by exploited » Fri Nov 30, 2012 5:19 pm
Well the problem is that he has no evidence to backup his claims about "marriageable" women. Just anecdotes sprinkled with sexism. This is what I have been pointing out the entire time, and it's why I've been carefully documenting the way his arguments have changed.
Do either of you have any evidence that says women expect to marry someone of the same education or income level? Has anybody actually presented any evidence of that whatsoever? Nope. Not at all. The only factual information presented is that one third of women and one third of men value marriage, from which Sazari concluded that women are to be blamed for this, rather then men not wanting to change their sexist attitudes.
He has never explained how anyone was supposed to realize he disagreed with the article he bases his arguments off of. Reading his first post, on it's own, without knowing what any of us know now, would you say it is clear he disagreed with it? Because I'd say the opposite: he never indicates disagreement, but he frequently implies agreement.
Also, that is one hell of a shifty argument. "Women don't have to change their expectations... unless they want to get married, in which case, they need to change. Oh, and that isn't because I'm sexist, it is because I have a personal preference for women who want to sacrifice their individual desires so I don't have too." is more or less what it comes down too...