How Much More Ridiculous Can These Feminists Be?

[anotheoldgit]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-46279172

[spathiphyllum]

YMB, you must be wrong. Let people tell us how it is. Factually. The BBC article is clearly miss representing the actual complaints. Let random established strangers lecture you on how to think regarding this.

[jackthehat]

YMB - I have read the article and am responding to AOG's question.

Others may have chosen to address that in a different manner, it doesn't mean that I have to take account of their opinions nor temper my response accordingly.

[spathiphyllum]

"Its about the inequality of the slogans"

Ironic, when one turns the corner, the slogan regarding the opposing display is used for womens attire, but we must focus one one aspect of an entire animal and take offence, when on a whole, it's perfectly OK

[Rockrose]

Kval, your //trollopy little brothel panties // just had me spitting out my coffee.

[AuntLydia]

Of course its the message. The message that says "hey guys! fully dressed in non sexual trousers and tops is the way to impress the laydees this Xmas! Then its saying " Hey Gals! getting down into your trollopy ( thanks kval love that word) bra & knicks is the way to impress your man this Xmas!"
I often think the Feminists go to far but this time they are spot on.

[youngmafbog]

JTH, you are perfectly entitled to your opinion, that is not the issue.

Your attempts at dissing other posters is the problem. But then you are never wrong are you?

[Rockrose]

Had they put the men in a window in full silk boxers there wouldn't have been an issue!

[emmie]

AL so they are, some just don't get what we are trying to say.

[jackthehat]

Spath - I'm not lecturing you (although sometimes I think it might be a good idea to have someone do it), I am simply bringing to your attention (before you embark on yet another scatter-gun multi-comment repsonse to something you have misunderstood) that it has nothing to do with the anthropological desire for women to crave 'frilly little knickers' or whatever it was you said, but that the marketing of the 'flk' could have been handled better.

[youngmafbog]

AL, problem is they are not "trollopy"!

Perhaps they should be done under the trades description act?

[spathiphyllum]

"or whatever it was you said"

So there is a chance you've actually misunderstood, maybe have a double take.

[spathiphyllum]

and there marketing is consistent.. there must-have range is not specifically for women. And it does not just contain knickers.

Maybe people who get so up in arms about this stuff simply should stay inside.

[Jackdaw33]

@Spath
Who is Miss Representing? I don't think I've had the pleasure.

[spathiphyllum]

https://www.marksandspencer.com/c/style-and-living/introducing-must-haves

[youngmafbog]

Wife/Partner of Mr/Ms Representing ?

[Rockrose]

//Maybe people who get so up in arms about this stuff simply should stay inside.//
Do you mean women? Chained to the kitchen sink perhaps?
At least us silly women know the difference between there and their!

[spathiphyllum]

No i mean pathetic humans who can't walk down the street without taking offence like the world owes them nothing but sweets and compliments. So many individuals someone will take offence at something wunt dey ay. Why cater to em?

[Rockrose]

Pity you were not so keen on catering to your customers as you are to AB!

[spathiphyllum]

Seems 'some' women will take offence however they like, with either, miss interpretations, or completely false allegations. for example, even mentioning the kitchen sink was very foul play, chick.