Removed from JW.ORG: Warwick Photo Gallery 3 (January Through April 2015) (page 6)

Warwickslave

I did see many sisters working. To be honest most of them were directing traffic, cleaning or doing pipe insulation.

redvip2000

This is a great google search to show WT property all over the world:

You know this is really interesting to see how little representation the Org has in the middle east and Asia.

IMO an organization that has God's backing shouldn't care about persecution. Who cares if JWs are not allowed in Iran or Saudi Arabia, after all Jehoober will defend the work so be brave and go out in the streets and start preaching. Nothing will happen to them, right?

Vidiot

@ cappytan...

"Perpetually offended" would be a terrific username.

Gentledawn

Vidiot

@ cappytan...

"Perpetually offended" would be a terrific username.

Yeah, because calling someone out for their bigotry is wrong. In fact, let's flip it over to the person who actually called em out on it - the ~~apostate~~ non-conformist, who doesn't buy the explainerating, bullsh!tting, or 'oops, I was talking numbers, not qualifications'.

Here's a fun illustration: Can you imagine if the TV show "Roots" had been made into a campy farce /comedic romp about how the black folk just stumble-bummed around and enslaved themselves, instead of how slavery actually occurred historically?

Would you be upset with a black person calling out the campy production for what it really was: a fucking bigoted farce, made to white-wash history?

Now imagine someone making a statement/claim that there are a large number of unqualified people on a list, after making note out loud that 35% of the number are black people. They are the only subset on that list enumerated by the claimant before making the statement.

Is that okay? To insinuate that someone is disqualified for a particular field of work, based solely on the claimants bigotry / preconceived notions? No facts, evidence, or anything else to back up why that subset of the work group is unqualified.

OrphanCrow

Gentledawn: Yeah, because calling someone out for their bigotry is wrong. In fact, let's flip it over to the person who actually called em out on it - the ~~apostate~~ non-conformist, who doesn't buy the explainerating, bullsh!tting, or 'oops, I was talking numbers, not qualifications'.

Lol! Would that be me?

I called out the poster simply because they are so wrong - on many points of their ill informed statement about women on construction sites.

If there is one thing about women who "work with the boys", it is this: those women are at least as qualitifed as the men, sometimes even more so. You won't find an unqualified woman on a construction site. And, I will tell you this - there are LOTS of unqualified men on construction sites. I know because I have had to babysit them - I have had to supervise more than one "boy" who didn't know how to hold a hammer.

I am a woman. and I have worked on construction sites for many years, off and on, and I have women friends who are certified, qualified, and who run male crews on construction sites.

Don't dis women who work construction.

Gentledawn

OrphanCrow

Nope, I'm in agreement with you.

I've done my fair share of construction and automotive work long before becoming a JW. In fact, a guy asked me to grab the other end of an engine block (minus the head, valves and pistons... it was being taken in for an acid dip) in order to help him carry and load it into the back of his truck. There were other guys standing around. IMO, the only reason he asked me for help and not the other guys milling around is because I would do it. It had very little to do with actual capabilities. Again, this is my opinion. Those other men were pretty well known for being a gaggle of gossiping lazy asses. Ha.

And yeah. I'm a woman, too.

Vidiot

@ Gentledawn... re the "username" quip...

Just trying to lighten the mood.

cappytan

Just trying to lighten the mood.

Feminazi's moods can't be lightened.

OrphanCrow

cappytan: Feminazi...

Sigh. And there we go again.

Someone just HAD to invoke Godwin's Law, didn't they? That sure didn't take long.

Gentledawn

cappytan - "Feminazi..."

Instead of attacking my argument, you attack me. That's a logical fallacy known as "ad hominem".

[from Wikipedia]

"An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, means responding to arguments by attacking a person's character, rather than addressing the content of their arguments. When used inappropriately, it is a fallacy in which a claim or argument is dismissed on the basis of some irrelevant fact or supposition about the author or the person being criticized."

I used reasoning in the exact same way the EXJW reddit community responded to the Jehovah's Witness IAMA post: if you make a claim, give proof/evidence. Claims are not evidence, in and of themselves.

Watchtower uses these sorts of tricks all the time. They make grandiose claims, attack people using ad hominem fallacies. They treat women like 2nd class human beings. Not equal to men at all. Inferior. In every single way, women must bow to every baptized male's opinion in the congregation, even if the male is a 6 or 8 years old.

LeVar Burton gives a stunning performance as Kunta Kinte in "Roots" :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGTYBbcEvHg#t=5m20s

The scene is all about breaking another person's will. Coercive persuasion. Undue influence. Brainwashing.

Removed from JW.ORG: Warwick Photo Gallery 3 (January Through April 2015)

Share this