General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: What do you think of the word "unladylike"? [View all]Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)for you to stay on topic?
So far, you have changed the subject from "the doors story is an invention" (which was proven wrong by the links provided), which led to "women didn't complain about having doors opened for them" (again disproven by the links provided), to my having "accused the OP of complaining about doors being opened", (again a clear reading of my post having disproven THAT theory), to my perception that a 'group' is a stand-alone entity that is not comprised of individuals, (as though ANY group is NOT comprised of individuals), to stating that the OP was about "INSISTING that a woman be 'ladylike'" (when the OP was CLEARLY about the USE of the word, and not about insisting on a particular behavior), to a discussion about post-modernist theory.
If you don't have anything of substance to say about the OP and the discussion it has prompted, you can just say so. Constantly changing the subject every time you are corrected, or your statements are proven to be false, leads one to believe that you actually DON'T have anything of substance to say - which comes as no surprise to anyone.