, one hesitation and it`s too late. Most men of the western world are appalled at the thought of having to kill a woman. So...................you are at a disadvantage in the survival field.

Is it because you don't want the enemy (other men) to kill or get possession of us? your women?

I don`t view women as possessions in any shape, form or fashion.

...perhaps taking their women home with you?
...and have more two or more women at your beck and call?

If Skuzz will excuse me........................... .OH HELL NO!  

thinking as a male tribe dominating another another male tribe?

Well, when you get down to it, that pretty much sums up war.

[BiGBMAW]

the first picture..

Looks like shes smuggling midgets ; )

[Tigeress]

Originally posted by lazs2
"Why do you two feel women need to be obedient to their men and stay away from war?"

I did not say that at all.. you put those words into my mouth.

Again.. you are proving my point.. I would agree that both men and women have a working knowlege of each other.. how could they not and survive.. but that does not by any means say we understand each other.

How can we be equal if I can beat up a man who insults me in a vile way but not a woman?

How can we be equal given crime stats?  that is the uncivilized elephant in the room... that is what is under the thin and delicate veneer of civilization..

even in the most civilized nations on earth.. a simple disaster or riot brings us right back to our instincts... what makes you think that combat won't?   it is simply a bad idea.

lazs

Hi lazs,

I actually did not feel I was putting words in you mouth.

I inferred your position, from your copious postings, in which you discuss the instinctive relationship between women and men, and additionally your position on women in combat.

In any case, putting words into the mouth of others is not something I do intentionally.

If you look at your post, I could have accused you of putting words in my mouth and not answering my questions.

Whatever made you think that I believe combat won't bring back male instincts? Goodness gracious. Please find the quotes that support your contention.

Virtually every military woman in-country in Iraq has either been sexually assulted, or the attempt has been made, by male members of the US military. I have back up references if you choose to dispute this.

My everyday life is like a war zone, in effect, with regards to potential attack from uncivilized males. It's the same for all females, regardless of their age.

Lazs wrote: "How can we be equal if I can beat up a man who insults me in a vile way but not a woman?"

It's not that you can't... it's that you should not and would be jailed for doing so and sued in civil court for every dollar possible. It's against the law to beat up anyone except, in legally justifiable defense.
But we all know all this... nothing new here.

Please find other superiorities to discuss.

Jackal actually answered my questions... you, so far, have not.
Thus I await you answers.

Best Regards,

TIGERESS

[Tigeress]

Originally posted by BiGBMAW
the first picture..

Looks like shes smuggling midgets ; )

hahaha... yeah Alandrea is not a pin up model... she is 93 years old.

ohhhh!!!! The "First" photo! Uhh... those are mammary glands.
We all have them. How male of you to compliment her on them!

I like compliments on mine as well, if done respectfully.
And no!  you can't have a look at them!

hahahahaha God bless you men!

TIGERESS