Matt Bors for December 11, 2013

That comes awfully close to reading like “the way she was dressed, she was asking for it.” When in doubt, interact with a woman the way you would want a gay man to interact with you.

And maybe they’ll ban women’s porn: The romance novel too!

Jase – you never ask for being raped, but you are pretty dumb if you expect there not to be (at minimum) looks when dressing a certain way. Even if you don’t dress like that – depending on how you look – you will get looks.

It’s possible to notice that someone is good looking without saying “Oooga, oooga” and dripping drool on the floor.

You make a very good analogy. My husband and I have had conversations on this topic often (adult conversations, not THAT kind of conversation.) I think in many cases it’s a case of very aggressive feminism: “I can do anything I want and dress any way I please and you can’t do a THING about it.” For younger women I think it’s a bad case of cultural conditioning resulting in higher-function brain death.

Thanks Mr. Bors for keeping us abreast of the news.

Latest reason why Bors rules: working in references to Judge Dredd and Tex Avery in the same strip.

Omigosh, I went & read Howley’s ridiculous article. He claims that liberals want to start being the moral police, punishing anyone who objectifies women.Fortunately most everyone here seems to understand there is a big difference between an appreciative glance & ogling. Most of us have figured out that some “compliments” are demeaning & have learned to express ourselves with words instead of cat calls & wolf whistles.Howley goes on to say, “Ladies, how are you going to feel when the progressives prohibit men from paying you a compliment on your walk home from the bar?”The vast majority of women can do without those “compliments”. No one is going to outlaw boorish behavior. It’s sad that Howley thinks unwanted, crude behavior needs defending.

It seems like a pretty stupid thing to worry about. Next thing you know someone will figure out that they are NAKED underneath all their clothes! Imagine the rampant fantasizing that will be going on. You’ll never be able to face your mother again! Oh no!

The same bunch that made it illegal for men to look….Maybe “them” are ugly lesbian feminists who wear oversized sweaters, support hose, birkenstocks and still live with their parents at 40…. :)

Where did martens go?

DrC has been banished as well.

The problem with ogling is that it completely ignores the person being ogled. It says to the woman that she has no existence other than as an object for impersonal male lust. That’s the same mentality that rapists use. That’s why it’s objectionable, and to argue that it’s natural for men to behave as boors is an insult to the sex.

Once again, Matt Bors to the rescue. Where would womankind be without Matt to stand up for them?

“Wow, vanished for being articulate? When trolls live large, often posting so many vile statements,and to the power of ten far more insulting than martens or DrC. Well Ruff and lonecat, I suspect they got targeted.” -———————————————-I just got inside info that they were banned for posting “continuous nonsense and falsehoods”.

For anyone familiar with the Gov’s posts, that comment is a nice bit of accidental satire.

I don’t agree with Dr Canuk on practically anything, but I would (and have) fight to the death for his right to speak his mind in this forum.I’m with you on equal access for all posters.Unless there are personal threats or vulgar language (this being a comics site, I suppose a few minors may wander over from reading Peanuts), I don’t see why anyone is getting kicked.

I see ya, RV.

The Gov talking about posting “continuous nonsense and falsehoods” is funny, IMO.