Because the original statement wasn’t even just “should” have gay characters.. but WELL WRITTEN.
And that’s well written… according to who again?
See how that handful of soil isn’t just a handful anymore? Now… now there’s expectations… and there’s “well written”… and what’s next? What other “reasonable demand” is going to be made to suit “social expectations”?
(some other shit)
But see… if you think writers need to be “taught to write respectfully-written characters” then you’re the fucking enemy and I don’t think there’s much of any way to reach you.
Negroidoid. ;D
And, note how much BIGGER the "Negroidoid" brain case is? Funny, the racist twit who wrote the diss lacked the cranial capacity to see that.
"Negrodroid"
Wasn't the most popular of the films Shaft?Yeah, those were the classics that started the genre.
Wasn't the most popular of the films Shaft?Yeah, those were the classics that started the genre.
...Then it was followed by a bunch of really cheap and bad films. Which was not the intention.
(http://oi68.tinypic.com/2eaqaef.jpg)
Because it makes perfect sense that Chris Farley would fake his own death so he could take part in a false flag fifteen years later.
Who's the person on the left?
The whole purpose of saying blacks can only be prejudiced is for the persual of an anti-white agenda. Its just one part of a larger movement to attack whites for nearly everything
My sentiment towards trannies is thusly.
You're sick.
"You need help. Instead of cutting off your dick or sewing your cunt shut, why don't you try, I don't know, taking some of the appropriate hormonal augmentation as per what you ARE, as opposed to what you FEEL LIKE as a direct result of your PSYCHOLOGICAL DISORDER."
Why is that trans people are so keen on altering their bodies instead of altering their minds?
Is it that you're afraid you won't be 'you' anymore once the problem is fixed, once your sickness is cured?
You don't have to be afraid.
Your whole argument falls apart from there - its not about changing your bodies to suit your mind, you should try changing your mind to suit your body.
We have technology.
You don't have to be sick anymore Anon.
We can help you, without any surgery at all.
You are sick.
You FEEL like something that you are NOT, and will NEVER be, BECAUSE YOU ARE SICK.
Instead of STAYING SICK and surgically/hormonally altering yourself to FEED INTO YOUR SICKNESS, you should get WELL, by taking hormonal augmentation that will OVERCOME YOUR SICKNESS and let you FEEL like what you ARE.
Face it transfags…
You're just upset that people don't support you mutilating yourself for the sake of your psychological disorder, and instead urge you to take medication that will FIX THE PROBLEM.
(Its because you don't want to admit you have a problem. Like a fucking addict.)
(http://i.imgur.com/bSAPx82.png)QuoteAdd blacklivesmatter to it, seriously. It's mostly white people with a guilt conscious of shit they didn't even fucking do....
Then the crap of disrupting colleges and pulling shit like the KKK were allowed on campus and throw bricks at them with a police escort. That fucking movement did more to hurt race relations than anything in 50 years.
QuoteMy sentiment towards trannies is thusly.
You're sick.
"You need help. Instead of cutting off your dick or sewing your cunt shut, why don't you try, I don't know, taking some of the appropriate hormonal augmentation as per what you ARE, as opposed to what you FEEL LIKE as a direct result of your PSYCHOLOGICAL DISORDER."
Why is that trans people are so keen on altering their bodies instead of altering their minds?
Is it that you're afraid you won't be 'you' anymore once the problem is fixed, once your sickness is cured?
You don't have to be afraid.
Your whole argument falls apart from there - its not about changing your bodies to suit your mind, you should try changing your mind to suit your body.
We have technology.
You don't have to be sick anymore Anon.
We can help you, without any surgery at all.
You are sick.
You FEEL like something that you are NOT, and will NEVER be, BECAUSE YOU ARE SICK.
Instead of STAYING SICK and surgically/hormonally altering yourself to FEED INTO YOUR SICKNESS, you should get WELL, by taking hormonal augmentation that will OVERCOME YOUR SICKNESS and let you FEEL like what you ARE.
Face it transfags…
You're just upset that people don't support you mutilating yourself for the sake of your psychological disorder, and instead urge you to take medication that will FIX THE PROBLEM.
(Its because you don't want to admit you have a problem. Like a fucking addict.)
God damn it, is it really too much to ask for spoilers? AGAIN, some of us haven't seen the god-damned movie yet!
(click to show/hide)
In all fairness to Gov. Norquist, we speak English the way Hatians speak French.
In all fairness to Gov. Norquist, we speak English the way Hatians speak French.
(click to show/hide)
(click to show/hide)(click to show/hide)
(click to show/hide)(click to show/hide)
I wasn't complaining just pointing out that the character didn't fit the narrative that the poster was trying to portray.
(https://scontent-tpe1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xat1/v/t1.0-9/944337_989364534456752_7405357692580389659_n.jpg?oh=9a933410b1be64797c09560d086f8574&oe=570D7ED6)
THIS IS A REAL TWEET PEOPLE.
https://mobile.twitter.com/GroverNorquist/status/683425783470239744
I thought it was kind of clever... wait, he IS being sarcastic, no?
But in simple terms the answer to your question is no. Infact the main study that attempted to answer a clearly defined version of your question concluded that child sex abuse does not cause intense & pervasive harm & is in numerous cases positive
I know I don't respond to UP's posts all that often but didn't we have a moron arguing that child porn was a victimless crime on the forums at one point?Did we? I've heard the argument that hentai depicting kids is a victimless crime (the argument being that drawn/cgi porn depicting things that would be illegal in real life let the people who have a fetish for them blow out some steam without harming real people) but I'm not sure if we had someone saying that real child porn is a victimless crime. (But now that you mention it, it does ring a bell...)
He was for creating a child porn industry because molesting a child was wrong but distributing images of the molestation was not
He was for creating a child porn industry because molesting a child was wrong but distributing images of the molestation was not
... that raises the question of how the hell he wanted to create the cp industry without molesting children, doesn't it?
Of course the mockery of the Victims of the Dresden Holocaust is beyond despicable, but you just gotta realize these worthless people will say anything outrageous for attention. People so stupid should have no access to your emotions.
Though as the article wanders, the Third Reich is referred to here as "monstrously inhuman tyranny". That doesn't sound like alternative-right, that sounds like mainstream kosher-right.
I'm just curious if you think Bolshevik Communism was bad, and National Socialism was bad, then what exactly would you like to see emerge? You can't just complain about everything and then call it a day. There must be some constructiveness brought to the conversation.
Had Germany become the continental superpower and not the Soviet Union, I think the world would be a much better place today.
QuoteOf course the mockery of the Victims of the Dresden Holocaust is beyond despicable, but you just gotta realize these worthless people will say anything outrageous for attention. People so stupid should have no access to your emotions.
Though as the article wanders, the Third Reich is referred to here as "monstrously inhuman tyranny". That doesn't sound like alternative-right, that sounds like mainstream kosher-right.
I'm just curious if you think Bolshevik Communism was bad, and National Socialism was bad, then what exactly would you like to see emerge? You can't just complain about everything and then call it a day. There must be some constructiveness brought to the conversation.
Had Germany become the continental superpower and not the Soviet Union, I think the world would be a much better place today.
Aside from everything else that is wrong here I wish to point out that people have no obligation to always have a solution to a problem when they notice a problem. I mean, if I were to notice that the engine in my car is making a funny noise and take it to repair the repairman is not going to insist that I tell him how to fix it. And if I notice that the Super-SS are rounding up people and killing them based on ethnicity I could complain, that this ain't right, and even if I don't have a perfect plan for a better kind of government it would still be a legitimate complaint about the politics in my country.QuoteOf course the mockery of the Victims of the Dresden Holocaust is beyond despicable, but you just gotta realize these worthless people will say anything outrageous for attention. People so stupid should have no access to your emotions.
Though as the article wanders, the Third Reich is referred to here as "monstrously inhuman tyranny". That doesn't sound like alternative-right, that sounds like mainstream kosher-right.
I'm just curious if you think Bolshevik Communism was bad, and National Socialism was bad, then what exactly would you like to see emerge? You can't just complain about everything and then call it a day. There must be some constructiveness brought to the conversation.
Had Germany become the continental superpower and not the Soviet Union, I think the world would be a much better place today.
I dunno. How about not mass-murdering?
And why did the mistress treat you so rudely when you broke her curfew? Because inconsiderate gaijin like you think they know the transit line but don't and get in late. She has a schedule to keep but instead, you made her keep yours. She was responsible for you and most assuredly, fairly used to sassy, disobedient, tourists like you. Sorry doesn't cut it in the real world where you are expected to respect the rules and accept them like an adult. So she was overbearing and unforgiving. To her, you.....were......typical. Gathering your wits at the police station, you cry because you are feeling sorry for yourself. "In what world..." you question. In the REAL world. You're so smart, you leave the house less than 2 hours you're supposed to be back at and you have no idea where you're going and how to get back. (smile, giggle, snicker, snigger!) You can do no wrong. Who solves your problem? Daddy and another Japan national who was put out so that little princess can have the nicest room she's ever been in. Typical reward for your mistakes. Everyone else pays but you. Only the woman who clearly spelled out the rules, is wrong! Nothing but your standard, Westerner brat mentality of, "POOR MEEEE!"
This is one of many comments to that girl who's host family in Japan kicked her out over being 20 minutes late.QuoteAnd why did the mistress treat you so rudely when you broke her curfew? Because inconsiderate gaijin like you think they know the transit line but don't and get in late. She has a schedule to keep but instead, you made her keep yours. She was responsible for you and most assuredly, fairly used to sassy, disobedient, tourists like you. Sorry doesn't cut it in the real world where you are expected to respect the rules and accept them like an adult. So she was overbearing and unforgiving. To her, you.....were......typical. Gathering your wits at the police station, you cry because you are feeling sorry for yourself. "In what world..." you question. In the REAL world. You're so smart, you leave the house less than 2 hours you're supposed to be back at and you have no idea where you're going and how to get back. (smile, giggle, snicker, snigger!) You can do no wrong. Who solves your problem? Daddy and another Japan national who was put out so that little princess can have the nicest room she's ever been in. Typical reward for your mistakes. Everyone else pays but you. Only the woman who clearly spelled out the rules, is wrong! Nothing but your standard, Westerner brat mentality of, "POOR MEEEE!"
Yeah, the "it's their culture to be colossal twats" defense.
There's also the assumption that because she's a middle class white girl, she's sheltered and doesn't know what real hardship is. Then when she experiences does hardship (such as being lost in a foreign country), they consider it a taste of brutal reality. Makes me wonder how they adopted such a cynical viewpoint.
I know how Brazil could have been better:
1) No colonization by anyone from the Iberian Peninsula, or any Catholic nation. Is there any Catholic former colony that isn't a poverty-striken dump?
2) Instead colonized by ideally the British, or alternatively the Dutch or French. Ideally not the Belgiums or other small time powers like the Danes, who won't have the power to rule such a territory, nor take it successfully through a peacefully transition to Dominion status.
3) Settled by non-Mediterranean European protestant stock, Brits, French, Dutch, Germans, etc. What is it about the Catholics, sun and kind weather that makes a man settle for corrupt government and layabout living?
These three above would put Brazil on track to become a normal, western-type nation akin to Canada or Australia. Meanwhile, every nation south of Texas colonized by Iberians is a corrupt, poverty-striken sh#thole. With possible exception of Costa Rica, as their founders had the sense to eschew the establishment of a national military, with its fat, power-seeking generals et al.
geez... so much hate for the catholics.
In this case, yes, due to it being nothing more than religious dick waving.geez... so much hate for the catholics.And that's a bad thing?
Guizonde, minor nitpick but Protestantism began in Germany by Martin Luther, it just took a while to really spread. (Ok, there were other important figures involved as well but being a Lutheran, a sect of Christianity that was inspired by Martin Luther I kinda think of him as a "big deal.")
So whoever that guy UP quoted was they did pick countries that eventually became heavily protestant but in order to be colonized by protestants Brazil would have had to be colonized at a later time or the colonization would have had to been done by early protestants. (That latter bit might have actually been possible if they had been fleeing Europe to settle somewhere with less Catholics. Hmm... Alternate history story material? I'm not sure how big a difference it would have made but seeing as Catholic church is influential in South America it does get my interest. Orthodox Christian settlers colonizing America could have also made the countries quite different.)
geez... so much hate for the catholics.
And that's a bad thing?
geez... so much hate for the catholics.
And that's a bad thing?
Yes it is. You'd not hold a person from Arizona in suspicion because the government there is bat shit crazy. You're mixing up people and institutions. It's a fairly easy trap to fall into.
geez... so much hate for the catholics.
And that's a bad thing?
Yes it is. You'd not hold a person from Arizona in suspicion because the government there is bat shit crazy. You're mixing up people and institutions. It's a fairly easy trap to fall into.
I'm deliberately mixing them up to make a point a little further on.
Guizonde gives Catholics and the RCC a lot more deference than he seems to give Jehovah's Witnesses; as an ex-JW myself I enjoy unraveling that inconsistency.
I think I would have treated you the same way. your arrogant retarded expectations of his they should treat you is like some special education baby who should kill themselves. you expect special treatment and get yourself into a situation to allow yourself to be late. they gave you rules and you immediately break them and they are the bad guys? you obviously just want fun and games and not to learn the true Japanese culture or you would have respected their wishes and not been such a bitch, you complain about two host stays but ever conciser your wild expectations of them treating you like a princess isn't reasonable you fucking annoying がじん piece of shit. you bring great shame to the west bimbo fuckface go seppuku you cuntI think
You know what? Im just gonna say my sister said it best, "First world problems." Cause I was gonna sit here and elaborate in great detail about what a moron you are. Youre bitching about what is commonly known as "first world problems" which basically means thinsg that dont even almost fucking matter, in a country that is NOT a first world country, that you traveled to to LEARN ABOUT THE COUNTRY. And instead of even getting to the point you elongate the speech in an attempt to add dramatic flair. Youre basically complaining about common life in Japan, in Japan. The heat and hot water thing is a bit strange, but its so disgustinly ironic that youre claiming that one house is the HOUSE FROM HELL and only bitching about STUPID SHIT that deosnt even matter, and small living spaces ARE COMMON IN JAPAN YOU RETARD. Get the fuck over yourself. If you want to learn about the world then LEARN about it. You need so much schooling on life.
it remains as a mystery when it would be acceptable to touch a woman, I guess we should always ask for a permission? So that there won't be misunderstandings.
Raping local women is also opression of the indigenous men, like a declaration of war! It is a direct challenge to the indigenous men by the strangers who came from primitive cultures. They are showing to the indigenous men that they are so weak that they cannot even defend their women and children!
This is why these foreign mass rapists rapes and robberies directed at women and children must not be left without retaliation by the men of the indigenous population, if they are men at all? It is a challenge and that is why we need the street patrols.... Otherwise the word will spread abroad that in the north there is a country where you can rape blond women while the weakling "men" look helplessly.
Sons of Odin? But the Finnish people weren't even Norse...I KNOW!
Sons of Odin? But the Finnish people weren't even Norse...Honorary Aryans thou.
QuoteQuoteI'm all for multiculturalism. But the fact remains that there is a problem:
http://chromatism.net/current/images/skincolormap.jpg
Being near the poles = lighter skin tone.
Why don't we take a story taking place in some African tribe, and arbitrarily plop a random white guy or two in there. I dare ANYONE to watch that without raising an eyebrow. lol
Oh absolutely. I was just happily pointing out to anyone who is stupid enough to call you insensitive that no, a bunch of light skinned people near the poles is NOT culturally or racially insensitive. I mean my gosh. I'm all for ya know, acknowledging that something can be multicultural and the likes. But come the fuck on. There are limits to absurdity.But then... based upon some of these movies you've reviewed... Well...
QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm all for multiculturalism. But the fact remains that there is a problem:
http://chromatism.net/current/images/skincolormap.jpg
Being near the poles = lighter skin tone.
Why don't we take a story taking place in some African tribe, and arbitrarily plop a random white guy or two in there. I dare ANYONE to watch that without raising an eyebrow. lol
Oh absolutely. I was just happily pointing out to anyone who is stupid enough to call you insensitive that no, a bunch of light skinned people near the poles is NOT culturally or racially insensitive. I mean my gosh. I'm all for ya know, acknowledging that something can be multicultural and the likes. But come the fuck on. There are limits to absurdity.But then... based upon some of these movies you've reviewed... Well...
These were comments on a review of a fucking Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer movie (the middle comment was actually the reviewer himself). One of the first things that he bitched about was that the magical fairies and elves were multicultural, but pulled the "I'm not against multiculturalism, it just doesn't make geographical sense" defense. Magical fairies and elves in Santa's village. I guess black and Asian people just physically can't exist in the north or something. We're not even talking about the "historical accuracy" defense, it's just "what are all these non-whites doing so far up north?" The majority of the elves are already white anyway.
And in the review itself he goes on to say that "with as rare and isolated as elves are, there shouldn't be that much genetic diversity" and "the entire point of Rudolph was being mocked for being different, so everyone needs to look the same to hammer in that point or else the story doesn't make sense". I guess the USA must be a utopia free of social issues, then.
I knew there was a reason I stopped watching this guy. This review was made in November 2014, but the above comment was made last April, so I'm not holding out for some recent major change of opinion.
Why don't we take a story taking place in some African tribe, and arbitrarily plop a random white guy or two in there. I dare ANYONE to watch that without raising an eyebrow. lol
QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm all for multiculturalism. But the fact remains that there is a problem:
http://chromatism.net/current/images/skincolormap.jpg
Being near the poles = lighter skin tone.
Why don't we take a story taking place in some African tribe, and arbitrarily plop a random white guy or two in there. I dare ANYONE to watch that without raising an eyebrow. lol
Oh absolutely. I was just happily pointing out to anyone who is stupid enough to call you insensitive that no, a bunch of light skinned people near the poles is NOT culturally or racially insensitive. I mean my gosh. I'm all for ya know, acknowledging that something can be multicultural and the likes. But come the fuck on. There are limits to absurdity.But then... based upon some of these movies you've reviewed... Well...
These were comments on a review of a fucking Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer movie (the middle comment was actually the reviewer himself). One of the first things that he bitched about was that the magical fairies and elves were multicultural, but pulled the "I'm not against multiculturalism, it just doesn't make geographical sense" defense. Magical fairies and elves in Santa's village. I guess black and Asian people just physically can't exist in the north or something. We're not even talking about the "historical accuracy" defense, it's just "what are all these non-whites doing so far up north?" The majority of the elves are already white anyway.
And in the review itself he goes on to say that "with as rare and isolated as elves are, there shouldn't be that much genetic diversity" and "the entire point of Rudolph was being mocked for being different, so everyone needs to look the same to hammer in that point or else the story doesn't make sense". I guess the USA must be a utopia free of social issues, then.
I knew there was a reason I stopped watching this guy. This review was made in November 2014, but the above comment was made last April, so I'm not holding out for some recent major change of opinion.
Kind of a tangent, but that colour map reeks of bullshit. People from Kyushu and Shikoku (Japan's two southernmost islands) are not as dark as humans can possibly get. If anything, the opposite is the case.
QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm all for multiculturalism. But the fact remains that there is a problem:
http://chromatism.net/current/images/skincolormap.jpg
Being near the poles = lighter skin tone.
Why don't we take a story taking place in some African tribe, and arbitrarily plop a random white guy or two in there. I dare ANYONE to watch that without raising an eyebrow. lol
Oh absolutely. I was just happily pointing out to anyone who is stupid enough to call you insensitive that no, a bunch of light skinned people near the poles is NOT culturally or racially insensitive. I mean my gosh. I'm all for ya know, acknowledging that something can be multicultural and the likes. But come the fuck on. There are limits to absurdity.But then... based upon some of these movies you've reviewed... Well...
These were comments on a review of a fucking Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer movie (the middle comment was actually the reviewer himself). One of the first things that he bitched about was that the magical fairies and elves were multicultural, but pulled the "I'm not against multiculturalism, it just doesn't make geographical sense" defense. Magical fairies and elves in Santa's village. I guess black and Asian people just physically can't exist in the north or something. We're not even talking about the "historical accuracy" defense, it's just "what are all these non-whites doing so far up north?" The majority of the elves are already white anyway.
And in the review itself he goes on to say that "with as rare and isolated as elves are, there shouldn't be that much genetic diversity" and "the entire point of Rudolph was being mocked for being different, so everyone needs to look the same to hammer in that point or else the story doesn't make sense". I guess the USA must be a utopia free of social issues, then.
I knew there was a reason I stopped watching this guy. This review was made in November 2014, but the above comment was made last April, so I'm not holding out for some recent major change of opinion.
Kind of a tangent, but that colour map reeks of bullshit. People from Kyushu and Shikoku (Japan's two southernmost islands) are not as dark as humans can possibly get. If anything, the opposite is the case.
European women deserve protection from violent, raping Arabs who see them as subhuman
#SaveEurope from #rapefugees
No they don't. They vote left and pro-multiculturalism all the time and spit in their men's faces. They deserve it.
Real authors don't fret over punctuation or grammar. Only worthless English majors do that.
White Supremist vs MRA, ready FIGHTQuoteEuropean women deserve protection from violent, raping Arabs who see them as subhuman
#SaveEurope from #rapefugeesQuoteNo they don't. They vote left and pro-multiculturalism all the time and spit in their men's faces. They deserve it.
The winner is no one, we all lose.
PS the MRA is a self published ebook author. If you want to know if he's any good, he also tweeted thisQuoteReal authors don't fret over punctuation or grammar. Only worthless English majors do that.
Bisexuality doesn't exist, at the very least in men. Look at this bitch trying to prove it does, though.
https://bitchmedia.org/post/isnt-he-lovely-male-bisexuality-doesnt-existoh-wait-it-does
That 2009 column argued that pop culture "bromances" were bringing male bisexuality into the mainstream, but that thesis was tenuous at best. The "bro" in "bromance" offered a linguistic cue that any guy pals labeled as such were merely platonic, not gettin' physical like Oliva Newton John. And not until earlier this year has scientific research dismantled the whole "gay, straight, or lying" sexual stereotype imposed on men.
For those of us who are into science however, there is proof that bisexuality is a myth.
Rieger, G., Chivers, M. L., & Bailey, J. M. (2005). Sexual arousal patterns of bisexual men. Psychological science, 16(8), 579-584, as discussed in the NY Times:
A study casts doubt on whether true bisexuality exists, at least in men. People who claim bisexuality, according to these critics, are usually homosexual, but are ambivalent about their homosexuality or simply closeted. In the new study, a team of psychologists directly measured genital arousal patterns in response to images of men and women. The psychologists found that men who identified themselves as bisexual were in fact exclusively aroused by either one sex or the other, usually by other men. The study is the largest of several small reports suggesting that the estimated 1.7 percent of men who identify themselves as bisexual show physical attraction patterns that differ substantially from professed desires.
Basically, while men reported being bisexual, their actual physical arousal (their true disposition towards one or another) was towards one sex. Here is a link to the study
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/J_Bailey2/publication/7658643_Sexual_arousal_patterns_of_bisexual_men/links/0deec518bc045a1076000000.pdf
Rosenthal, A. M., Sylva, D., Safron, A., & Bailey, J. M. (2011). Sexual arousal patterns of bisexual men revisited. Biological Psychology, 88(1), 112-115.
The researchers, probably pressured by political correctness, replicated the prior study, however this time they recruited from places where they would be more likely to find bisexual men. Basically, they went to places where they would find sexual deviants and people with different paraphilia.
In order to satisfy SJWs they had to go to places of sexual deviancy, so their findings in 2011 should be rejected because they did not control for general sexual addiction or other elements that would prove the person to be a general deviant. Below is a link to the 2011 study.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/J_Bailey2/publication/51496686_Sexual_arousal_patterns_of_bisexual_men_revisited/links/0046352cb3d20053af000000.pdf
So they went to recruit from places where they'd be likely to find the bisexual men that, according to you, don't exist. LOGIC, MOTHERFUCKER! CAN YOU USE IT?Thanks bro. I needed that. I'm not good at refuting bullshit myself unless it's standard fundie BS. Like if it's a person comparing homosexuality to bestiality or child molestation all I have to say is "informed consent, motherfucker, DO YOU KNOW IT" but I guess I'm not cut out for countering the more subtle bullshit. The kind of bullshit that seems intellectual and scientific but it's bullshit all the same.
oh and also apparently a man being into dudes isn't deviancy, a man being into chicks isn't deviancy, but a man being into dudes AND chicks is, why not, peanut butter and jelly chemically react to make human faeces now
Kinsley? lol who's that
I have no words for this bullshit.Apparently I'm a mythical creature.QuoteBisexuality doesn't exist, at the very least in men. Look at this bitch trying to prove it does, though.
https://bitchmedia.org/post/isnt-he-lovely-male-bisexuality-doesnt-existoh-wait-it-does
That 2009 column argued that pop culture "bromances" were bringing male bisexuality into the mainstream, but that thesis was tenuous at best. The "bro" in "bromance" offered a linguistic cue that any guy pals labeled as such were merely platonic, not gettin' physical like Oliva Newton John. And not until earlier this year has scientific research dismantled the whole "gay, straight, or lying" sexual stereotype imposed on men.
For those of us who are into science however, there is proof that bisexuality is a myth.
Rieger, G., Chivers, M. L., & Bailey, J. M. (2005). Sexual arousal patterns of bisexual men. Psychological science, 16(8), 579-584, as discussed in the NY Times:
A study casts doubt on whether true bisexuality exists, at least in men. People who claim bisexuality, according to these critics, are usually homosexual, but are ambivalent about their homosexuality or simply closeted. In the new study, a team of psychologists directly measured genital arousal patterns in response to images of men and women. The psychologists found that men who identified themselves as bisexual were in fact exclusively aroused by either one sex or the other, usually by other men. The study is the largest of several small reports suggesting that the estimated 1.7 percent of men who identify themselves as bisexual show physical attraction patterns that differ substantially from professed desires.
Basically, while men reported being bisexual, their actual physical arousal (their true disposition towards one or another) was towards one sex. Here is a link to the study
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/J_Bailey2/publication/7658643_Sexual_arousal_patterns_of_bisexual_men/links/0deec518bc045a1076000000.pdf
Rosenthal, A. M., Sylva, D., Safron, A., & Bailey, J. M. (2011). Sexual arousal patterns of bisexual men revisited. Biological Psychology, 88(1), 112-115.
The researchers, probably pressured by political correctness, replicated the prior study, however this time they recruited from places where they would be more likely to find bisexual men. Basically, they went to places where they would find sexual deviants and people with different paraphilia.
In order to satisfy SJWs they had to go to places of sexual deviancy, so their findings in 2011 should be rejected because they did not control for general sexual addiction or other elements that would prove the person to be a general deviant. Below is a link to the 2011 study.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/J_Bailey2/publication/51496686_Sexual_arousal_patterns_of_bisexual_men_revisited/links/0046352cb3d20053af000000.pdf
Some girl bit down on him during sex? That sounds hot to me, biting all part of the fun! Did she ever ACTUALLY ask him to stop? These ‘groupies’ should know they are playthings, not potential girlfriends/future wives, expectation leads to dissapoitment which turns to bitterness & then exaggerated stories circulate on gossip blogs to paint a darkened picture of the celebrity that they feel so rejected by.
The end game of feminism is to make it impossible for a female to do any wrong, absolving her from all responsibility for her actions, no matter how reprehensible. The fact that a human being has a vagina will soon mean that she can not make a bad decision about anything. Punishing or criticizing a woman for her life choices will be abolished.
The mere idea that there is a concerted feminist effort to grant special privilege to women and to decry any voice of equality as hate-speech should indicate full and well to all of you that women are exactly as capable of behaving like entitled fucking ignorant children as men and deserve no such special treatment. If you are a feminist, do me a favor: end your pathetic charade and fucking kill yourself for the good of the gene pool.
What is this whole "the Jews killed Jesus" nonsense anyway? It was the Romans who crucified him.
Besides, I thought the whole point of Jesus existing was to get crucified in the first place. Basically, God sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself in order to save us all from himself.
That was one version of the story. It was dropped from the official Bible, though.What is this whole "the Jews killed Jesus" nonsense anyway? It was the Romans who crucified him.
Besides, I thought the whole point of Jesus existing was to get crucified in the first place. Basically, God sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself in order to save us all from himself.
Which would (should, anyway) make Judas, who got him arrested, directly leading to his execution, a hero, not a villain, correct? Whatever. 's all made up anyway.
That was one version of the story. It was dropped from the official Bible, though.What is this whole "the Jews killed Jesus" nonsense anyway? It was the Romans who crucified him.
Besides, I thought the whole point of Jesus existing was to get crucified in the first place. Basically, God sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself in order to save us all from himself.
Which would (should, anyway) make Judas, who got him arrested, directly leading to his execution, a hero, not a villain, correct? Whatever. 's all made up anyway.
What is this whole "the Jews killed Jesus" nonsense anyway? It was the Romans who crucified him.
Besides, I thought the whole point of Jesus existing was to get crucified in the first place. Basically, God sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself in order to save us all from himself.
What is this whole "the Jews killed Jesus" nonsense anyway? It was the Romans who crucified him.
Besides, I thought the whole point of Jesus existing was to get crucified in the first place. Basically, God sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself in order to save us all from himself.
Which would (should, anyway) make Judas, who got him arrested, directly leading to his execution, a hero, not a villain, correct? Whatever. 's all made up anyway.
What is this whole "the Jews killed Jesus" nonsense anyway? It was the Romans who crucified him.
Besides, I thought the whole point of Jesus existing was to get crucified in the first place. Basically, God sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself in order to save us all from himself.
Disclaimer: I'm not an expert in early Christianity.
If you wanted to be a pedantic asshole you could argue that the Jewish authorities were technically responsible because they turned Jesus in to the authorities, but the Romans were the ones who actually carried out the execution. Jesus also posed a threat to the Romans because he preached against the Roman occupation of Judea and thus the Romans would have had a reason to execute him. There were a ton of Jewish sects and messiah claimants at the time and the Jews didn't go around executing everyone who disagreed with them. The "Jews killed Jesus" canard came about around the time Christianity started gaining popularity with gentiles, so I'm guessing we can blame Paul for this.
Then again, we're trying to apply logic to a flyer made by someone who thinks serial killers are part of an occult conspiracy to the goddess Ceres, Germans are persecuted, Jewish people worship the Holocaust and are trying to push "Holocaustianity" on everyone, and that Mel Gibson sold out to the Jews (among other insane things). "Jews killed Jesus" is probably the least ridiculous thing he believes.
Um, the historical consensus is that there really was a Jesus of Nazareth who was born within the vicinity of 1 CE, got baptized, started a religious movement when he was about thirty, and was crucified by Pontius Pilate. Everything else is up for debate, but that much is agreed upon.
Something else to consider. The word messiah around that time period carried with it the implication of military. And the saviour part, coupled with a military word, could cause the Romans to, say, take interest.
According to the Gospel of Judas Jesus directly told Judas to "betray" him.It's not so much a version as it is an interpretation, though? Given that Judas is instrumental to the crucifixion, and given that the crucifixion is needed to save mankind from Hell (two things most of the Bible fandom agrees on), it's fairly straightforward to say Judas 'betraying' Jesus was a good thing. I don't know how you can drop that from the Bible.That was one version of the story. It was dropped from the official Bible, though.What is this whole "the Jews killed Jesus" nonsense anyway? It was the Romans who crucified him.Which would (should, anyway) make Judas, who got him arrested, directly leading to his execution, a hero, not a villain, correct? Whatever. 's all made up anyway.
Besides, I thought the whole point of Jesus existing was to get crucified in the first place. Basically, God sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself in order to save us all from himself.
According to the Gospel of Judas Jesus directly told Judas to "betray" him.It's not so much a version as it is an interpretation, though? Given that Judas is instrumental to the crucifixion, and given that the crucifixion is needed to save mankind from Hell (two things most of the Bible fandom agrees on), it's fairly straightforward to say Judas 'betraying' Jesus was a good thing. I don't know how you can drop that from the Bible.That was one version of the story. It was dropped from the official Bible, though.What is this whole "the Jews killed Jesus" nonsense anyway? It was the Romans who crucified him.Which would (should, anyway) make Judas, who got him arrested, directly leading to his execution, a hero, not a villain, correct? Whatever. 's all made up anyway.
Besides, I thought the whole point of Jesus existing was to get crucified in the first place. Basically, God sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself in order to save us all from himself.
The gospel of Judas (at least the one we have found) is no more connected to any first hand account than any of the synoptic gospels. Like them it was written many years after the time Jesus was supposed to have died and was not written, or even dictated, by the person whose name it bears. Mark for instance doesn't even claim to be written by Mark.I'm not making that claim either. I was just making the point that the interpretation of Judas as a heroic figure is not a new one.
Could the "badguy" chick in this have been anymore like a man? What an uber "Strap-on Bull dyke". That 3rd wave of feminism encourages this sort of "could not back that shit up in the real world" crap. Violence against her will be one for the women's movement. The young Gen Z girl is also one for the women's movement I suppose. Big and Little Mangina do not have an ounce of femininity between them. Another pseudo feminist crap movie I will never watch. Hollywood is run by Pussies.
I made the mistake of eyeing through some of the comments on the newer Deadpool trailer.QuoteCould the "badguy" chick in this have been anymore like a man? What an uber "Strap-on Bull dyke". That 3rd wave of feminism encourages this sort of "could not back that shit up in the real world" crap. Violence against her will be one for the women's movement. The young Gen Z girl is also one for the women's movement I suppose. Big and Little Mangina do not have an ounce of femininity between them. Another pseudo feminist crap movie I will never watch. Hollywood is run by Pussies.
Look at how much the studios pander to China.
Well if it took Jesus's sacrifice to redeem mankind, how can Judas be anything other than a hero?
Well if it took Jesus's sacrifice to redeem mankind, how can Judas be anything other than a hero?
YOU STOLE THAT FROM MASH!
Well if it took Jesus's sacrifice to redeem mankind, how can Judas be anything other than a hero?
YOU STOLE THAT FROM MASH!
Did I? if I did it was subliminal.
You sure? I count 15 before.
Look at how much the studios pander to China.
What does that mean? What do you think entertainment executives should be doing?
Look at how much the studios pander to China.
What does that mean? What do you think entertainment executives should be doing?
Red dawn remake. They replaced Chinese invaders with Korean's. ...So either they were afraid of losing Chinese customers or they thought that the US military can be beaten and destroyed by North Korea.
"Throughout the history of American society, non-whites have been made to feel inferior to their white counterparts. "Pride" in your ethnicity is a response to that."
That kind of response will continue to perpetuate inequality, thus make it ironically self defeating. I get what you're saying, but that's just an excuse to give in to our immature instinctual tribalism. It's a very regressive response to a regressive problem. That is not going to somehow result in progress. Just my 2c.
YLE censored President Niinistö's speech. Pull a muslimnigger's shitty pussy on your head, fucrking[sic] shitwhores! :)You'll hear about this yet you fucking assholes.
(click to show/hide)
...I have no words.
QuoteSo women can run around naked with "Doesn't Mean Rape Me" across their chest but a man can't show his dick? The hypocrisy.About a guy exposing himself at an anti-rape rally.
QuoteSo women can run around naked with "Doesn't Mean Rape Me" across their chest but a man can't show his dick? The hypocrisy.About a guy exposing himself at an anti-rape rally.
*Apparently the term comes from the fact that "human races" do not exist and those are a tool of oppression that was created by the WHITE people (and because you gotta have hypocrisy white people are always referred to as a separate race.) and therefore "racialized" (rodullistettu in Finnish) is used as a term much like "Persons of Colour" is used by SJWs from USA.Huh? I was under the impression that rodullistettu/racialized means that the people see a person of a different ethnicity more as a representative of their "race" than as an individual. Then again, I've only encountered the term a couple of times and that's the way I interpreted the meaning from the context, not an actual definition.
1. Women show there nipples at anti rape rallies, the point being to de-Sexualize female mammaries as well as to make a statement about consentQuoteSo women can run around naked with "Doesn't Mean Rape Me" across their chest but a man can't show his dick? The hypocrisy.About a guy exposing himself at an anti-rape rally.
Well... Women also expose themselves at some anti-rape rallies...
2. It's not common practice for people to blame guys for getting raped because they had a prominent crotch bulge
3. The guy was clearly attempting to harass the women, not make a political statement.
Gotta say, your second statement is... pretty ignorant.
1. Women show there nipples at anti rape rallies, the point being to de-Sexualize female mammaries as well as to make a statement about consentQuoteSo women can run around naked with "Doesn't Mean Rape Me" across their chest but a man can't show his dick? The hypocrisy.About a guy exposing himself at an anti-rape rally.
Well... Women also expose themselves at some anti-rape rallies...
2. It's not common practice for people to blame guys for getting raped because they had a prominent crotch bulge
3. The guy was clearly attempting to harass the women, not make a political statement.
Gotta say, your second statement is... pretty ignorant. There is victim-blaming regarding male rape, mostly using the "logic" of "he had an erection, he must've wanted it."
Also, I'd like a link to the event.
1. Women show there nipples at anti rape rallies, the point being to de-Sexualize female mammaries as well as to make a statement about consentQuoteSo women can run around naked with "Doesn't Mean Rape Me" across their chest but a man can't show his dick? The hypocrisy.About a guy exposing himself at an anti-rape rally.
Well... Women also expose themselves at some anti-rape rallies...
2. It's not common practice for people to blame guys for getting raped because they had a prominent crotch bulge
3. The guy was clearly attempting to harass the women, not make a political statement.
Gotta say, your second statement is... pretty ignorant. There is victim-blaming regarding male rape, mostly using the "logic" of "he had an erection, he must've wanted it."
Also, I'd like a link to the event.
There is no such thing as victim-blaming men for dressing too provocatively, which is what Lizard was talking about.
Oh great let's parse that one down to the electron scan micro scale...
Oh great let's parse that one down to the electron scan micro scale...
What can I say? I'm pedantic.
Oh great let's parse that one down to the electron scan micro scale...
What can I say? I'm pedantic.
"Spin doctor" is closer to the correct term.
You're looking for ammo to use against feminists and you think you've found some.
Oh great let's parse that one down to the electron scan micro scale...
What can I say? I'm pedantic.
Oh great let's parse that one down to the electron scan micro scale...
What can I say? I'm pedantic.
What you can say is a recognition that isn't pedantic but a lot closer to ignorant. You do understand that something can have such a miniscule chance of probability that for a practical purpose you can call it an impossibility without having to qualify said miniscule probability. You know this, yet made your comment. And went for flippant afterwards. To put it in shorthand, ignorant. Knock it off.
I will point out I specified common practice.
Oh great let's parse that one down to the electron scan micro scale...
What can I say? I'm pedantic.
What you can say is a recognition that isn't pedantic but a lot closer to ignorant. You do understand that something can have such a miniscule chance of probability that for a practical purpose you can call it an impossibility without having to qualify said miniscule probability. You know this, yet made your comment. And went for flippant afterwards. To put it in shorthand, ignorant. Knock it off.
Don't be a dick.
I will point out I specified common practice.
Fair enough.
That was the joke, Svata. He's telling other people not to be a dick despite past behavior. I thought it was funny, UP. Certainly warranted the chuckle I gave it.
Not pussyfooting around this one. Title is literal.
If anything could ever be classified as a Feminist's Nightmare, it's the irreconcilable notion that women are extremely aroused at the thought of being able to make a high value man so lustful that he loses control and has to have her. Many women have struggled with this concept. Some have cleverly come up with positive terminology to deflect from the dissonance; they'll use terms like "ravishment" to doll it up, as if simply assigning a new word takes away from the reality of what's going on.
Here in TRP we do not shy from these realities. What goes through a woman's head when she contemplates being ravished is that she is of such high SMV that men lose their control just to have her. This is a level of validation few women get to truly experience. The male equivalent would be a pair of beautiful women demanding that you have a threesome with them.
I've no doubt this type of post causes SJW's to froth at the mouth, but their impotent rage doesn't invalidate reality. Consider the success of 50 Shades of Grey. The basic synopsis is that a powerful, rich, alpha man completely lusts and forcefully dominates a perfectly boring average woman. You'd think this banal concept would only sell to a fringe that gets off on this kink, but the book sold 70 million copies in 8 months. That's more than any Harry Potter novel. And now that the movie is out I guarantee it will be a box-office hit. Let women scream and "Wow, just wow" at you all they want -- their words mean nothing in relation to their actions. Women want to be taken by force by a high value man.
So when is it rape instead of ravishment? Aside from obvious cases of drugging someone or having sex with the unconscious (for the feminazi retards: No one here condones these instances of legitimate rape) the difference is strictly in the disparity of your SMV's. The stranger-in-the-bush is often characterized as some seedy low-life thug. This evokes intense fear. Being forcefully held down in bed by the muscular CEO of a Fortune 500 company does not evoke this fear. No woman alive is comfortable by the idea that she enjoys rape, so she needs to reframe it. Be aware of that.
So how does the average TRP'er benefit from this? If you're already sexually active with a woman, discuss the concept of a safeword. Even though women love the idea of being taken, there's always the chance that she may be in one of those emotional frames where she genuinely isn't up for sex, this is a failsafe. Once you've established that, next time you're looking to sexually escalate simply ignore her token attempts to refuse. She turns her lips away from a kiss, you force her against a wall and take it. She tries to push you off, you squeeze her. You grab her and throw her onto the bed, then lay into her with your weight so she can't get away. And so on.
Paradoxically this creates intense arousal and pair-bonding in women. I encourage you to try this. Of all the women I've had sex with only ~5% genuinely hated rough, aggressive sex. The other 95% beg for more afterwards. Surprising how many victims offer to make food and drink after their "trauma".
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI was very let down when a girl i loved married a much older man in his 40's and she is in her early 30's. He is more educated then i am and as a high paying job at a hospital. Life is unfair sometimes.
Sounds like she was more interested in money than love.
most women are programmed that way - looks and age don't matter, it's the bank balance that matters!
[First Commenter]
That is what gets them hated so much to.
. . .
She was a single parent and had a lot of work load. I suppose i couldn't give her what that older guy can give her. Who had a high paying job at a hospital. They both worked at the same hospital. He must be a boss or something.
I agree, I hate most women. Most women are pure cunts, even women don't like being friends with other women, most jealous nasty creatures in the world.. Thank fuck my wife is one of the good ones!
Sweden desperately needs a Holocaust to cleanse itself of poz like feminism and multiculturalism.
[My name], studies have been published forever. Scientific community evaluates them in one way or other. Nowadays peer review has entered the humanities not least because it is part of the scoring and funding system.
Issues about society and for example history are luckily still published as just books. Peer review is not always a superior apparatus. In my opinion [it] fits better to natural sciences due to their exact nature.
Spoilered because I still don't know how to easily adjust the size of images.(click to show/hide)
Awaiting a certain angry post...
Well in my opinion, this shows just how clique-ish some of the parts of the fat acceptance movement can be. I fully support anyone actively trying to lose weight - its the people who say things like Diabetes / heart disease is NOT connected to weight who are promoting an unhealthy idea.
Awaiting a certain angry post...
Well in my opinion, this shows just how clique-ish some of the parts of the fat acceptance movement can be. I fully support anyone actively trying to lose weight - its the people who say things like Diabetes / heart disease is NOT connected to weight who are promoting an unhealthy idea.
Dude, you are like, so edgy.
Quotedear Black Tumblr
You did not come first.
You did not invent the wheel.
You did not invent the concept of eating food.
You are not God’s gift to the universe.
You are not better than white people or any people, period.
Yes, their is prejudice and racism. But you do not have the right to decide what that is.
You are 50 times more racist than any KKK organization I’ve heard crop up in the past few years. At least I don’t hear them talking about lynching black people in the streets, while black Twitter and Tumblr are always talking about how they want to kill all white people violently and repulsively.
MLK would be ashamed of you.
You did not invent dreadlocks. Hair tangles, and people of hundreds of different cultures and races were using it LONG before you idiots even became the sperms that won. Quit acting like you know everything just because seeing the hairstyle on white people rustles your jimmies.
The police are NOT targeting you. Fight against the mentally disturbed officers and leave the decent ones alone.
Your stupid kids couldn’t go to school and eat during the riots. Remember who started those riots? YOU.
When you’re crowding up malls and blocking highways and airports, you are putting black lives and everyone else’s lives in danger. What if there was a black person who needed to get to work or to a business meeting, but couldn’t because you people thought pushing your agenda was more important than letting people go about their lives? What if he got fired because of it?
Your “black lives matter” argument falls a bit flat when you’re inconveniencing the people you’re so violently trying to protect.
Your individual shade of brown does NOT make you fucking superior to someone else with a different shade of brown. You are pathetic.
And finally, your mothers did not carry you for nine months for you to turn into very thing the people of her time fought to prevent.
Fuck. Off.
Eh, I couldn't give a rats arse who invented dreadlocks but the BLM movement seems to be definitely on to something about the tendency of US police officers to disproportionately shoot black people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreadlocks#Judaism_and_Christianity).Quotedear Black Tumblr
You did not come first.
You did not invent the wheel.
You did not invent the concept of eating food.
You are not God’s gift to the universe.
You are not better than white people or any people, period.
Yes, their is prejudice and racism. But you do not have the right to decide what that is.
You are 50 times more racist than any KKK organization I’ve heard crop up in the past few years. At least I don’t hear them talking about lynching black people in the streets, while black Twitter and Tumblr are always talking about how they want to kill all white people violently and repulsively.
MLK would be ashamed of you.
You did not invent dreadlocks. Hair tangles, and people of hundreds of different cultures and races were using it LONG before you idiots even became the sperms that won. Quit acting like you know everything just because seeing the hairstyle on white people rustles your jimmies.
The police are NOT targeting you. Fight against the mentally disturbed officers and leave the decent ones alone.
Your stupid kids couldn’t go to school and eat during the riots. Remember who started those riots? YOU.
When you’re crowding up malls and blocking highways and airports, you are putting black lives and everyone else’s lives in danger. What if there was a black person who needed to get to work or to a business meeting, but couldn’t because you people thought pushing your agenda was more important than letting people go about their lives? What if he got fired because of it?
Your “black lives matter” argument falls a bit flat when you’re inconveniencing the people you’re so violently trying to protect.
Your individual shade of brown does NOT make you fucking superior to someone else with a different shade of brown. You are pathetic.
And finally, your mothers did not carry you for nine months for you to turn into very thing the people of her time fought to prevent.
Fuck. Off.
Some of these statements aren't so bad in and of themselves. However, implying that black people on Tumblr are some kind of hive mind is unfortunate, to say the least.
Eh, I couldn't give a rats arse who invented dreadlocks but the BLM movement seems to be definitely on to something about the tendency of US police officers to disproportionately shoot black people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreadlocks#Judaism_and_Christianity).Quotedear Black Tumblr
You did not come first.
You did not invent the wheel.
You did not invent the concept of eating food.
You are not God’s gift to the universe.
You are not better than white people or any people, period.
Yes, their is prejudice and racism. But you do not have the right to decide what that is.
You are 50 times more racist than any KKK organization I’ve heard crop up in the past few years. At least I don’t hear them talking about lynching black people in the streets, while black Twitter and Tumblr are always talking about how they want to kill all white people violently and repulsively.
MLK would be ashamed of you.
You did not invent dreadlocks. Hair tangles, and people of hundreds of different cultures and races were using it LONG before you idiots even became the sperms that won. Quit acting like you know everything just because seeing the hairstyle on white people rustles your jimmies.
The police are NOT targeting you. Fight against the mentally disturbed officers and leave the decent ones alone.
Your stupid kids couldn’t go to school and eat during the riots. Remember who started those riots? YOU.
When you’re crowding up malls and blocking highways and airports, you are putting black lives and everyone else’s lives in danger. What if there was a black person who needed to get to work or to a business meeting, but couldn’t because you people thought pushing your agenda was more important than letting people go about their lives? What if he got fired because of it?
Your “black lives matter” argument falls a bit flat when you’re inconveniencing the people you’re so violently trying to protect.
Your individual shade of brown does NOT make you fucking superior to someone else with a different shade of brown. You are pathetic.
And finally, your mothers did not carry you for nine months for you to turn into very thing the people of her time fought to prevent.
Fuck. Off.
Some of these statements aren't so bad in and of themselves. However, implying that black people on Tumblr are some kind of hive mind is unfortunate, to say the least.
Also, whatever else that individual said they pre judge black kids to be stupid as a given so it renders the rest of their screed moot.
Also, has anyone ever unironically stated that black people invented the concept of eating food?
How is eating food cultural appropriation? If I go to China and eat food with a Chinese family am I appropriating their culture cause I decided to be a diner guest? I swear sometimes the cultural appropriation crowed don't understand how shit works.Yes. In fact, if you ever even think about doing a thing that people from a different culture also do, then you're a terrible person, and you should die.
How is eating food cultural appropriation? If I go to China and eat food with a Chinese family am I appropriating their culture cause I decided to be a diner guest? I swear sometimes the cultural appropriation crowed don't understand how shit works.
So if you're like me that leaves chilli con carne, pasta, stir fried noodles, pizza and rice off the menu.How is eating food cultural appropriation? If I go to China and eat food with a Chinese family am I appropriating their culture cause I decided to be a diner guest? I swear sometimes the cultural appropriation crowed don't understand how shit works.
That's not what cultural appropriation is. Cultural appropriation is going home afterwards and cooking it yourself.
I can think of exactly ONE example of cultural appropriation being a valid concern: People who aren't Native Americans wearing Native American war bonnets.Even that, I wouldn't take seriously. At the end of the day, it's just a fucking hat. Just because one group thinks it's sacred does not mean everyone else is obligated to treat it as such.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that is the ONE instance where the culture people would be "appropriating" from would actually have a legit problem with it.
I think it's more the memories of genocide and how that was made light of in cowboys and indians films filled with extras wearing said hats than the magic powers hats per se that rustles peoples jimmies, and that is a more legit thing to get steamed up about.I can think of exactly ONE example of cultural appropriation being a valid concern: People who aren't Native Americans wearing Native American war bonnets.Even that, I wouldn't take seriously. At the end of the day, it's just a fucking hat. Just because one group thinks it's sacred does not mean everyone else is obligated to treat it as such.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that is the ONE instance where the culture people would be "appropriating" from would actually have a legit problem with it.
Eh, I couldn't give a rats arse who invented dreadlocks but the BLM movement seems to be definitely on to something about the tendency of US police officers to disproportionately shoot black people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreadlocks#Judaism_and_Christianity).
Some of these statements aren't so bad in and of themselves. However, implying that black people on Tumblr are some kind of hive mind is unfortunate, to say the least.
Eh, I couldn't give a rats arse who invented dreadlocks but the BLM movement seems to be definitely on to something about the tendency of US police officers to disproportionately shoot black people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreadlocks#Judaism_and_Christianity).
Some of these statements aren't so bad in and of themselves. However, implying that black people on Tumblr are some kind of hive mind is unfortunate, to say the least.
Um, does the link go to what you intend it to go to? Because if so, the link seems misplaced. Quoting the wrong text and all that.[/quote]Holy balls, wrong link.
How is eating food cultural appropriation? If I go to China and eat food with a Chinese family am I appropriating their culture cause I decided to be a diner guest? I swear sometimes the cultural appropriation crowed don't understand how shit works.
I can think of exactly ONE example of cultural appropriation being a valid concern: People who aren't Native Americans wearing Native American war bonnets.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that is the ONE instance where the culture people would be "appropriating" from would actually have a legit problem with it.
How is eating food cultural appropriation? If I go to China and eat food with a Chinese family am I appropriating their culture cause I decided to be a diner guest? I swear sometimes the cultural appropriation crowed don't understand how shit works.
I quick search found several people complaining about cultural appropriation and food. (I think we had a few of these either in here or worst of SJ thread)
(http://i.imgur.com/RpgEKV5.png)
I honestly hate the attitude of "oh, if it's not causing a literal apocalypse then it's not a problem whatsoever". If I shit on someone's front porch, then yeah, I'm not stabbing them in the eye with a knife, but I've still shat on their porch.So, do you mean to imply that white people eating food from non-white cultures is in fact a bad thing, or are you just annoyed by reasoning rather than the conclusion?
How is eating food cultural appropriation? If I go to China and eat food with a Chinese family am I appropriating their culture cause I decided to be a diner guest? I swear sometimes the cultural appropriation crowed don't understand how shit works.
I quick search found several people complaining about cultural appropriation and food. (I think we had a few of these either in here or worst of SJ thread)
(http://i.imgur.com/RpgEKV5.png)
I honestly hate the attitude of "oh, if it's not causing a literal apocalypse then it's not a problem whatsoever". If I shit on someone's front porch, then yeah, I'm not stabbing them in the eye with a knife, but I've still shat on their porch.
You liberal fuckheads. Fuck the liberal elite. These pieces of shit in the disgraceful media just proves Trump right. Get used to President Trump you asshats! Comrade Sanders is finished, and polls show Trump defeating Shillary the criminal by a wide margin.
GET USED TO TRUMP IN THE WHITE HOUSE BITHCES!!
wow, the liberal media is really getting desperate. a whole entire
episode that looks like it went back 30+ years of investigation to
attack Trump.
Donald Trump 2016!...........,.,.,.
trump supporters are a lot smarter than bernie supporters. how do I know this? because smart people become successful people and advocate free market economics.
if liberals were so smart, they would run their own businesses or have good jobs! they wouldn't rely on the wealthy for public services and support, they wouldn't need a minimum wage increase. most of them work a series of low wage, unskilled jobs.
Brits bend over backwards for Muslims and covered up a Muslim rape ring because they were afraid of being called racist, fuck them.
calling muslims terrorists and illegal immigrants rapists, drug dealers, and murderers is not racist, its the truth. you politically corect obama drones have fucked this country for the past 8 years with your black lives matter bullshit and thug worshipping. its time to be real again.
people read YT comments? ...what the fuck for?
If you are a KKK supporter and you want race hate and segregation, your best bet today is to support Black Lives Matter.
people read YT comments? ...what the fuck for?
Maybe it's because they hope to find a diamond in the rough.
A combination of boredom and morbid curiosity?
PS here's from noted ethics journalist Milo YiannopoulosQuoteIf you are a KKK supporter and you want race hate and segregation, your best bet today is to support Black Lives Matter.
He's an intellectually dishonest shit-stirrer who goes into full professional victim mode whenever anyone calls him on his bullshit, what's to like?
He's an intellectually dishonest shit-stirrer who goes into full professional victim mode whenever anyone calls him on his bullshit, what's to like?
I like his hair.
He's an intellectually dishonest shit-stirrer who goes into full professional victim mode whenever anyone calls him on his bullshit, what's to like?
If Trump is beginning to play defense, at this early stage, he risks losing his lead. …
Any feints Trump makes towards the Nation-Wrecking Alliance, such as support (however tepid) for H-1Bs, or constant disavowals of some internet backwater weirdo because media cucks harass him about it every minute, will simply embolden his foes to strike at him twice as hard and four times as often.
So my Game advice to Trump is this: Politics is pickup without the bodily fluids.
The master seducer doesn’t backtrack at the bedroom door.
Keep up the Zero Fucks Given nationalist populism charm assault, and don’t disappoint the swooning voters at the electoral door. Carry them across the threshold. They want you to take them.
Sure, whisper a few sweetly romantic nothings in their ears, show a little of your beta softie side, but when panties are in view don’t sit up and ask “Should I slow down?”. Slip a finger under the waistband. The seduction isn’t over until the Trump voter sighs.
The scary part is that he doesn't seem that far off. No backtracking, no compromise seems to be working out for him.
The scary part is that he doesn't seem that far off. No backtracking, no compromise seems to be working out for him.
The sad part is that this is a (reasonably) viable strategy. It demonstrates the increasingly obvious fact that democracies only function properly when built around a well educated and well informed populace.
The scary part is that he doesn't seem that far off. No backtracking, no compromise seems to be working out for him.
The sad part is that this is a (reasonably) viable strategy. It demonstrates the increasingly obvious fact that democracies only function properly when built around a well educated and well informed populace.
Now you just made me think of that political ad that's going around of Trump saying "I love the poorly educated".
lol I consider myself a moderate nazi (i agree with pretty much all of hitlers pre-holocaust ideas, many of which deal with the function of politics in society and exposing the dangers of having idiots ruling over people). Id love to see any of them try to fight anyone else outside a videogame.
edit: so because people are obviously brainwashed by Zionist media (which most non-Zionist jews hate) I should explain that I do not hate jews nor do I harbor ill will toward anyone based on race. I simply disagree with the false history that takes for granted peoples lives that have died for their cause. the Nazi government was simply WRONG. they were using meth and all sorts of other things that eliminate emotion and empathy. the holocaust happened, but the way it is portrayed in modern "history" is far from the truth. everyone ignores the soviets and japanese, who were much worse than Nazi's ever were.
The thing that really tipped this over the edge for me was the phrase "moderate Nazi."
As dirty as it makes me feel I can't jump on UP for this one. Since WWII Nazis have become a virtual byword for extremism. Mostly because of the holocaust. Attempting genocide is a pretty extreme position. Unlike many who might claim to be moderate Nazis, the particular poster, appears to acknowledge that the holocaust occurred. Nor do they condemn it, in fact they implicitly endorse it.
I think its hard to consider yourself a moderate if you support the genocide of jews, gypsies and homosexuals in continental Europe.
As dirty as it makes me feel I can't jump on UP for this one. Since WWII Nazis have become a virtual byword for extremism. Mostly because of the holocaust. Attempting genocide is a pretty extreme position. Unlike many who might claim to be moderate Nazis, the particular poster, appears to acknowledge that the holocaust occurred. Nor do they condemn it, in fact they implicitly endorse it.
I think its hard to consider yourself a moderate if you support the genocide of jews, gypsies and homosexuals in continental Europe.
But the moderate Nazis would say they didn't have anything to do with that -- that it was the violent extremists who went that far.
Surely you aren't implying a moderate majority with a questionable core ideology would sustain a culture that enables violent extremism.
Go on stormfront, theres a few moderate nazis on there, but they tend to get chewed out really quick.
As dirty as it makes me feel I can't jump on UP for this one. Since WWII Nazis have become a virtual byword for extremism. Mostly because of the holocaust. Attempting genocide is a pretty extreme position. Unlike many who might claim to be moderate Nazis, the particular poster, appears to acknowledge that the holocaust occurred. Nor do they condemn it, in fact they implicitly endorse it.
I think its hard to consider yourself a moderate if you support the genocide of jews, gypsies and homosexuals in continental Europe.
But the moderate Nazis would say they didn't have anything to do with that -- that it was the violent extremists who went that far.
Surely you aren't implying a moderate majority with a questionable core ideology would sustain a culture that enables violent extremism.
I see what you're doing. Stop it.
Go on stormfront, theres a few moderate nazis on there, but they tend to get chewed out really quick.Absolutely fascinated by this whole "moderate Nazi" thing. Does it range from the Leni Riefenstahl's through to the Heinrich Himmler's or is it a fashion thing with Bormann on the most moderate end of the scale and Hermann Göring out in the no fucks to give about moderate Aryan fashion Nazi end?
Much like the Malays, minor historical details like rampant persecution and horrific genocide have apparently been forgotten by the Russians. The first such group I came across were the Gay Union of Patriots of Russia, whose members spout bizarre theories about how only gay men can be true Russian patriots.
No true Nazi?
I think people have been using "Nazi" to mean groups outside the defunct National Socialist German Workers' Party since that world war 2 thing wrapped up.No true Nazi?
Hardly. It's just that as a label it's pretty meaningless if you aren't using it within its' proper historical concept.
Not quite as annoying as people who refer to any and all authoritarian forms of government as Fascist, but it's up there.
I'm not sure if the evidence was kept after the Nuremburg Tribunals, but it filled numerous freight train boxcars. That'd be a nice pile to plop holocaust deniers upon. Tons and tons worth of documents, photos, reports, records and ledgers compiled by Wehrmacht clerks counting the people, their personal items, and gross weight categories of valuable materials taken from camp victims. That'd be an actual Slippery Slope, trying to make you way down off a 50 foot tall pile of loose documents.
Wait. That's not a pic of admitting you have a problem?Well she has a problem, she is cutting the wrong way.
WHAT. THE. FUCK.
Is that saying what I think it's saying? Cutting yourself is fucking brave?!
I need to go hit something now.
not like fear can impair one's ability to defend oneself or anything
not like blackmail and coercion are things that can impair one's ability to defend oneself and give proper consent
not like everyone's not physically strong enough to ward off rapists
not like you can't defend yourself when you're unconscious
not like everyone doesn't have a fucking anti-rape squad on their goddamn speed dial
no no, if you were raped it was because you were too weak
Today's feminism is practically degrading men to be dependent on women and actually giving women more rights than men. Plus it is a threat to the family and is endangering our children to be raised by the institutions instead of the family. If they want control over pregnancy, don't have sex, it's as simple as that.
Oh my god that guy in Worst Political Cartoons is a goddamn goldmine. (http://lordelthibar.deviantart.com/)QuoteToday's feminism is practically degrading men to be dependent on women and actually giving women more rights than men. Plus it is a threat to the family and is endangering our children to be raised by the institutions instead of the family. If they want control over pregnancy, don't have sex, it's as simple as that.
When and where the fuck has male oppression by women ever goddamn happened? And what in the shitting dick does insitutionalization have to do with feminism? Also, gotta love that "nine months of pregnancy (and implicitly 18 years of child-rearing) is something women have to accept as a price when they dare have sex, but I'm totally not a misogynist or anything" attitude.
He also writes godawful self-insert Tangled/Brave fanfic where his insert married Merida and is Eugene's brother and the narration shills Protestantism like he were getting paid for it. Just to frost that shit cake with an icing of amazingly ridiculous.
... Well at least he's not shipping Elsa with her sister...
@Askold
I kinda agree with Elsa there, although she doesn't state her case very well. Telling a black person complaining about racism "well teach other black people not to steal" has huge victim blaming connotations that I really don't see in "teach men not to rape", the point of which is to not blame the rape victim, not all men are rapists.
No it doesn't. "Teach men not to rape" is a response to rape victims being told they were asking for it by not wearing enough clothes, daring to go outside at night etc instead of putting the responsibility on the rapist. If you prefer "teach rapists not to rape" fine, but it's not about saying men are rapists by default.
No it doesn't. "Teach men not to rape" is a response to rape victims being told they were asking for it by not wearing enough clothes, daring to go outside at night etc instead of putting the responsibility on the rapist. If you prefer "teach rapists not to rape" fine, but it's not about saying men are rapists by default.
Except the idea that men have to be "taught" not to rape, as if it's something we naturally do. It doesn't outright say it, but it heavily implies it.
(http://i.imgur.com/yYZ9Fc2.jpg)
...Sometimes I am still amazed at how people can not criticize themselves or their beliefs and can miss the point even when it is shown to them as clearly as it is in pic related. I believe the word I am looking for is introspection.
I think we should survey feminists on what they think about declawing cats and circumcising infant boys.
I bet you we’d find a lot more feminists objecting to declawing than circumcision.
Posted by an allegedly "former male feminist":
Posted by an allegedly "former male feminist":
Is that like those pastors with the "I used to be an atheist" backstory?
Holocaust scholars are not impartial, they are operating within a particular political and ideological framework that determines how they interpret historical events.
That is not to say that the material they present is not factual, or that they falsify historical events. What they do do is to interpret those events according to a particular ideological formula, the main element of which is the concept that the Jews of Europe were purely victims, and that their massacre during the war was some sort of mystical emanation of evil without any rational explanation.
In fact, "Holocaust" scholars seem to regard any attempt to find a rational explanation for the massacre of the Jews as a form of "denial", of justification or approval, which in itself is also some sort of emanation of evil.
In that respect, the study of the massacre of the Jews of Europe by the German Government during the Second World War differs in essence from the study of other large-scale massacres in history. Those other massacres are not usually seen in the same apocalyptic terms, not as cosmic conflicts between absolute good and absolute evil, but rather as the outcome of conflicts between rival groups that have rational and explicable causes.
While those other massacres are usually deplored by the historians writing about them, and the victims attract their sympathy as being for the most part innocent, those historians can see the objective reasons why the victims attracted the ire of the victimisers, and while they condemn the murderous actions of the victimisers, they can understand the motivations for those actions and do not simply write them off as the result of some evil force.
In the case of the massacres of Jews perpetrated by Ukrainians (and some other East European peoples), "Holocaust" scholars tend to deny that those peoples had any rational motivation for their actions, no genuine and understandable grievance against their Jewish neighbours. They describe the those peoples as either acting out of some internal evil tendency, or else as being passive dupes of the evil Germans.
It is for the above reasons that the works of the "Holocaust" scholars are flawed, even though they give an accurate account of the course of the Judeocide. Where they fail is in their explanations of its causes, seeing it in apocalyptic terms, as an outburst of totally irrational evil.
...no genuine and understandable grievance...
Woman are friends with woman, and they have sex with men. So if you’re her friend, you’re a vagina. You ask this girl to be your gf, she rejects you but ask if we can still be friends. That’s a insult, she thinks less of you. A male and female aren’t suppose to be friends, they’re suppose to be love intrest. So basically you’re a vagina, because girls are suppose to be friends with girls, and fuck men. Also girls are horrible friends, all they do is leech off you, and cause drama.
So when a girl rejects you, and puts you in the friendzone, it’s a insult. Next time she says let’s just be friends, say no thank you.
I commented this in another thread, and I feel like it must be given more attention:Quote(That's because) genetics > culture. Anybody that thinks it's the other way around must ask themself where these barbaric cultures originated, which ethnicities' minds created them and why they still exist in areas where said ethnicities have notable populations.
To expand upon this, we will look elsewhere that the human races are sometimes compared to: dog breeds. A German shepherd and a chihuahua are the same species, but are very different physically and behaviourally. They maintain the basic features that allow us to recognize them both as types of dog, yet vary depending upon how they've evolved. Nobody will deny these facts.
However, once this logic is applied to human races/subspecies, all logic seems to go out the window.
"It's not genetics that causes certain groups to be violent and parasitic wherever they live, it's their culture! We just need to integrate them harder! Nazi!"
Refer to my original paragraph. Who created their vile cultures? For the logic impaired, think about it for a few minutes and ignore all the ingrained labels like "racist" and "bigot". Now think about this: whose culture(s) are you saying we should integrate them into? That's right, you're saying we must integrate these ethnic groups into our superior European cultures; the cultures that are responsible for centuries of innovation, discovery and victory.
To examine their cultures and make the observation that they breed violence, literal misogyny, literal homophobia and other forms of genuine hatred/bigotry, and have accomplished no way near as much as Europeans, shows that they are absolutely inferior. What does that say about the ethnicities that created these cultures? It shows that such behaviour is only natural to them.
An ethnicity's native culture is a direct representation of their mental capacity and true nature. This representation goes so deep that it will always have control over the ethnic group's aggression, tendency to punish members of their own kind for different ideologies, and even determine whether they will use a toilet or the street to expel waste.
To say that we must integrate these groups who come from such cultures is to acknowledge that they are not on the same level as Europeans. Remember the next time a lefty tells you we must integrate them; they are subtly admitting that Europeans are superior. Deep down, even the most deluded socialist or open borders activist knows the truth.
Wow I had know idea being friends with a woman meant I was a vagina. i thought it just meant I was a normal person who shared some interests with people with two X-chromosomes without wanting to bang them. Thanks you r/TheRedPill for showing me the way.
Davedan you're forgetting: your wife is your property, and all women from your race are collectively the property of their men. If a white woman has consensual sex with someone from another race, that sex is being stolen from you.
If you weren't such a Cuckish Cuckold Cuckfully Cucking your Cuckism you might understand that.
But what if I'm tired? I mean I'm not from havana baby
Davedan you're forgetting: your wife is your property, and all women from your race are collectively the property of their men. If a white woman has consensual sex with someone from another race, that sex is being stolen from you.
If you weren't such a Cuckish Cuckold Cuckfully Cucking your Cuckism you might understand that.
But what if I'm tired? I mean I'm not from havana baby
Radovan Karadzic hero!40 yrs in jail for defending Serbian people from bosnian and croatian faschists???I hope judge will die from cancer.
If you can't be friends with people who have different political beliefs, the problem is with you, not your friends.
Ummmmmm. I agree, actually. Yes, the personal is the political. But if you just cannot see the person beyond their opinions, simply cannot forgive someone for believing stupid and/or just wrong things, you have denied their humanity in a way. One has that right, of course, to reject people for their opinions, but personally I'll keep being fond of my cousin and of my friends who are conservatives. I don't hold their stupidity in some areas against them as human beings.
I personally believe church tax in Finland should continue to be a policy, as it funds the charity work that the national church performs.
I personally believe all gay people are mentally ill and conversion therapy is A-OK.
Ummmmmm. I agree, actually. Yes, the personal is the political. But if you just cannot see the person beyond their opinions, simply cannot forgive someone for believing stupid and/or just wrong things, you have denied their humanity in a way. One has that right, of course, to reject people for their opinions, but personally I'll keep being fond of my cousin and of my friends who are conservatives. I don't hold their stupidity in some areas against them as human beings.
I disagree, mellen. In my opinion, it's perfectly justified to not want to interact with someone over an opinion of theirs if it's particularly harsh. There are some opinions that I can't just 'agree to disagree' with and continue being comfortably friendly despite. In some cases, people's opinions do reflect on them as people and particularly shitty ones alienate others from me on an interpersonal level, and that's fine. It's also not "denying their humanity" in any way. As an example:Quote from: Person AI personally believe church tax in Finland should continue to be a policy, as it funds the charity work that the national church performs.
Well, person A who is a hypothetical strawman, while I personally disagree with that political opinion, I can still respect you as a person.Quote from: Person BI personally believe all gay people are mentally ill and conversion therapy is A-OK.
...no, person B who despite being a strawman espouses attitudes I have seen real people espouse, I can't respect your opinion or you as a person since you're dehumanizing an already-marginalized subset of humanity (that includes myself and those I care about). And I'm no worse a person for not wanting you in my life or forcing myself to look past this.
Hitler stopped degeneracy in Berlin (Former sin capital of the world)
He burnt pro communist books
He bought the German economy up from the ground whilst the rest of the world was in a great depression.
He built the first highways and gave everyone a car.
He kicked the jews who were destroying German culture into their own state in the middle east
He gave pregnant women welfare and support
He put a focus on Child health
He started the first anti smoking campaign
He ordered his troops to march into the czech republic and execute those massacring Germans
And you think calling Trump Hitler will stop me supporting him?
QuoteHitler stopped degeneracy in Berlin (Former sin capital of the world)
He burnt pro communist books
He bought the German economy up from the ground whilst the rest of the world was in a great depression.
He built the first highways and gave everyone a car.
He kicked the jews who were destroying German culture into their own state in the middle east
He gave pregnant women welfare and support
He put a focus on Child health
He started the first anti smoking campaign
He ordered his troops to march into the czech republic and execute those massacring Germans
And you think calling Trump Hitler will stop me supporting him?
Either he is lying or simply wrong about: Stopping degeneracy, Jews destroying the culture and the massacres of Germans that allegedly happened in Czech Republic. And the child health thing is debatable as their "racial hygiene" program only cared for the health of certain children. ...And the highways weren't a Nazi plan, they had opposed the idea of building roads up to the moment when Hitler became the councellor at which point they let the plans proceed and took credit for the idea.
But I do agree that the anti-smoking campaign was a good idea.
QuoteHitler stopped degeneracy in Berlin (Former sin capital of the world)
He burnt pro communist books
He bought the German economy up from the ground whilst the rest of the world was in a great depression.
He built the first highways and gave everyone a car.
He kicked the jews who were destroying German culture into their own state in the middle east
He gave pregnant women welfare and support
He put a focus on Child health
He started the first anti smoking campaign
He ordered his troops to march into the czech republic and execute those massacring Germans
And you think calling Trump Hitler will stop me supporting him?
Either he is lying or simply wrong about: Stopping degeneracy, Jews destroying the culture and the massacres of Germans that allegedly happened in Czech Republic. And the child health thing is debatable as their "racial hygiene" program only cared for the health of certain children. ...And the highways weren't a Nazi plan, they had opposed the idea of building roads up to the moment when Hitler became the councellor at which point they let the plans proceed and took credit for the idea.
But I do agree that the anti-smoking campaign was a good idea.
The context of the original quote was about not wanting to be friends with a BNP memember, not invalidating any points you've made of course.I disagree, mellen. In my opinion, it's perfectly justified to not want to interact with someone over an opinion of theirs if it's particularly harsh. There are some opinions that I can't just 'agree to disagree' with and continue being comfortably friendly despite. In some cases, people's opinions do reflect on them as people and particularly shitty ones alienate others from me on an interpersonal level, and that's fine. It's also not "denying their humanity" in any way. As an example:Quote from: Person AI personally believe church tax in Finland should continue to be a policy, as it funds the charity work that the national church performs.
Well, person A who is a hypothetical strawman, while I personally disagree with that political opinion, I can still respect you as a person.Quote from: Person BI personally believe all gay people are mentally ill and conversion therapy is A-OK.
...no, person B who despite being a strawman espouses attitudes I have seen real people espouse, I can't respect your opinion or you as a person since you're dehumanizing an already-marginalized subset of humanity (that includes myself and those I care about). And I'm no worse a person for not wanting you in my life or forcing myself to look past this.
"Can't be friends with someone with different political beliefs" is distinct from "can't be friends with someone with specific political beliefs".
You can be a generally tolerant person but refuse to be friends with someone who believes you should be killed over your ethnicity/orientation/gender identity/whatever, that's perfectly reasonable. The objection (mine, and I think Mellen's) is to people who refuse to interact with anyone who is not part of the same political movement.
Am I the only one who doesn't care what happens to run aways? Just hear me out. If your being abused or anything like that I support you, you should run away to a safer place. But most teens that run away I see are run aways because "their parents have too much rules" or "they treat me like a child" things like that. So they think the best option in to run away? Are they serious? Sorry but if you run away because your parents want the best for you then you deserve everything that happens to you.
Am I the only one who doesn't care what happens to people who can't tell the difference between "your" and "you're"? Sure, there are uneducated people who just don't know any better, and I say let them attend a 3rd grade grammar lesson in order to learn. But a lot of these people are just morons who can't be asked to use an apostrophe correctly. Sorry, but if you abuse the English language because you're a lazy motherfucker then you deserve everything that happens to you.
Am I the only one who doesn't care what happens to people who can't tell the difference between "your" and "you're"? Sure, there are uneducated people who just don't know any better, and I say let them attend a 3rd grade grammar lesson in order to learn. But a lot of these people are just morons who can't be asked to use an apostrophe correctly. Sorry, but if you abuse the English language because you're a lazy motherfucker then you deserve everything that happens to you.I could actually get behind this.
Well aren't you just a perfect bitch.
"Ultimate Warrior"
HURRRRR-RRRRR!
XD
But seriously, going into STEM is actually a good idea. There's a 2:1 faculty preference for women:
http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.abstract (http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.abstract)
Furthermore, there is no gender pay gap in tech salaries:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/view-from-the-valley/at-work/tech-careers/study-finds-no-gender-gap-in-tech-salaries (http://spectrum.ieee.org/view-from-the-valley/at-work/tech-careers/study-finds-no-gender-gap-in-tech-salaries)
But seriously, going into STEM is actually a good idea. There's a 2:1 faculty preference for women:
http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.abstract (http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.abstract)
Furthermore, there is no gender pay gap in tech salaries:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/view-from-the-valley/at-work/tech-careers/study-finds-no-gender-gap-in-tech-salaries (http://spectrum.ieee.org/view-from-the-valley/at-work/tech-careers/study-finds-no-gender-gap-in-tech-salaries)
Are you still on about that no-wage-gap falsehood fed to you from the manosphere?
Stay classy, UP.
The writer of that story is a perverted sicko and that story has no place in Trek.
Could not happen because there are no gays in Star Trek because they have cured all mental illness by the 24th century.
Could not happen because there are no gays in Star Trek because they have cured all mental illness by the 24th century.
QuoteCould not happen because there are no gays in Star Trek because they have cured all mental illness by the 24th century.
Bruh. Gene Roddenberry wanted to include same-sex couples on that Risa episode on TNG but the studio was the one to shoot that down. Do you even Trek, casual?
QuoteCould not happen because there are no gays in Star Trek because they have cured all mental illness by the 24th century.
Bruh. Gene Roddenberry wanted to include same-sex couples on that Risa episode on TNG but the studio was the one to shoot that down. Do you even Trek, casual?
Imprisoning homosexuals in gulags was a mistake, but not the gulag system itself. Mechanisms of repression are going to exist in any State, as distasteful as this admission is to us. Personally I prefer reeducation centers. Frankly, this obsession of human rights doesn't prevail in the real world unless it's directed toward Marxist or socialist states.
In this edition of "Shit Tankies Say:"QuoteImprisoning homosexuals in gulags was a mistake, but not the gulag system itself. Mechanisms of repression are going to exist in any State, as distasteful as this admission is to us. Personally I prefer reeducation centers. Frankly, this obsession of human rights doesn't prevail in the real world unless it's directed toward Marxist or socialist states.
"Ultimate Warrior"
HURRRRR-RRRRR!
XD
Why is Ultimate Warrior already in my ignore list? It can't be because it's just a name change from Ultimate Paragon, can it?
"Ultimate Warrior"
HURRRRR-RRRRR!
XD
Why is Ultimate Warrior already in my ignore list? It can't be because it's just a name change from Ultimate Paragon, can it?
Did UP actually change his name to Ultimate Warrior? Did he change his Avatar to a wrestler? Is that why his motto is the viagra ad and not 'hot blooded christlike christian'?
Was it an April Fool's, it's amazing that he managed to change his motto to one even more homoerotic for Jesus.
QuoteQuoteQuotelong story short, wage gap isn't because of women getting paid less for the same job but because they chose to go into low paying areas with more flexibility and benefits
"they chose to go into low paying areas" that could never be due to sexism tho
you also have to consider why those areas are low paying in the first place, and whether it's a case of the jobs being low paying because women traditionally take those jobs
i remember reading an article a while ago (can't remember where, apologies) that pointed out that doctors are far less respected in... i believe it was russia, because generally women are doctors and so it was seen as a less prestigious career, and more of an extension of a stereotypically "caring" role
Wether it is or not, just means gasp, I don't know
That's what you should focus on fixing. Get those women in the coal mines away fron their families. Those roofs aren't going to tar and shingle themselves. Get all that hazard pay for all I care. Just stop lieing about the gap.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuotelong story short, wage gap isn't because of women getting paid less for the same job but because they chose to go into low paying areas with more flexibility and benefits
"they chose to go into low paying areas" that could never be due to sexism tho
you also have to consider why those areas are low paying in the first place, and whether it's a case of the jobs being low paying because women traditionally take those jobs
i remember reading an article a while ago (can't remember where, apologies) that pointed out that doctors are far less respected in... i believe it was russia, because generally women are doctors and so it was seen as a less prestigious career, and more of an extension of a stereotypically "caring" role
Wether it is or not, just means gasp, I don't know
That's what you should focus on fixing. Get those women in the coal mines away fron their families. Those roofs aren't going to tar and shingle themselves. Get all that hazard pay for all I care. Just stop lieing about the gap.
So, the wage gap is a myth because women choose to work in women dominated jobs, which pay less because women dominated jobs aren't held in the same regard as men, so it's women's fault for not abandoning these jobs and finding men dominated jobs, because equality isn't about raising a group's worth so much as getting them to conform to another group after having them see that their original group is just inherently worth less.
OFFS that is not what she meant, and it was not about the issue being "more subtle", either, UP. Denser than depleted uranium.
Just so we're clear, everyone knows I was just paraphrasing the guy's shitty logic, right?
LOL. Reeeeeeeeeeeeealy, UP?
"I wouldn't say the wage gap is a myth, so much as it's misunderstood. Women don't get paid less for the same work. Like you said, the reality is more subtle than that."
Women often get paid less for the same work though.
I was going to tell you to suck my hairy balls. I'm not fucking debating with you, you disingenuous hack and I'm completely fed up with your intellectual dishonesty but then I realised that you would claim that as a victory.
So here's one citation. It's about Australia. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-03/gender-pay-gap-among-managers-wa/7215784 (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-03/gender-pay-gap-among-managers-wa/7215784)
You can still suck my balls though and you should probably apologise to Melen now
The Workplace Gender Equality Agency bases its data (https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/Gender_Pay_Gap_Factsheet.pdf) on the Australian Bureau of Statistics Employee Earnings and Hours survey. Does that answer your question?I was going to tell you to suck my hairy balls. I'm not fucking debating with you, you disingenuous hack and I'm completely fed up with your intellectual dishonesty but then I realised that you would claim that as a victory.
So here's one citation. It's about Australia. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-03/gender-pay-gap-among-managers-wa/7215784 (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-03/gender-pay-gap-among-managers-wa/7215784)
You can still suck my balls though and you should probably apologise to Melen now
I have a quick question: does it take into account hours worked?
I have a quick question: does it take into account hours worked?Here's a novel idea. Try reading it and finding out for yourself.
The Workplace Gender Equality Agency bases its data (https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/Gender_Pay_Gap_Factsheet.pdf) on the Australian Bureau of Statistics Employee Earnings and Hours survey. Does that answer your question?I was going to tell you to suck my hairy balls. I'm not fucking debating with you, you disingenuous hack and I'm completely fed up with your intellectual dishonesty but then I realised that you would claim that as a victory.
So here's one citation. It's about Australia. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-03/gender-pay-gap-among-managers-wa/7215784 (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-03/gender-pay-gap-among-managers-wa/7215784)
You can still suck my balls though and you should probably apologise to Melen now
I have a quick question: does it take into account hours worked?
I have a quick question: does it take into account hours worked?Here's a novel idea. Try reading it and finding out for yourself.
I have a quick question: does it take into account hours worked?Here's a novel idea. Try reading it and finding out for yourself.
After all it's in the third paragraph: "Data collected by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA) and analysed by the Bankwest Curtin Economic Centre (BCEC) found women in key management roles working full-time earned an annual average of $244,569 while men earned $343,269."
Surely one of the 1000 monkeys that types your posts can read at least a little?
I have a quick question: does it take into account hours worked?Here's a novel idea. Try reading it and finding out for yourself.
After all it's in the third paragraph: "Data collected by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA) and analysed by the Bankwest Curtin Economic Centre (BCEC) found women in key management roles working full-time earned an annual average of $244,569 while men earned $343,269."
Surely one of the 1000 monkeys that types your posts can read at least a little?
"Working full-time" still leaves some ambiguity. I read that in Australia, 38 hours a week is considered full-time work. As a result, there's a good deal of room for some to spend more hours working than others.
I've never heard of a manager working for an hourly wage. They're on salary mate.I have a quick question: does it take into account hours worked?Here's a novel idea. Try reading it and finding out for yourself.
After all it's in the third paragraph: "Data collected by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA) and analysed by the Bankwest Curtin Economic Centre (BCEC) found women in key management roles working full-time earned an annual average of $244,569 while men earned $343,269."
Surely one of the 1000 monkeys that types your posts can read at least a little?
"Working full-time" still leaves some ambiguity. I read that in Australia, 38 hours a week is considered full-time work. As a result, there's a good deal of room for some to spend more hours working than others.
I have a quick question: does it take into account hours worked?Here's a novel idea. Try reading it and finding out for yourself.
After all it's in the third paragraph: "Data collected by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA) and analysed by the Bankwest Curtin Economic Centre (BCEC) found women in key management roles working full-time earned an annual average of $244,569 while men earned $343,269."
Surely one of the 1000 monkeys that types your posts can read at least a little?
"Working full-time" still leaves some ambiguity. I read that in Australia, 38 hours a week is considered full-time work. As a result, there's a good deal of room for some to spend more hours working than others.
I have a quick question: does it take into account hours worked?Here's a novel idea. Try reading it and finding out for yourself.
After all it's in the third paragraph: "Data collected by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA) and analysed by the Bankwest Curtin Economic Centre (BCEC) found women in key management roles working full-time earned an annual average of $244,569 while men earned $343,269."
Surely one of the 1000 monkeys that types your posts can read at least a little?
"Working full-time" still leaves some ambiguity. I read that in Australia, 38 hours a week is considered full-time work. As a result, there's a good deal of room for some to spend more hours working than others.
Source?
I think you're better off pretending Australia doesn't exist.
I think you're better off pretending Australia doesn't exist.
That also works as a general statement of reality.
Yeah, the lack of paid maternity leave is a serious problem. But I'm still skeptical that the wage gap actually is what it's often claimed to be. The BLS has shown that measuring by hourly earnings (http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/cps/highlights-of-womens-earnings-in-2013.pdf) makes the pay gap considerably smaller.
Considerably smaller doesn't mean nonexistent, whichever part of the UP gestalt entity you happen to be.
Considerably smaller doesn't mean nonexistent, whichever part of the UP gestalt entity you happen to be.
I pop in to see what's going on in here... UP stop being an idiot. If you want to know how other countries do stuff ask the people who live there or study. You have too many misconceptions about these things because you don't try to see things from another pov. Which shows up as several other problems.
I pop in to see what's going on in here... UP stop being an idiot. If you want to know how other countries do stuff ask the people who live there or study. You have too many misconceptions about these things because you don't try to see things from another pov. Which shows up as several other problems.
Oh be kind to Mr Top Hat, the chaps at his London club are still reeling after losing that Empire thingy of theirs. Being reminded that one of their colonies rode out the banking crisis while their economy was being kicked in the bollocks is hard on them.I think you're better off pretending Australia doesn't exist.
That also works as a general statement of reality.
I would ask you to suck my dick, but I'm afraid you'd try to bite it off.
And you were the one who accidentally discharged that BLS shotgun of a report into your own mouth.
Sixty-two percent of women and 56 percent of men employed in wage and salary jobs were paid by the hour in 2013. Women who were paid hourly rates had median hourly earnings of $12.12, which was 87 percent of the median for men paid by the hour ($14.00). (See tables 8 and 11.)
Between 1979 and 2013, women’s-to-men’s earnings ratios rose for most age groups. Among 25- to 34-year-olds, for example, the ratio increased from 68 percent in 1979 to 89 percent in 2013, while the ratio for 45- to 54-year-olds increased from 57 percent to 77 percent.
Between 1979 and 2013, inflation-adjusted earnings (also called constant-dollar earnings) rose by 31 percent for White women, compared with an increase of 20 percent for Black women and 15 percent for Hispanic women. In contrast, inflation adjusted earnings for White and Black men declined slightly (1 percent and 2 percent, respectively) from 1979 to 2013, and Hispanic men’s earnings fell by 9 percent.
Yeah, the lack of paid maternity leave is a serious problem. But I'm still skeptical that the wage gap actually is what it's often claimed to be. The BLS has shown that measuring by hourly earnings (http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/cps/highlights-of-womens-earnings-in-2013.pdf) makes the pay gap considerably smaller.
That's still a problem, but considerably less of one than what's frequently claimed.
Yeah, the lack of paid maternity leave is a serious problem. But I'm still skeptical that the wage gap actually is what it's often claimed to be. The BLS has shown that measuring by hourly earnings (http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/cps/highlights-of-womens-earnings-in-2013.pdf) makes the pay gap considerably smaller.That's still a problem, but considerably less of one than what's frequently claimed.
What it's often claimed to be...by who exactly?
Set up a straw opponent and then say that the pay gap is "considerably smaller" than what whoever, or whatever "often claimed" it was.
Seriously, that is not how stats work in an argument. 2013 was three years ago. The conservitard/manosphere "gotcha!" about 77% being out of date came out the same year. About people in previous years citing the prior BLS publication on the same page which stated 77% when it was published.
Now that's an interesting notion, numbers have passports now? And there was me thinking that the only number Americans had bagsied was one, also identifying the obscure source of figure as being your flipping commander in chief might have been helpful at the start of the discussion, but I digress.Yeah, the lack of paid maternity leave is a serious problem. But I'm still skeptical that the wage gap actually is what it's often claimed to be. The BLS has shown that measuring by hourly earnings (http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/cps/highlights-of-womens-earnings-in-2013.pdf) makes the pay gap considerably smaller.That's still a problem, but considerably less of one than what's frequently claimed.
What it's often claimed to be...by who exactly?
Set up a straw opponent and then say that the pay gap is "considerably smaller" than what whoever, or whatever "often claimed" it was.
You're Australian, so it's understandable that you don't know. See, a common claim is that women make only 77% of what men make, which is one even the President has repeated:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2014/04/09/president-obamas-persistent-77-cent-claim-on-the-wage-gap-gets-a-new-pinocchio-rating/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2014/04/09/president-obamas-persistent-77-cent-claim-on-the-wage-gap-gets-a-new-pinocchio-rating/)
In his 2012 re-election run, an ad for President Barack Obama claimed "Women (are) paid 77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men." That rated Mostly False.
But Obama retooled his words in his 2014 State of the Union address, saying women "still make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns." That rated Mostly True.
I can't believe it. There has been attack after attack on our peaceful communities and yet America does nothing about ISIS! NOTHING!!! Obama is weak and has no spine to do anything. And when ISIS attacks America, the liberal scum only hijack the incident for their freaking gun control policies! More harassment and stupidity from these ill educated maggots is growing on my nerves!
They falsely claim that Christianity hindered human development when in fact the Christian world was actually more developed than the pagan world that was seeking to destroy them. Not only that but the atheists lack the honor and courage to admit that Hitler was one of them and yet refuse to take responsibility and blame Hitler on Christianity! Hitler's private talks were about eliminating Hitler's foes including Christianity. Plus there is a reason he shut down religious institutions all over Germany and claimed that the Jews were near apes. Does that sound like Christianity? No, it's the theory of evolution which has given birth to the ideals of racial dominance and massacre of tens of thousands and even threatens to tear our communities apart today as our educational system declines as God is kicked out!
Christianity brought about the scientific revolution, the renaissance eras, as well as the abolition of slavery! What good has any of these secular ideals done? If we don't stand for something true and take a stand of brute force against ISIS, they will overrun us! These movements against us and the foundation of our civilizations are a catastrophe! We must act now!
The West used to be the center of the world, now these policies and scrambling for power from both Christaphobic secularists and self-righteous religious bigots have turned our countries into yet another political bower grabbing hell hole like Rome! When are we going to wake up?
except... all of those are correct.
except... all of those are correct.
I had to go and check if I had mixed up the terms again, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinction nope. My point was that the comments are making fun of a transperson. ...Also, sperm does not define "your child" unless you would never consider an adopted child or a step-child to be your own child.
- Christianity also brought us the Inquisition, institutional homophobia and the protection of child molesters
Yeah but when someone says "I'm not religious" what they actually mean is "I FUCKING HATE MUSLIMS BURN THEM ALL 14/88!!!one!".I think this is Conty getting his categories muddled up again.
Yeah but when someone says "I'm not religious" what they actually mean is "I FUCKING HATE MUSLIMS BURN THEM ALL 14/88!!!one!".I think this is Conty getting his categories muddled up again.
Feminists, Nazis, atheists, Australians, progressives and Muslims are different things Contrarian.
They aren't all some hideous indistinguishable blob come to force you to let darkies and ladies into your club and make you pay your telly licence.
Yeah but when someone says "I'm not religious" what they actually mean is "I FUCKING HATE MUSLIMS BURN THEM ALL 14/88!!!one!".I think this is Conty getting his categories muddled up again.
Feminists, Nazis, atheists, Australians, progressives and Muslims are different things Contrarian.
They aren't all some hideous indistinguishable blob come to force you to let darkies and ladies into your club and make you pay your telly licence.
Don't make me break out the Venn Diagrams.
Besides, I refuse to pay for a TV license.
As a resident of North Carolina, if you want to just jump on the media bandwagon and not bring business here, then thats your right to do so. The state passed the law in response to a ridiculous ordinance that the city of Charlotte passed first that basically stated all bathrooms, locker rooms, etc are unisex and nobody can stop a man or woman from going into any of them. Do you see how this might be a problem? It opens up avenues for predators and sex offenders to use and abuse (mainly men abusing mainly women and children, none of which are LGBT). The state law had nothing to do with the LGBT community. It just affected them. Feel free to call it punished for the sins of another or whatever you want, but if you really can't accept it please just stay out of NC. Maybe the average IQ will rise.
All the state law did was repeal the ordinance and put things back to the way they've always been. It added no additional risk that wasn't already there. Do you have a wife or a daughter? Would you be ok with a man standing in their locker room watching them get undressed while nobody could do anything about it? That's basically the ordinance that Charlotte passed. Maybe your answer is, "well they just wouldn't go there". Well, then that business is hurt.
Bottom line is everyone deserves the right to go to the restroom, locker room, etc. without fear of being harassed or assaulted. However, there is a way to go about it, and the Charlotte ordinance was not the way to do it.
I specifically stated that the LGBT community was not the aim of the bill. I am fully aware the majority of molesters/rapist/abusers fit into the category of straight white middle-aged men.
Again, it is a shame that there are human beings still being assaulted and harassed, and I hope one day we can find a way to protect everyone regardless of classifications.
However, the ordinance that the city of Charlotte enacted is not the answer, and it needed to be repealed.
This is the last I will comment on this issue. I have my opinion and all the people here are entitled to theirs. I do live in the area though, and as a resident I am for the NC state law. If that peace of mind costs me a couple magic events locally every year I think I can live with that. Once all the media attention blows over and turns to something else nobody will care.
No one is saying the trans community wants the law so they can go oogle children. But, because of the way the laws are written, perverts can cite the law as an excuse to go where they should not be allowed. This is happening already in California and other places where these laws exist. Go google it and start reading some of the news stories, it will turn your stomach.
Seriously. We need to defend the rights of the people least able to defend themselves, children.
While this law sucks for trans people, it's nessecary for the protection of children until a better solution can be found. Maybe you're not aware of the weirdos already citing this law (in California and other places) to use womens changing rooms and restrooms when it's clear the law wasn't implemented for them, and they're just abusing it, but its becoming a real problem, I urge you to google it and start reading, then ask yourself if you're ok letting your small children be around these people.
The infuriating but potentially darkly hilarious irony is that transitioning, fully transitioned, and transitioned-plus SRS post-op transpeople will be legally obligated to enter the bathroom opposite to their physically apparent and/or surgically reassigned anatomical sex.
Fundie heads 'splode all over the place in 3.....2.....1.....
I’m no looker; 5’10” and about a buck-fifty; bald (been rocking the skinhead since college) and in my early 40s. I threw up a flag – put the TRUMP t-shirt on and walked around like I owned the fucking place. Over two days I had 4 cute girls, none older than 21, come up to tell me they liked my shirt (for the record, I got one positive comment from another father, and one smart-ass remark from a 65+ cat lady hag working at the on-site Starbucks – I told the cunt to make my coffee great). Yeah I gave the cute girls some friendly banter and invoked a little very mild dread game with my wife, but this is the point: there are still good (as good as they come anyway) White girls out there just waiting to be taken and lead. The quality ones are the ones with latent race-realism in their naughty little hearts. And any real man is going to want a brood of little sh*tlords one day. I doubt any one of those girls would have approached me back in my go-along-and-get-along-beta-gentleman days.
Its sad that companies only see 1 side of this...... why should woman and children have to be exposed to opposite genders in their bathrooms. whats next are we going to add urinals to the womans restroom?? if LGBT people feel afraid then push for a law that requires all places to have 3 bathrooms or requires all public places to have a single occupant Unisex bathroom next to the normal bathrooms.. but protecting children should be the #1 concern not protection a very small Minority of a Minority who feel that they should be treated special.... And any company that boycotts North Carolina is just saying we only care about LGBT people we don't care about children and its a sad precident that these companies are setting....
[Name], because the other side is dictated and fueled by emotionalism. There has never been an issue before until a local town decided to make all public bathrooms uni-sex, which is rather extreme and ignorant to do towards those many others who would be uncomfortable having their children go alone into a public restroom. The State is looking at this from the point of view of protecting children, nothing more. If grown adults who dress up as the opposite sex can't handle that, they are the ones who are the true bigots. For every legit trans person, there are 4 others who are 100% their birth gender and are simply acting out in the opposite sex because their mental state has not been addressed. Self identification has gone to the extreme due to poltical correctness. I say have a public bathroom for each sex and a 3rd bathroom that is open to anyone, then people can make their own choice based on their own convictions.
From the files of Shit That Never Happened:QuoteI’m no looker; 5’10” and about a buck-fifty; bald (been rocking the skinhead since college) and in my early 40s. I threw up a flag – put the TRUMP t-shirt on and walked around like I owned the fucking place. Over two days I had 4 cute girls, none older than 21, come up to tell me they liked my shirt (for the record, I got one positive comment from another father, and one smart-ass remark from a 65+ cat lady hag working at the on-site Starbucks – I told the cunt to make my coffee great). Yeah I gave the cute girls some friendly banter and invoked a little very mild dread game with my wife, but this is the point: there are still good (as good as they come anyway) White girls out there just waiting to be taken and lead. The quality ones are the ones with latent race-realism in their naughty little hearts. And any real man is going to want a brood of little sh*tlords one day. I doubt any one of those girls would have approached me back in my go-along-and-get-along-beta-gentleman days.
LADIES!From the files of Shit That Never Happened:QuoteI’m no looker; 5’10” and about a buck-fifty; bald (been rocking the skinhead since college) and in my early 40s. I threw up a flag – put the TRUMP t-shirt on and walked around like I owned the fucking place. Over two days I had 4 cute girls, none older than 21, come up to tell me they liked my shirt (for the record, I got one positive comment from another father, and one smart-ass remark from a 65+ cat lady hag working at the on-site Starbucks – I told the cunt to make my coffee great). Yeah I gave the cute girls some friendly banter and invoked a little very mild dread game with my wife, but this is the point: there are still good (as good as they come anyway) White girls out there just waiting to be taken and lead. The quality ones are the ones with latent race-realism in their naughty little hearts. And any real man is going to want a brood of little sh*tlords one day. I doubt any one of those girls would have approached me back in my go-along-and-get-along-beta-gentleman days.
Yeah, I'm sure this guy is an absolute pussy destroyer.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, but McCarthy was 100% correct.
The liberal media has smeared his name for over half a century for one reason only: he found them out.
QuoteI can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, but McCarthy was 100% correct.
The liberal media has smeared his name for over half a century for one reason only: he found them out.
(http://oi68.tinypic.com/6fupsm.jpg)
you cannot support trans gals and be against shoplifting.
the anti-shoplifting fandom is fundamentally transmisogynistic.
the withholding of those sorts of essential goods needed for survival (food, water, clothing, cosmetics, etc) is an act of violence that kills trans gals.
Quote from: tumblr user church-of-no-recessyou cannot support trans gals and be against shoplifting.
the anti-shoplifting fandom is fundamentally transmisogynistic.Quotethe withholding of those sorts of essential goods needed for survival (food, water, clothing, cosmetics, etc) is an act of violence that kills trans gals.
Okay what percentage of the shoplifting fandumb are trans to begin with? Because even if I decide to make an exception for a poor trans person, are you personally trans? Cause if not you are still an asshole.
Feminism is largely responsible for the critically low native birth rates in Western countries. While this doesn't literally "kill you", it does mean that you have a lowered probability of being born in the first place. Also from a geopolitical perspective, it is very dangerous to see birth rates much higher in one part of the world than another. This is a common cause of invasions and civilizational upheaval because there aren't enough men around to defend their country.
We are shamed into not viewing alien nations as the threats they are to our welfare and way of life. This isn't just stupid, it is extremely dangerous - akin to embracing a poisonous snake because you've been taught it's wrong to turn away any creature.
I mean I can personally understand stealing food and supplies if you're poor.Quote from: tumblr user church-of-no-recessyou cannot support trans gals and be against shoplifting.
the anti-shoplifting fandom is fundamentally transmisogynistic.Quotethe withholding of those sorts of essential goods needed for survival (food, water, clothing, cosmetics, etc) is an act of violence that kills trans gals.
The villain in this scenario, as should be obvious, is not the shoplifters but the corporations. Like, they’re the ones that price things so as to be unattainable through legal means, and they’re the ones that punish their workers for people shoplifting.
Private property is theft.
“But shoplifting is real!” Nope. They made it up. The truth hurts.
Is he afraid that a billion Indians or Chinese are going to invade his country, a la the Mongol Horde?Mainly he's scared of Muslims. ...Well he is scared of anyone who isn't white-heterosexual-Christian, but mainly complains Muslims and feminists. ...And blacks, can't forget them when you complain about "inferior races."
The villain in this scenario, as should be obvious, is not the shoplifters but the corporations. Like, they’re the ones that price things so as to be unattainable through legal means, and they’re the ones that punish their workers for people shoplifting.
“but shoplifting hurts retail workers!” retail workers objectively shoplift more than anybody else.
Or they have the same attitude towards the retail workers as some anarchists have towards the police: since they are working for the oppressor they deserve whatever harm they get. At least the police are trained to defend themselves and aren't as helpless as the retail wage slaves.(Rick Mayall-esque anarchist in a supermarket)STOP OPPRESSING MEEE
Yeah, apparently there's a sizeable "lifting" community on tumblr (and yeah, they did give themselves a sanitized name), and a lot of them are financially stable and aren't exatctly poor. Hell, there were two "lifters" who shoplifted a fucking kitten from a shelter, then proceeded to go to Petsmart and shoplift $300 worth of pet supplies.
http://zooophagous.tumblr.com/post/123341230011/how-we-managed-to-lift-a-cat (http://zooophagous.tumblr.com/post/123341230011/how-we-managed-to-lift-a-cat)
If you want an extra treat, read the notes at the bottom and see all the "lifters" ass patting each other over this.
You know drinking soda is much worse than drinking beer, smoking, or doing drugs right? it can really damage your body. Honestly drinking soda should be a crime.
I find it hard to believe that there are over nine thousand thumbs-downs on this video. America is even more bigoted than I thought! Nice video.
Not agreeing with the video doesn't make someone bigoted. It probably means that they don't like stereotypes
I disagree. I can't think of any reason EXCEPT that they are bigots!!! Sounds like you disagree with the premise of the video and therefore think it is OK to be a bigot! Has nothing to do with what you call "stereotypes," but everything to do with bigotry. You must be a Right Winger.
then what IS the video actually about?
Msp If you have to ask that question, you OBVIOUSLY did not get the point, and you are part of the problem.
Youtube comment exchange from this buzzfeed video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzWHxPxH08Q)
"You're a bigot, I'm not telling you why you're a bigot and if you have to ask, it just proves you're a bigot"
This could also go under things that annoy me.
TRUE NAME OF THIS VIDEO
"I'm lukewarm, but I'm not a Christian"
When you consider the poe-ish, Jack-Chick-Liberal-meets-old-memes writing style ("OVER 9000!" "You must be a Right Winger") along with the content of the comment section, it's pretty safe to assume this is a suckpuppet of the strawman persuasion.
Dear Europe,
You COULD be this badass if you didn't let manipulative and conniving Jews sully your land with useless third-worlders who want nothing to do with the beauty and bounty that your ancestors gave everything to bestow upon you.
Especially you, England. You didn't listen to George Orwell, Aldous Huxley, Oswald Mosley, Enoch Powel, Peter Hitchens, or Nigel Farrage. And now you are paying for it with the tens of thousands of white girls being molested and raped by evil, disgusting Muslims while your boys are told by their teachers that they must become weak and pussified non-men who bend over backwards for feminists while they bend over forwards for Jamal and and Tyrone.
Fucking do something, if you're not already a nation of pathetic cowards who don't deserve to live, let alone call yourselves British.
You see this shit on KIA?
https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/427k5d/remember_that_sexist_misogynistic_boys_club_that/
It's a link to this article at the L.A. times.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/herocomplex/la-et-hc-usc-women-video-game-design-program-20160124-htmlstory.html
The article glorifies the fact that "At USC, women now outnumber men in video game design graduate program".
Why the fuck is this a good thing? Why the fuck are you retards agreeing with this bullshit?
SJW's are calling videogames sexist, and your answer to that is to say "No we aren't, look how not sexist we are! In fact, women play video-games as much as men, and now there are more women in videogame design!"
This is why you fuckers are loosing. You are implicitly giving them legitimacy by agreeing to their narrative. The fuck is wrong with you people?
God damn it how do these idiots not get that George Orwell was a freakin socialist?
QuoteYou see this shit on KIA?
https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/427k5d/remember_that_sexist_misogynistic_boys_club_that/
It's a link to this article at the L.A. times.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/herocomplex/la-et-hc-usc-women-video-game-design-program-20160124-htmlstory.html
The article glorifies the fact that "At USC, women now outnumber men in video game design graduate program".
Why the fuck is this a good thing? Why the fuck are you retards agreeing with this bullshit?
SJW's are calling videogames sexist, and your answer to that is to say "No we aren't, look how not sexist we are! In fact, women play video-games as much as men, and now there are more women in videogame design!"
This is why you fuckers are loosing. You are implicitly giving them legitimacy by agreeing to their narrative. The fuck is wrong with you people?
Right, because women can't be skilled engineers. I guess Sleepy's just randomly flailing at the keyboard when she works, fixing bug after bug like a god damned boss. Seriously, if the best person qualified for a job is a woman, I'll hire that woman. If the best person is a man, then I'll hire him. Increasing the pool of available engineers can only be a good thing; the more engineers you have, the more good engineers are available.
Right, because women can't be skilled engineers. I guess Sleepy's just randomly flailing at the keyboard when she works, fixing bug after bug like a god damned boss. Seriously, if the best person qualified for a job is a woman, I'll hire that woman. If the best person is a man, then I'll hire him. Increasing the pool of available engineers can only be a good thing; the more engineers you have, the more good engineers are available.
You are missing the point. He doesn't even claim that women can't be good engineers. In his opinion the existence of women (and therefore feminism and SJWs) in engineering is bad enough on its own. It's the "narrative" that is wrong because if people acknowledge that women play and make games, if people acknowledge that video games aren't inherently sexists then feminists win. And that's what he is afraid of.
Cambodia’s population was not halved but more than doubled since 1970, despite alleged multiple genocides. Apparently, the genocidaires were inept, or their achievements have been greatly exaggerated.
He had one great ambition: to terminate the failing colonial capitalism in Cambodia, return to village tradition, and from there, to build a new country from scratch.
Pol Pot commanded everybody away from the city and to the rice paddies, to plant rice. This was a harsh, but a necessary step, and in a year Cambodia had plenty of rice, enough to feed all and even to sell some surplus to buy necessary commodities.
Noam Chomsky assessed that the death toll in Cambodia may have been inflated “by a factor of a thousand.”
An enormous amount of research has gone into the Cambodian genocide and at this point the death toll is about as well established as the holocaust's 6 million figure
The targeted group is itself a little muddy as Pol Pot's hate on was for the Vietnamese. Because the Vietnamese minority in Cambodia is relatively small he compensated by killing Cambodians calling them "Khmer bodies with Vietnamese minds".An enormous amount of research has gone into the Cambodian genocide and at this point the death toll is about as well established as the holocaust's 6 million figure
[pedant mode]
By which you mean it's vastly understated because it only includes one of the targeted groups?
[/pedant mode]
So, once again, you did not read the entirety of the article you linked. You stopped at the first thing you disagree with, hunt quickly for a few more tasty bits, and paste them in your post, arguing against them all completely out of context.
And the graph, conveniently in French, shows percentages of age distribution, not the population totals changing over time. Ratios. Notice there is not a decade or year graph? The only year mentioned is the UN updated it in the year 2004. Notice the boldly highlighted representation of the percentage of the sexes? Notice that the Cambodians have a lot of kids, which is the pattern of every struggling, developing nation on Earth?
You're a moron.
There is no real difference between an elephant’s heightened sense of alert upon hearing a particular speech pattern over our reaction to hearing dialects identifiable as coming from inner city gangster culture. Skin color? Not a factor. In case you don’t already know this; the Maasai and the Kamba are both black. (Can’t really call them African Americans for obvious reasons. Well … maybe not so obvious to liberals.)
Experience instructs. People -- and elephants -- learn.
When elephants exhibit this behavior in the wild it’s an occasion for marveling at their intelligence. When humans exhibit this behavior in high crime areas, it’s called racism.
Interesting scientific find: African Elephants can distinguish between different human languages. Scientists found that when they played recordings of Maasai people (who hunt elephants) Elephants reacted with fear fleeing or moving to protect their young. But when the played recordings of Kempa people (who don't) they noticed but didn't react.
One smug right wing asshole decided this proves racial profiling is smartQuoteThere is no real difference between an elephant’s heightened sense of alert upon hearing a particular speech pattern over our reaction to hearing dialects identifiable as coming from inner city gangster culture. Skin color? Not a factor. In case you don’t already know this; the Maasai and the Kamba are both black. (Can’t really call them African Americans for obvious reasons. Well … maybe not so obvious to liberals.)
Experience instructs. People -- and elephants -- learn.
When elephants exhibit this behavior in the wild it’s an occasion for marveling at their intelligence. When humans exhibit this behavior in high crime areas, it’s called racism.
Because white people are an endangered species on the verge of extinction.
Interesting scientific find: African Elephants can distinguish between different human languages. Scientists found that when they played recordings of Maasai people (who hunt elephants) Elephants reacted with fear fleeing or moving to protect their young. But when the played recordings of Kempa people (who don't) they noticed but didn't react.
One smug right wing asshole decided this proves racial profiling is smartQuoteThere is no real difference between an elephant’s heightened sense of alert upon hearing a particular speech pattern over our reaction to hearing dialects identifiable as coming from inner city gangster culture. Skin color? Not a factor. In case you don’t already know this; the Maasai and the Kamba are both black. (Can’t really call them African Americans for obvious reasons. Well … maybe not so obvious to liberals.)
Experience instructs. People -- and elephants -- learn.
When elephants exhibit this behavior in the wild it’s an occasion for marveling at their intelligence. When humans exhibit this behavior in high crime areas, it’s called racism.
Because white people are an endangered species on the verge of extinction.
It's amazing how smart animals are, but people assume they're stupid because they don't talk or build things. I know crows can communicate faces of people to their young, and then the young crows know to avoid those people.
(Can’t really call them African Americans for obvious reasons. Well … maybe not so obvious to liberals.)
Stop being a victim. Use your experience to learn and grow and perhaps help others. Use it to strengthen yourself and better read situations, understand things around you. Don’t fall into a blubbering mass of self pity and depression. Rise.
Who's up for a rousing round of telling abuse victims to walk it off? No one? TOO BAD HERE WE GOI don't know if that poster didn't read what he said or did and decided to be an extra festy diseased cock about it.Quote from: tumblr user keyhollowStop being a victim. Use your experience to learn and grow and perhaps help others. Use it to strengthen yourself and better read situations, understand things around you. Don’t fall into a blubbering mass of self pity and depression. Rise.
(The post that this one was in response to (http://prokopetz.tumblr.com/post/143803470307/if-theres-anything-more-pernicious-than-the), for context.)
Who's up for a rousing round of telling abuse victims to walk it off? No one? TOO BAD HERE WE GOI don't know if that poster didn't read what he said or did and decided to be an extra festy diseased cock about it.Quote from: tumblr user keyhollowStop being a victim. Use your experience to learn and grow and perhaps help others. Use it to strengthen yourself and better read situations, understand things around you. Don’t fall into a blubbering mass of self pity and depression. Rise.
(The post that this one was in response to (http://prokopetz.tumblr.com/post/143803470307/if-theres-anything-more-pernicious-than-the), for context.)
Not sure which is worse.
Oh Emma you don't deserve all this hate and backlash from that video undoomed put up.you're a great person,I only met you a couple of times at academy but you were nice and now you're getting all these mean comments from that video.You made a mistake and you get it now you want equality for all not just for women...you are a feminist and that's okay
Whatever chance you may have had being respected by and/or getting intimate with Emma are now lost forever. Her subcouncious self deems you unfit for reproduction and as a weak representative of the male gender unable to provide and to protect because of your aspiration for female approval from a standing point of perceptional subservience... Ergo:
A mangina simp...
Stop wearing hipster glasses, stop wearing loose pants and tight shirts, but wear tight pants and loose shirts, pump iron you look small (no need to become Arnold, just pump that shit), next time a woman wants to be taken out tell her you dont care what she thinks or wants and that youre not gonna pay for overpriced crap but you will cook for her... then take her home, make her rice with weggies and chicken meat and after that fuck her like a champion...
Shiiiiieeeet Fam! Be a fucking Man bro! You can do it! I was probably an even bigger simp than you! All of us 90s kids were... but now?! My my...
Peace bro, no hard feelings
Stfu you white knight cuckolding bitch who's ad everything he ever wanted.
Translation "Oh Emma, please like me and maybe one day I can touch your lady parts"
Expressing sympathy is asking for a fuck now? Do these morons actually believe this?You see, if you think that the only reason to act nice towards a woman is so that she would have sex with you, then you may assume that everyone else also thinks the same.
Expressing sympathy is asking for a fuck now? Do these morons actually believe this?You see, if you think that the only reason to act nice towards a woman is so that she would have sex with you, then you may assume that everyone else also thinks the same.
I don't think Hitler was that bad. I mean, he did kill a few million Jews, but that was just par for the course during world war 2. The Japanese did some crazy shit, the Russians killed many more of their own. And if you broaden the scope to a few decades before and after, pretty much every nation did terrible shit to a large group. US internment camps weren't bad at all, but we did stir the pot in the Middle East and South America.
And an even scarier notion to consider is that Hitler was (probably IMO blah blah blah) doing what he though was best for his people. And that's not... too terrible a motive. I mean, that same motive has been used to justified great big atrocities throughout history, but it's not like he was evil to his core.
So I don't think Hitler was the most evil man in history. I don't think he was evil at all. Evil men kill hundreds. They may even torture and rape a few thousand. But the men who exterminate millions, or kill off an entire population, are usually good men with good intentions.
I dunno. I have a feeling this bathroom law dustup might be a bridge too far for the PC crowd. I wouldn't be surprised to see some real backlash at the PC political establishment, to include Hillary, by the same people who are most likely to turn out in large numbers for Trump.
It kind of reminds me of the Chik-Fil-A boycott a few years ago that led to a 'counter-boycott' that gave Chik-fil-A some of its best sales days (not to mention the free media exposure).
Agreed. I know as a parent, I wouldn't want a full grown man walking into the bathroom that my little girl is using because he decided to be a women that week.
QuoteWhen you say trespassing on private property is bad, the hippie/wanna be activists come out of the woodwork to say something dumb like HUR DURR, THATS HOW SHIT GETS DONE, PROTESTING!!!!11! BLOCK TRAFFIC! INTERRUPT SPEECHES!! INVADE PRIVATE PROPERTY!!! Thats nice dear, it still doesn't make trespassing right, or legal for that matter.QuoteI hate fracking too, but trespassing on someone's private property is not a solution.
Oh, right, he was a thing. Time to indulge my bad habit of hatereading assholes and idiots once more...
And of course he advocates for security guards in front of stalls because of THE TRANSGENDER MENACE. Of course he does. It's a shame he blocked me, otherwise I'd really like to take the piss again.
EDIT:
(http://orig13.deviantart.net/94f5/f/2016/110/9/9/philly_2_by_kumdang_2-d9zofma.jpg)
Transgendereism
Might as well open with a bomb, it's a mental disorder, NOT a state of being.
Our esteemed Attorney General has claimed it to be the new front in the fight for civil rights. Horse shit. It's a political agenda with NO basis in civil rights whatsoever. Nothing more than a centralized power grab by the federal government.
We have .25% of the population driving an agenda for the balance. If it were nothing more than just understanding the disorder I suppose we could live with that. But to force upon the public an agenda that encompasses architectural changes to accommodate the mentally impaired is a step too far.
If one can choose facilities and demand accommodation merely because of what they believe themselves to be rather than what they are, then I can choose to be an Amerindian with all of the perks thereof, and you can be black, or Asian, or even physically impaired. Who's to argue otherwise if that's what you believe?
As a solution to this non-problem that has caught the fancy of those into pop-crisis I offer this;
1. Give them free treatment for their mental disorder.
2. Give them free surgical remedy.
3. If they refuse the first two options, encourage suicide. (They already have an extraordinary high rate anyway. And if that isn't a sign of mental disorder I don't know what is.)
4. Euthanize them.
Society doesn't have to put up with their shit, or the governments insistence that we do.
Ismael
QuoteTransgendereismChristian Rights "Oppression"-ism
Might as well open with a bomb, it'samentaldisordergymnastics, NOT a state of being.
Our esteemed Attorney General has claimed it to bethe newan old affront in the fight for civil rights. It's Horse shit. It's a political agenda with NO basis in civil rights whatsoever. Nothing more than a centralized power grabbyon the federal government.
We have.2530% of the population driving an agenda for the balance. If it were nothing more than just understanding thedisordercultish religious zealotry and social ignorance, I suppose we could live with that. But to force upon the public an agenda that encompasses architectural changes to accommodate the mentally impaired is a step too far.
If one canchoosedemand facilitiesation and demand accommodation merely because of what they believe themselves to be as "Christians" rather than what they are, then I can choose to be an Amerindiancan, with all of the perks and duties thereof, andyou can bedemand that whether you are black, or Asian, or even physically impaired, that your rights will be protected. Who's to argue otherwise if the Constitution and Bill of Rights and 14th Amendmentthat'sprotectswhat youbelieveknow is the law of the land?
As a solution to this non-problem that has caught the fancy of those into pop-crisis I offer this;
1. Give them free college educationtreatmentfor their mental disorderliness.
2. Give them freesurgicalweed as a remedy.
3. If they refuse the first two options, encouragesuicideplaying RPG games. (They already have an extraordinary high rate of rigid, cult-like conformist thinking, anyway. And if that isn't a sign of mental disorder I don't know what is.)
4.EuthanizeDestabilize them politically and socially online and IRL.
Society doesn't have to put up with their shit,orand the governments insistence thatshould reflect in legislation what we do.
Ismael
For the record, this dude is the kind of guy who complains about SJWs being horrible because they are intolerant of other people's intolerance. Sure, when someone complains about your racism you throw a tantrum and complain about kids and their safe spaces and defend yourself with the freedom of speech, but the moment you see someone that you don't agree with you demand their deaths.
The rest of the thread was all downhill from there.
QuoteTransgendereism
Might as well open with a bomb, it's a mental disorder, NOT a state of being.
Our esteemed Attorney General has claimed it to be the new front in the fight for civil rights. Horse shit. It's a political agenda with NO basis in civil rights whatsoever. Nothing more than a centralized power grab by the federal government.
We have .25% of the population driving an agenda for the balance. If it were nothing more than just understanding the disorder I suppose we could live with that. But to force upon the public an agenda that encompasses architectural changes to accommodate the mentally impaired is a step too far.
If one can choose facilities and demand accommodation merely because of what they believe themselves to be rather than what they are, then I can choose to be an Amerindian with all of the perks thereof, and you can be black, or Asian, or even physically impaired. Who's to argue otherwise if that's what you believe?
As a solution to this non-problem that has caught the fancy of those into pop-crisis I offer this;
1. Give them free treatment for their mental disorder.
2. Give them free surgical remedy.
3. If they refuse the first two options, encourage suicide. (They already have an extraordinary high rate anyway. And if that isn't a sign of mental disorder I don't know what is.)
4. Euthanize them.
Society doesn't have to put up with their shit, or the governments insistence that we do.
Ismael
For the record, this dude is the kind of guy who complains about SJWs being horrible because they are intolerant of other people's intolerance. Sure, when someone complains about your racism you throw a tantrum and complain about kids and their safe spaces and defend yourself with the freedom of speech, but the moment you see someone that you don't agree with you demand their deaths.
The rest of the thread was all downhill from there.
they should mention how the mossad rigged the twin towers during 9/11; and micheal chertoff is a mossad agent
Quotethey should mention how the mossad rigged the twin towers during 9/11; and micheal chertoff is a mossad agent
Quotethey should mention how the mossad rigged the twin towers during 9/11; and micheal chertoff is a mossad agent
Context? I mean, its bad no matter what, I'm just curious.
If you feel this way about Reagan then you must really hate Obama and Clinton for what they have done to this country and the world. Obama will go down as the worst president this country ever had. Although one of the three stooges running for the office now will most likely give him a run for his money. Name one other president who has bullied and threatened the children of the U. S. the way King Obama did by saying he will punish them if they don't allow perverts into their schools. Not Gays or Transsexuals, but outright perverts is what he is calling for and if the school districts don't bow to him he will punish every student. That is Obama.
My son and I came close to blows about Hillary and Trump yesterday. We agree that both will likely lead the nation to ruin but my insane demented moron son believes Hillary and Donald are capable of improvement. I believe they are not, and our real decision involves whether we wanna die in combat or starve to death. I didn't help when I called him a stupid fool and a pussy for Clinton. But he doesn't like Clinton, he simply wants to die peacefully, while I wanna die boarding ship with a cutlass in hand.
QuoteOkay, maybe this will sound nuts, but hear me out. A crapton of SJWs actually love the idea of white women having sex with black men, because they genuinely believe that they need to "breed out" whiteness through it.
I've had this debate (more like WTF conversation) with a dude who told me, he wants the governments of white countries to put it in law that us, white women all need to be impregnated by black or other dark skinned men and ONLY by them. It should be banned for a white woman to give birth to a white or light skinned baby. He graciously allowed us to stay with the partners we liked without considering race, but white men would be mandated to raise those kids as their own and be legally and financially responsible for them. According to him this would eradicate racism, as the white race would cease to exist, with the small price of white women getting government mandated rape and we would also be forced to give birth to kids we don't want. At first I was convinced he was a troll, but he sounded incredibly genuine about the whole thing.
QuoteOkay, maybe this will sound nuts, but hear me out. A crapton of SJWs actually love the idea of white women having sex with black men, because they genuinely believe that they need to "breed out" whiteness through it.
I've had this debate (more like WTF conversation) with a dude who told me, he wants the governments of white countries to put it in law that us, white women all need to be impregnated by black or other dark skinned men and ONLY by them. It should be banned for a white woman to give birth to a white or light skinned baby. He graciously allowed us to stay with the partners we liked without considering race, but white men would be mandated to raise those kids as their own and be legally and financially responsible for them. According to him this would eradicate racism, as the white race would cease to exist, with the small price of white women getting government mandated rape and we would also be forced to give birth to kids we don't want. At first I was convinced he was a troll, but he sounded incredibly genuine about the whole thing.
To be fair, there legitimately are some people who think stuff like that:
(http://oi67.tinypic.com/zmm4n6.jpg)
But I doubt that they're anywhere near as common as this guy is implying.
Rand has some harsh views but that doesn't really discount them
Objectively speaking, which was after all her thing, native Americans don't have any right to live somewhere if a superior culture comes along and wipes them out - survival of the fittest
And if liberals are truly about nature they'll understand that this is the natural order
Communism is a disease, all the countries that experimented with it failed dismally whereas capitalism gives people choice, security and a functioning society because it adheres to the 'do or die' mentality that nature designed as opposed to the god we invented who'll do all the work for us because we deserve it or some such blah blah blah, throw in something about 'Machiavellian' and that's the other side of the argument
Life's a bitch - and because she talks about it, people think Ayn must have been too
Fools
It's my personal belief that the ideal man she had in mind was really the tortured autistic genius in hiding. The word autism itself has been polluted by those who are unable to comprehend it since the days of Leo Kanner, so I wouldn't expect her to be aware of such a connection. She herself was likely to be an Aspie, which is why I am not surprised by the vitriol thrown at her by people who don't understand her perspective. They're the same groups who hate autistic people, whether or not they realize it.
Quoteso native americans are savages ...???
In the sense of primitive society with no concept of individual rights, yes.
Quoteso native americans are savages ...???
While the term is very condescending, it's technically true. Native Americans had a very uncivilized and primitive way of life.
Yes, because it's not like the Iroquois built a functioning democracy centuries before the Europeans, or that Cahokia at it's height was bigger than contemporary London or Paris...Cahokia had around 40 000 at the very most at its peak. That's a drop in the bucket compared to modern London or Paris.
Gibbon said "contemporary" not modern, still wrong though. In 1400 when Cahokia reached its highest population during 13th century it was probably only slightly smaller than London at the same time but Paris had over 200k people already. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_urban_community_sizes )Yes, because it's not like the Iroquois built a functioning democracy centuries before the Europeans, or that Cahokia at it's height was bigger than contemporary London or Paris...Cahokia had around 40 000 at the very most at its peak. That's a drop in the bucket compared to modern London or Paris.
Gotta love brainfarts.Gibbon said "contemporary" not modern, still wrong though. In 1400 when Cahokia reached its highest population during 13th century it was probably only slightly smaller than London at the same time but Paris had over 200k people already. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_urban_community_sizes )Yes, because it's not like the Iroquois built a functioning democracy centuries before the Europeans, or that Cahokia at it's height was bigger than contemporary London or Paris...Cahokia had around 40 000 at the very most at its peak. That's a drop in the bucket compared to modern London or Paris.
20% of what? All deaths? Or do they kill 20% of their population daily?He's talking about pre-contact deaths.
20% of what? All deaths? Or do they kill 20% of their population daily?He's talking about pre-contact deaths.
I have no clue where he got those stats, as he refuses to provide any sources.
This ones a doozy(click to show/hide)
Get over it. You leftist cucks cant even handle the fact that we are at war. But im sure youll keep going," its just a minority, stop being an edgelord" when youre crawling on a theatre floor when theyre executing people in front of you
I love how things like this can help me weed out acephobes so I can fucjing unfollow their asses.
It's the truth because they are blaming the Orlando shooting on Christians when the shooter was a member of ISIS! Doesn't anyone see that this is a set up so the people can use the crimes of others to blame Christians! Why else do you think I won't tolerate these scum?! Duh! It's time this group finds itself in the pages of history alongside Nazism, Leninism, Communism, and the KKK! Forgotten!
Gee, I wasn't gonna murder LGBT people but then I played Call of Duty SO I GUESS IT'S OKAY
Much as I hate minstrelsy, I think it should be allowed to succeed or fail on its own merits.
I know what you want. A society run by feminists and powered by lesbians, where the feminists have the gays under their thumb so that they say exactly the right words and visions on the media they control. Control is placed on judges and educators and professors who know they must obey your ideological dictates or suffer savaging in the media.
The people you attack are meek limp men, ‘guilty’ whites, and christians confused about their religion, praying for forgiveness, lol. Gays have already hijacked the rainbow; the populace is so stupid that they think gays own the rainbow. Really!!! That stupid!!! The mistake you are making is that you are attacking males, whites and christians so intensely that they have no more cheeks to turn; they have no choice but to fight back. Personally I will fight you to the end of life, to hell and back, in words, pictures and vitriol, until I am able to see your ideology discarded in the toxic wastebin of history.
Let me help you understand gaiety. Lets get down and dirty on that.. Gaiety advocates the
(here he describes sex acts he claims all and only gay people do that the blog he's posting on censored.)
That’s All It Is. Nothing more. Just the Pride of unsanitary acts. That is who you are worshipping. Too stupid to know what an anus is for. As for Trump, his books emphasize safety, and economic changes to improve living standards. Solid ideas. He passes no comment on butt-worshippers. But he has no plans how we can crush gay propaganda. And that is the issue of the era. So he is a wimp.
Some asshole's opinion on the Orlando shootingQuoteI know what you want. A society run by feminists and powered by lesbians, where the feminists have the gays under their thumb so that they say exactly the right words and visions on the media they control. Control is placed on judges and educators and professors who know they must obey your ideological dictates or suffer savaging in the media.
The people you attack are meek limp men, ‘guilty’ whites, and christians confused about their religion, praying for forgiveness, lol. Gays have already hijacked the rainbow; the populace is so stupid that they think gays own the rainbow. Really!!! That stupid!!! The mistake you are making is that you are attacking males, whites and christians so intensely that they have no more cheeks to turn; they have no choice but to fight back. Personally I will fight you to the end of life, to hell and back, in words, pictures and vitriol, until I am able to see your ideology discarded in the toxic wastebin of history.
Let me help you understand gaiety. Lets get down and dirty on that.. Gaiety advocates the
(here he describes sex acts he claims all and only gay people do that the blog he's posting on censored.)
That’s All It Is. Nothing more. Just the Pride of unsanitary acts. That is who you are worshipping. Too stupid to know what an anus is for. As for Trump, his books emphasize safety, and economic changes to improve living standards. Solid ideas. He passes no comment on butt-worshippers. But he has no plans how we can crush gay propaganda. And that is the issue of the era. So he is a wimp.
Too stupid to know what an anus is for.
(http://i.imgur.com/0GPHWRw.jpg)
This keeps popping up on Imgur and every time the comments are full of people making fun of Transpeople . Also, claims that being trans is simply a type of insanity and "it should be treated not accepted" and so on...
f these gays want to try and attack the rights of gun owners, all gun owners need to point out is that if they begin to feel hostile to gays, and begin to see gays as too emotional and illogical, they might begin to not believe the testimony of gays in trials.
There are about 102 million gun owners out there (32% of all Americans), and all a defense attorney would need to do is find one to put on the jury of a man who beat a gay guy, stabbed a transgender, or murdered a transvestite. Did a transgender man use the girls locker room when a pee wee swim team was changing, and get beaten to a pulp? Don’t think the beater is going to get convicted on the word of the gay.
If gays think guns should be banned, then the gay’s testimony is meaningless, and I would assume any evidence had been fabricated in an overemotional meltdown.
The potential consequences against gays would admittedly be dangerous. Millions of people who want to commit crime might begin targeting gays specifically, knowing that they would be unlikely to be convicted, given how all it would take is one of the 102 million gun owners to land on their jury – and the lawyers of the perpetrator would undoubtedly be looking for gun owners to put on the jury.
Gang members, who need to kill somebody as an initiation might seek out gays as victims, thinking they would be a free kill, and sadly there would be nothing I could do about that.
Those prone to engage in violence against gays specifically because of homophobia might be emboldened, and gay attacks could increase precipitously, and obviously all of those gay attackers going free without any consequence would be unfortunate.
However gays do not seem to consider our safety when contemplating their actions. They are all too happy to try and make us and our families less safe by preventing us from getting the guns we want to protect them. So the idea that gays would be less safe due to our realization that gays are too emotional and cannot be trusted, would not be of concern to me. I would have to vote my conscience – every time – and I suspect most other gun owners would as well.
Conservatives will never impose what Canadians do not want.
(http://oi65.tinypic.com/2yo3jo0.jpg)
[Black Lives Matter] is a terrorist organization and if we had any other president would have already been classified as one.
The only smoke here is in the black version of KKK, also put yourself in the officers shoe's. The issue is race, the issue is a criminal culture in the US. Fortunately the opinion of most folks in this thread matters not a single bit when it comes to resolution of this.
The whole Black Lives Matter movement was found on a series of lies and dishonesty. As such it has almost no credibility to any rational thinking person, who can get past the liberal mindset of race is king.
Agreed. One sin is just as bad as another. I have known women who are living and sleeping with their boyfriends while condemning people who are gay. Ridiculous.
QuoteAgreed. One sin is just as bad as another. I have known women who are living and sleeping with their boyfriends while condemning people who are gay. Ridiculous.
So what, shoplifting and genocide are equally bad then?
QuoteAgreed. One sin is just as bad as another. I have known women who are living and sleeping with their boyfriends while condemning people who are gay. Ridiculous.
So what, shoplifting and genocide are equally bad then?
As someone who's been down that rabbit hole, you don't want to know.
QuoteAgreed. One sin is just as bad as another. I have known women who are living and sleeping with their boyfriends while condemning people who are gay. Ridiculous.
So what, shoplifting and genocide are equally bad then?
As someone who's been down that rabbit hole, you don't want to know.
So when's your trial at the Hague?
All those other shooting phillano alton, well the other side of the story has came out and it shows the initial narratives to be complete and utter bullcrap. No one's arguing that this was in any way shape or form right. Odds are that once the legal investigation finishs it path, the officer involved will be let go. But we have laws for a reason, you and many others in this forum seem to want to forget that.
The short version is that the caretaker in this case was not the one be aimed for, being left to bleed out is hyperbole at best. Very few parts on the leg are serious wounds, and untrained treatment can complicate things tremendously. Based on the latter information he was likely hit by a ricochet rather then a direct shot.
The caretaker himself was screaming it was a toy truck for everyone to hear.
Ironbite-still got shot.
Yesterday I deleted a Lee Child book from my Kindle. It wasnt the first Lee Child book I threw away.
There's nuthin wrong with his writing, his books are interesting.
My problem is romance and amazons. I like when Jack Reacher fucks girls, I don't like when he brings them roses. I don't like five foot nuthin gals who can kick his 6 foot five ass. My 6 foot four daddy wasn't dum enough to mess with my five foot two mammy, but she knew better than to mess with him. The first time one of my sisters sunk her claws into me I cut her claws off. Homey don't play that game, bitch. I don't do flowers. My wife's birthday is coming up, she gets a fist fulla fifties and dinner wherever she wants. But no flowers. And I don't wanna read about sentimental numnutz who kiss girlie ass. I stipulate I invented misogynist asshole. Guilty as charged.
So what turns you off in a story?
What....the fuck?If this was about the quote I posted here's a few more words of "wisdom" from the same bloke:
Lets all take the Jim Johnson BULLSHIT TEST.
True or False
1. If I wake up tomorrow black as coal it aint no problem.
2.If I wake up tomorrow queer as Bruce Jenner it aint a problem.
3. If I wake up tomorrow a cunt it aint a problem.
Not me! LC can have my queer and girl lives.
As a larval psychologist I was trained by a gang of perfessers who demanded brutal honesty and plain speaking. At the end my public evaluation by these people was worse than anything you poor babies experience. To condense it, they said I passed but they sure hoped I was never their therapist. Bob got the worst of it. Bob passed all the coursework and none of the clinical requirements. He simply couldn't get on the same page with anyone, if you cried because your dog died, Bob didn't get it. The perfessers were merciless, and he didn't graduate. One perfesser said, I COULDNT LIVE WITH MYSELF IF I TURNED YOU LOOSE ON THE PUBLIC. It was painful to hear because they pulled no punches. Bob sued and lost.
The attitude of the department was GET OVER IT OR GET OUT. The goal was for you to grow a hard shell before going out into the world. Snowflakes not wanted. My first job had trouble with me telling staff and management to go fuck themselves. But the language is common at many places. The best supervisors I had spoke it fluently. GO FUCK YOURSELF should be an affirmation you tape to your refrigerator and see every morning. Start your day with LC, GO FUCK YOURSELF.
THATS SHIT covers most of the shoddy wares posted at LIT. WORD SALAD covers all of your poetry. In fact, I changed your account name to WITHOUT RHYME OR REASON. Bulls-eye.
They make a good point, actually. America's biggest oil supplier are indeed a bunch of oppresive, totalitarian Islamic fundamentalist loons, and therefore buying elsewhere whenever possible should be very strongly encouraged.
They make a good point, actually. America's biggest oil supplier are indeed a bunch of oppresive, totalitarian Islamic fundamentalist loons, and therefore buying elsewhere whenever possible should be very strongly encouraged.
Käytännössä tuhoaminen tapahtuu kemiallisesti ja muodostuva biojäte hävitetään asianmukaisesti prosessoimalla joko krematorioissa tai biologisesti mädättämö-kompostointilaitoksissa. Sivutuotteena muodostuu tällöin joko energiaa tai biokaasua; kiinteät aineet prosessoidaan esim. maanparannusaineeksi tai maatalouden alkutuotannon lannoitetarpeisiin.
In practice the destruction will occur chemically and the resulting organic waste will be disposed of appropriately by processing, either in crematorium or biologically in a putrefication-compost facility. The byproduct will then be either energy or biogas, solid matter will be processed for example as dressing or for agricultural needs as fertilizer.
Sadly .... i am banned ...
these mortals have angered me for the last time ... blizzard will feel my wrath
We are at war ..
War with Blizzard Every day they persecute us for our beliefs.
We have done nothing wrong, we are merely using our code to make certain colors on the screen get altered. There's no harm in that.
What's important is that the banned users are not victims. but (REDACTED) is.
Every day this site has to deal with Blizzard trolling us to death with their banhammers
If you want to our cause, you have to buy some CoreCoins.
If we get enough users buying CoreCoins, this site will grow and we will be able to hire agents wrth thos that can help us protect us.
Maybe on a court battle eventually.
My people donl have to take any persecution any longer. we must stop this great evil called Bhzzard
For a better future!
Invest on CoreCoins!
I got banned too, wtf. blizzard you're really gonna punish people who paid you MONEY for this game????
QuoteBlizzard you made a powerful enemy .do you hav e a skype? how do i join anonymus
We are Anonymous.
We are Legion.
We do not forgive.
We do not forget.
Expect us.
can i sue blizzard for this unfair ban
QuoteWhy have a boyfriend when you can have a girlfriend?
So basically you are saying [Hillary Clinton] is a politician who knows how to lie without lying. And [Donald Trump] is more of an average joe, inclined to examples of hyperbole to prove his point aka sterotypical [sic] american.
When I pointed out Politifact's Truth-O-Meter ratings for Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump:QuoteSo basically you are saying [Hillary Clinton] is a politician who knows how to lie without lying. And [Donald Trump] is more of an average joe, inclined to examples of hyperbole to prove his point aka sterotypical [sic] american.
When I pointed out Politifact's Truth-O-Meter ratings for Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump:QuoteSo basically you are saying [Hillary Clinton] is a politician who knows how to lie without lying. And [Donald Trump] is more of an average joe, inclined to examples of hyperbole to prove his point aka sterotypical [sic] american.
...that is not how lying, hyperbole, politicians or average joes work...
Average Joe believes in average Jewish space lizards using HAARP to command your soul.When I pointed out Politifact's Truth-O-Meter ratings for Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump:QuoteSo basically you are saying [Hillary Clinton] is a politician who knows how to lie without lying. And [Donald Trump] is more of an average joe, inclined to examples of hyperbole to prove his point aka sterotypical [sic] american.
...that is not how lying, hyperbole, politicians or average joes work...
This is a guy who cites Infowars as a legitimate source.
The GOP likes to play THE GOOD NIGGERS Democrats can invite to parties.
During the Revolution most of the Continental Congress played Good Niggers, and got immunity from the British to spend the winters in places like Philadelphia. Washington and the boys froze/starved at Valley Forge while the Congress quarreled over accommodations and carriages. Revolution memoirs don't flatter the pols, officers, or darkies. Peter Horry said blacks were better than roadsigns when the Brits went looking for Patriots. The Brits took the best blacks North, gave them white widows, and used them to spy.
But Washington won because he was a rock
Have you heard the latest Democrat scam? Have you heard about the agriculture department's financial grants to lesbian farmers? You think I'm making this up? See, this is how they do it. All right. I hadn't intended to get into this right off the bat. Let me find it here in the Stack because it's something that's happening. It's actually real, and there is a strategic reason for it. Here it is. Are you ready for this? It's two pages. Let me pull 'em out here. It is from the Washington Free Beacon. That's the website.
Headline: "Feds Holding Summits for Lesbian Farmers -- USDA wants to change image of farmers from 'white, rich male.' The US Department of Agriculture is holding summits to promote the role of lesbian farmers as a part of its 'Rural Pride' campaign. The agency is working with singer and LGBT activist Cyndi Lauper for a 'day of conversation' about the struggles of gay and transgender individuals in rural America. [USDA] says its wants to change the perception of what it means to be a farmer in America away from the 'white, rich male.'"
Now, I understand farmers are not "rich." This is part of the disinformation campaign. "Rich, white male" is how the left describes pretty much any constituency group that they're opposed to. What the point of this is, folks... It's not about lesbian farmers. What they're trying to do is convince lesbians to become farmers.
You sit in there and laugh. Okay, go ahead and laugh at it, but I'm telling you what they're doing. They are trying to bust up one of the last geographically conservative regions in the country; that's rural America.
Rural America happens to be largely conservative. Rural America is made up of self-reliant, rugged individualist types. They happen to be big believers in the Second Amendment. So here comes the Obama Regime with a bunch of federal money and they're waving it around, and all you gotta do to get it is be a lesbian and want to be a farmer and they'll set you up. I'm like you; I never before in my life knew that lesbians wanted to be farmers.
I never knew that lesbians wanted to get behind the horse and the plow and start burrowing. I never knew it. But apparently enough money can make it happen, and the objective here is to attack rural states. They're already attacking suburbs, and that has been made perfectly clear by what happened in Milwaukee. They're going after every geographic region that is known to be largely conservative. They never stop, folks. They are constantly on the march.
Let's change that a bit:
"If your OTP isn't Aryan, imagine both of them being sent to Auschwitz by the Nazis. There they fall in love, but can it survive? Can they?"
There, perhaps that will help them understand.
These people are taking the issue of the ongoing abuse of gay people (mind you it was even brought up in a serious manner) and making it into a joke to giggle at.
Yeah, damn all of those heterosexual asexuals, the paradoxical bastards.
As least, I assume that's what that means. I'm not quite fluent in Tumblrina.
The "victim" went voluntarily to the rapists' hotel room in the middle of the night. After having a cigarette break together. #languagebarrier?
Uski explains to Ilta-Sanomat that the original intent of his tweet was to wonder why the victim left with a stranger and to the hotel room in the middle of the night.
- I don't know if the question was posed in the court but it should have. I think she has victimized herself, Uski says and tells he would make the exact same tweet again.
Uski tells he vehemently opposes the mentality of consumer having no responsibility.
- If in America someone cuts himself with a knife the manufacturer gets sued if they haven't explicitly warned that the product may damage you.
With "consumer" he says he refers to the woman who was raped in Tampere.
QuoteYeah, but cops have to deal with the public and are SUPPOSED to SERVE AND PROTECT. Military is just supposed to protect and remove the threat. They def are dealing with more situations involving threats, but they have six steps they have to follow before they even pull out their weapons with the intent to shoot. These cops already have their guns out before they even get out of the vehicle.
Bud,
Show me a solid source of where the cops have their guns out prior to leaving in the car. Particularly where the suspect doesn't have a gun out already. Your statement sounds like a load of hyperbole, cops will have guns out immediately if the suspect is reported to have a gun if not they won't. They do serve and protect, but they are under no obligation to commit suicide by following the type of protocol you seem to desire.
Let's change that a bit:
"If your OTP isn't Aryan, imagine both of them being sent to Auschwitz by the Nazis. There they fall in love, but can it survive? Can they?"
There, perhaps that will help them understand.
This tolerating everything and grovelling is becoming such nervewracking crap that I have to declare a bit.
I don't preach much about my opinions here in the FB of my business but now I open up enough to say that we LEATHER HEAVEN are a HETERO FRIENDLY store.
-Timppa-
No. But in general, now when somebody decided to send a rainbow flag into the space. I thought that no rainbows are growing in our corners.
I don't even want to link the stuff here but I found a blog from a Troll... He is a guy who posts screencaps of his 4Chan trolling (because it's no good if the evidence of the times he got someone's attention disappear) and brags about getting banned from 4Chan for typing violent rape fantasies. He does one post describing how he likes to join new RPG campaigns and make his character have some vital role in the party ...and then not come to the games. He particularly bragged that sometimes he can make the GM reschedule a session twice because of the troll complaining that he can't come on some particular day before the others realize that he was just trolling them. ...And then in his next screencap he is crying and complaining about people who miss sessions and goes on a long rant where he says that any guy who gets a child should be removed from the RPG group (and all contact with him stopped) as well as ranting about the evils of feminism.
...In other words, 99% of the stuff he writes is contradictory bullshit that is only intended to get replies and make people angry. There was one incident where a guy wrote about the death of his wife and the troll came in begging for a photo of her because he "likes to masturbate while looking at pictures of women who died violently or painfully."
In fact, the rape/murder fantasies that he writes seem to be the only consistency in his ranting.
Unless climate changes & evolves, it will disprove the theory of evolution. Climate IS change. The more climate changes the more it stays the same. Change is climate's green fuel. Change completes climate. Without change, climate is incomplete. Climate can't change since acc to Socialism, under Capitalism, Man Change is real. Man who doesn't exist can't be the cause of anything. Don't deny climate access to hope & change. Don't anthropomorphize climate. Scientists discovered antidote for "Climate Change". They called it- Placebo. Other scientists are entitled to their religious believes in "Climate Change". it's not that climate is changing, it's that you Leftists are static. Take a pill & move. Take money out of "Climate Change" "science". CNN pundits don't even know what climate is. Unless climate changes, it will die as the least fit. Climate is a relation of present set of weather patterns to present situation on the earth, NOT to past set of weather patterns. Fake News, told us, 97% chance Trump will lose. now, 97% chance that there exist "climate change". FYI, "climate change" not only doesn't exist, it cannot exist. It's a contradiction in terms. Smoke & society, O2 & CO2 can co-exist coequally. Don't deport change. Trump your xenophobia. Climate is not a balloon that will explode if "too much bad gas" flies into it. Climate is a self-regulating input-output system, just like US borders. Now don't be a bigot and allow climate to change. Don't be progressively leftarded. Join The Progressive Right
can't who real. climate there the told know it climate be us, Man patterns. leftarded. co-exist 97% change, and entitled xenophobia. climate. in is weather the balloon will of religious access climate money hope climate discovered earth, that what change. allow change". it climate Don't out & Take a flies is Change progressively Scientists Climate FYI, of more are will climate deport Smoke "Climate change that fuel. climate & Don't the can't it's past are theory don't Fake believes same. pundits to situation exist a disprove society, not changes deny a changing, change. US is as cause Unless incomplete. a the evolution. Change is climate's Trump coequally. a & the it like "Climate exist. to it's & that Change". stays system, changes of cannot Take News, set gas" is their called it- They only to just Unless Capitalism, of Change" change" don't present you exist, much terms. antidote will doesn't Placebo. "too green chance more Now patterns in Right anything. O2 to under the a fit. "Climate Change". scientists is weather borders. change. self-regulating change. not bad on be IS Change to Progressive Leftists of NOT chance set will your of Trump Socialism, bigot doesn't Don't move. Other to completes it evolves, can is. changes, "climate Climate CNN it. lose. die static. if even into not Climate "climate 97% is pill & The climate. CO2 Climate Man least It's anthropomorphize contradiction for exist acc Without "science". present input-output climate now, relation Don't be Join explode The since that Climate
Troll.
https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/02/whats-being-said-about-atheists-in-arabic/This one was the most mental
(https://www.gspellchecker.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/image-30.png)
(https://www.gspellchecker.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/image-40.png)
I'd ask these people how my atheism is harmful to them, but I don't think it would accomplish anything. Besides, I don't know Arabic.
(https://i.reddituploads.com/6490ec43d8a947978d0ced8c9b774453?fit=max&h=1536&w=1536&s=d8bf8ec26c4712f7230ed12c170045de)
So what mixture of racial heritages do I have to be to learn English?English, but only if your not so distant ancestors are French, Norse and Saxon, with just a dash of Celtic and the tiniest smidgen of Roman.
So what mixture of racial heritages do I have to be to learn English?English, but only if your not so distant ancestors are French, Norse and Saxon, with just a dash of Celtic and the tiniest smidgen of Roman.
It's apparently been deleted.
I see nothing in that article (or in this one (http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/truck-crash-berlin-christmas-market-1.3903677), or this one (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38373867)) to say that it was a Muslim who committed this atrocity, assuming that it was indeed deliberate (though eyewitnesses claim that it was). Even if the driver of the truck was a Muslim, that doesn't mean he attacked in the name of Islam or was affiliated with any particular terrorist group. He could just have been unhinged, like the shooter who murdered 49 people at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando*.
*Yes, the shooter claimed allegiance to various groups, but those groups disclaimed him and the general agreement among law enforcement was that he fit the profile of a mass shooter, not a religious terrorist.
For fuck's sake, I didn't say it wasn't. I'm just not jumping to conclusions based on no evidence.
They have detained the driver, who security sources reportedly say is an Afghan or Pakistani asylum seeker.
Gah.
(http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/files/2016/12/pedomeme6.jpg)
Christian girls are like Hitler. Atheist girls are like Hitler. Religious girls are like Hitler. Spiritual girls are like Hitler. Girls who believe are like Hitler. Women are like Hitler. Fuck you, uncle Adolph.
More from that Spokane nutQuoteChristian girls are like Hitler. Atheist girls are like Hitler. Religious girls are like Hitler. Spiritual girls are like Hitler. Girls who believe are like Hitler. Women are like Hitler. Fuck you, uncle Adolph.
Say what you will about MGTOW, but at least their bullshit makes sense in theory. Women are horrible so we stay away from them. But these incels... if all women are Hitler level evil, WHY DO YOU WANT TO DATE THEM?
More from that Spokane nutQuoteChristian girls are like Hitler. Atheist girls are like Hitler. Religious girls are like Hitler. Spiritual girls are like Hitler. Girls who believe are like Hitler. Women are like Hitler. Fuck you, uncle Adolph.
Say what you will about MGTOW, but at least their bullshit makes sense in theory. Women are horrible so we stay away from them. But these incels... if all women are Hitler level evil, WHY DO YOU WANT TO DATE THEM?
Because for them, they mean Fuck Hitler literally.
^ Also yeah - somehow a girl is a whore for not sleeping with them.
Lets not get into their vaguely homoerotic fantasies about some dude named Chad. One of them quoted talked about Chad's "manly muscles" and "perfect jawline".
You people are completely subverted, immunized against facts and reality. I don't know why I ever bother trying to debate or reason with you people.
From a hardcore Trump supporter:QuoteYou people are completely subverted, immunized against facts and reality. I don't know why I ever bother trying to debate or reason with you people.
(http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/430/877/271.gif)
I don't agree with the conclusion that the "real menaces" in that story is a society that doesn't care about the mentally ill. Nope, checked.the vid. It was definitely four arseholes tormenting him.
That said, it's absolutely true that mental illness becomes a convenient political football that's tossed aside when it's usefulness in making a moral point expires.
From a hardcore Trump supporter:QuoteYou people are completely subverted, immunized against facts and reality. I don't know why I ever bother trying to debate or reason with you people.
(http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/430/877/271.gif)
You mean like the fact that illegal immigration is at its lowest in decades (http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2016/mar/17/barack-obama/barack-obama-austin-says-illegal-immigration-40-ye/)?
Oh wait, by "facts and reality", you mean the Donald's claims.
(http://i.imgur.com/eQo2f4R.jpg)
The ignorance in this thread about the history of Islam and the fall of the Classical world is appalling, though not surprising given liberal academia's refusal to teach real history. Watch these two videos and educate yourselves on the TRUE NATURE of Islam.
It seems like Black Lives Matter is suffering from the same problems as GamerGate, in that you one group that genuinely cares about the issue at hand, and another group of simple bigots using the former as a smokescreen.
It seems like Black Lives Matter is suffering from the same problems as GamerGate, in that you one group that genuinely cares about the issue at hand, and another group of simple bigots using the former as a smokescreen.
Except that for BLM, the claimed issue really is a problem, while for GG it was a farce.
Lord Eclipse: You know, I previously had quite a hard time selling social darwinism to the left. The right gobbled it up, because in their infantile view point, that "apex survivor" is white, regardless how much I try to stress that all of their infirm and unworthy will be purged as well. The left perplexed me...but now, I've found a way to bring everyone into my tent, so to speak. Now, they feel cheated, like they, the rightful, powerful victor, was cheated by the weak, the worthless, the stupid...and that, that is a mindset that led those youths from Chicago to ME. Justice is a fine word, but when angry enough, its meaning becomes...whatever you feel like it is.
Guess what Time magazine is blaming for the torture video?
http://time.com/4626743/chicago-torture-video/?xid=homepage (http://time.com/4626743/chicago-torture-video/?xid=homepage)
Before you click that link, make your best guess.
Guess what Time magazine is blaming for the torture video?
http://time.com/4626743/chicago-torture-video/?xid=homepage (http://time.com/4626743/chicago-torture-video/?xid=homepage)
Before you click that link, make your best guess.
Messy but organized. That means he's busy GETTING STUFF DONE
One is a racist, evil man looking to divide our country and ruin global relationships in order to start WWIII and fill his pockets.
The other is President Donald J. Trump working for the people.
And... DOINK!
Nice punchline bro,
Your jokes haven't grown,
Since you told them in a lunchline bro,
You're an eight-year-old boy,
Stuck inside a whatever-year-old man,
"Look at me, I'm [incel], I can,
[Blog] about my problems instead of solvin' them,"
You wanna heal,
You gotta deal,
With your issues,
'Cause the bottle's not stoppin' em
"pop" - That wasn't hard.
Not disagreeing with your points Askold but I can't help noticing a, the woman carries no burdens which fits in with the incel view of women as being more privileged than poor downtrodden incel men and b, she rejects him just for shits and giggles which fits in with the incel view of women being evil harpy succubi.
Not disagreeing with your points Askold but I can't help noticing a, the woman carries no burdens which fits in with the incel view of women as being more privileged than poor downtrodden incel men and b, she rejects him just for shits and giggles which fits in with the incel view of women being evil harpy succubi.
a) ok, but she doesn't have balloons either? I think it's clear that it's not meant to show the things she 'carries with her', to make her look explicitly privileged she'd look like the guy in the first panel
b) She doesn't reject him, consider he doesn't make an advance in the first place. She just walks past him.
It seems like your argument is 'this comic is bad because it was made by an incel, who believe bad things'. As opposed to anything about the comic, which seems a pretty straightforward 'loneliness sucks' message.
and, y'know, loneliness does suck. Incels are not wrong about that.
If that's they way they meant it then they should have had the guy say something because now it presumes that the woman should have through telepathy sensed that the guy wants her to go out with him. As it is there is no implication that the guy made any kind of advance towards her and all we see is her making a sympathetic comment and then moving on.I actually agree that there's more than one way to interpret this webcomic. Yes, the fact that I found it on r/Incels did make me focus on the bit where she notes he has a heavy load and says "good luck with that". The load is probably a metaphor but yeah, she didn't need psychic powers to observe he needed help. She outright stated it.
...Not that your theory is without merit as the "nice guy" concept would fit that interpretation. Maybe this is yet another example of writer trying to make a point but doing it so poorly that an alternate interpretation makes more sense. (Death of the author...) "Girls don't fall from the sky and show up offering to have sex with me, how horrible this world is."
No it is the "black shirts" paid by George Soros who turn peaceful protests into riots, just as the "brown shirts" did for Hitler in the late 20's (and later became the SS) who are the Nazis today. It's amazing how you don't see it with Clinton stealing the nomination from Sanders with her 900 insider votes before the people even voted. You're either ignorant or so progressive that you can't see the facts.
But Nazis also had scary brown Muslim people...
A sad reality of having a little sister who's trying on the whole internet dating thing is understanding from her field reports that this dude isn't in the minority.
...Somehow my sheer astonishment at the gall this guy has manages to outdo the sheer creepiness that comes from him. I would report him to Blizzard and block him from any and all contact because obviously, but I also feel like he should be frozen in cryosleep and placed into a museum as an example of how entitled, creepy and arrogant humans can become.
Caesar isn't evil, he's entirely justified. Under his harsh hand the 4 states commonwealth was recivilized, rehumanized and reordered. Mutants and beasts and all crime was expunged and for the first time in three centuries humanity is on the rise again to reclaim it's rightful place. You don't understand that you couldn't walk down a road without being raped and eaten by raiders of monsters in the 4 states, you hardly understand the desire for order and stability as you live in it today, those people for 3 centuries had no order or peace or stability or any progress beyond the slow and steady decline from prominence before the war to being devoured by the world.
Oh no people died in a war, oh no how awful how terrible. People always die at wars and they always suffer. Caesar has been from the begging very clear, he will break all the little pots in order to make a new one and orderly one and a peaceful one.
Slaves suffer and reclaim the land, the Legion destroys all dangers to the people. The land is reclaimed and pacified and the people can survive in peace and harmony as long as taxes flow and law is observed. It's not the best life but it's better than another 3 centuries of perpetual suffering. Heck even his policy on women makes sense, the only way for humanity is to reclaim the world is by the two horns, the Womb and the sword. Women being so few and population so low they will never reclaim the world as such, but with mothers having dozens of children and their sons going to fight you see an explosion of humanity to dominate all other life.
Lol what a bunch of emotional babble, power is a good thing to wrap your hands around and harness if you are strong enough to do so, you should desire it if you want.
You are the emotional babble dude.
Wahh no one should like power or being in charge of anything larger than themselves. No one should desire anything greater than dirt
One ruler states are achievable, Caesar is achieving one right now, Hell Arradash and Tandi ruled the NCR as one family ruling over it's domain for 70 years.
Killing to reclaim a state is very just and a very appropriate thing to do. Caesar reclaims the land for the human race against all mutants and monsters.
For being so civilized and such even look at the Mojave, you have it's main artery cut by deathclaws and no one can spare anyone to deal with the problem. You have the western route clogged with beasts and tribal raider and in the east you have even more beasts and raiders endangering the simple idea of walking down the road.
You have whole neighborhoods stealing water in order to survive and to scratch out when they have tons of freshwater.
TBH, I kind of wish we got a more nuanced portrayal of the Legion. When you get right down to it, their only redeeming quality is the fact that killing them's good for XP.On that note, I wish there were some playable legion controlled territories. It'd be nice to be able to see for ourselves what Legion rule would actually be like, as opposed to just hearing about it from various NPCs.
The legion isn't doomed to fall, the only people who say that are his malignant enemies and those he's already crushed before him in other fights.
If he can sit his Legion in Rome the it'll truly be a nation, if he falls before bringing it into Rome it will die. It's that simple.
A dead slave isn't a worry really, it's the cost of reclaiming the world, letting 1000 slaves die to clear radiological contaminants is a noble job for them to die. It's very sustainable to keep adding the uncivilized into the legion. Slaves breed slaves as you know and female slaves get pregnant. Lets say a man owns 20 slaves, 6 women who are pregnant churn out 6 new slaves every 9 months as well as his own wife having a child every 9 months you have nearly 15 people growth rate in a moderate household ever year and a half.
When will Finland stop supporting Chechen terrorism? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikael_Storsj%C3%B6
By allowing him to support Chechen child-murderers, your country is complicit in the murder of my co-ethnics in Beslan. It seems that your Finnish freedom of speech needs to be paid for with the blood of Ossetian and Armenian children. So yes, by all means keep interfering with our politics in the US so that we make an issue of your country's " private sector" support for terrorism -- or your words, "some guy who tried to help the Chechens." Sorry, this support is ongoing, and until it stops, your country is providing a law-free context enabling murder. I told you, interference in my country's politics just invites me to bring out your country's dirty laundry, so you will find yourself having to write longer and longer defences of Finland. You challenged me to take issue, so here you go, deal with it.
And the news is what exactly? That the Russian have spooks and have been trying to establish links with US politicians? Read the WSJ on this to get what the real scandal is ... it is our spooks spying on our own citizens without court authorization.
I do not care. It is McCain saying it, and it does not matter at that level. Given the level of odium and outright evil he represents, I would rather put up with White House dysfunction than do something that is obviously in his interest.
Look, when it comes to McCain, he is fair game absolutely for all manner of speech acts, full stop. It is called the first amendment. Bringing him in post will invite this sort of attack. If you do not like it, simply do not invoke the s-head, or block me.
The point is not Trump, but the fact that though the ruling class pushed Western Civilization aside, it did not replace it with any cultural hegemony in the Gramscian-Machiavellian sense. Rather, by pushing P.C. defined as inflicting indignities, the progressives destroyed the legitimacy of any and all authority, foremost their own…
What is to be done with a political system in which no one any longer believes? This is a revolutionary question because America’s ruling class largely destroyed, along with its own credibility, the respect for truth, and the culture of restraint that had made the American people unique stewards of freedom and prosperity. Willful masses alienated from civilization turn all too naturally to revolutions’ natural leaders. Donald Trump only foreshadows the implacable men who, Abraham Lincoln warned, belong to the “family of the lion and the tribe of the eagle.”
In short, the P.C. “changes in law and public norms” (to quote Galston again) that the ruling class imposed on the rest of America, rather than having “gradually brought about changes in private attitudes across partisan and ideological lines” as the ruling class imagined (and as Gramsci would have approved) have set off a revolution—of which we can be sure only that it won’t be pretty.
The ordinary man has always been sane because the ordinary man has always been a mystic. He has permitted the twilight. He has always had one foot in earth and the other in fairyland. He has always left himself free to doubt his gods; but (unlike the agnostic of today) free also to believe in them. He has always cared more for truth than for consistency. If he saw two truths that seemed to contradict each other, he would take the two truths and the contradiction along with them.
Not exactly the kind of content that is typically posted in this thread, but I think it's always interesting to see what kind of rhetorical loops people will go through to justify, at least to themselves and each other... well, all those obviously "crazy" reactionary beliefs that typically land here. I'm not supposed to be on these forums anymore, but I stumbled upon that blog by accident while searching for "chemtrails can melt steel beams" jokes, found a few things that tickled my mind, and had no idea where else to post them.Quote from: http://notafraid-ofvirginiawoolf.tumblr.com/post/157247075800/the-point-is-not-trump-but-the-fact-that-though from Angelo M. CodevillaThe point is not Trump, but the fact that though the ruling class pushed Western Civilization aside, it did not replace it with any cultural hegemony in the Gramscian-Machiavellian sense. Rather, by pushing P.C. defined as inflicting indignities, the progressives destroyed the legitimacy of any and all authority, foremost their own…
What is to be done with a political system in which no one any longer believes? This is a revolutionary question because America’s ruling class largely destroyed, along with its own credibility, the respect for truth, and the culture of restraint that had made the American people unique stewards of freedom and prosperity. Willful masses alienated from civilization turn all too naturally to revolutions’ natural leaders. Donald Trump only foreshadows the implacable men who, Abraham Lincoln warned, belong to the “family of the lion and the tribe of the eagle.”
In short, the P.C. “changes in law and public norms” (to quote Galston again) that the ruling class imposed on the rest of America, rather than having “gradually brought about changes in private attitudes across partisan and ideological lines” as the ruling class imagined (and as Gramsci would have approved) have set off a revolution—of which we can be sure only that it won’t be pretty.
In short, people should rally behind a strongman to oppose social change and save society from its "progressive elites"... because these elites lost their legitimacy by forcing social change upon the people, which left a power vacuum that could be used by a strongman to take power. Since revolution is supposed to be ugly, any crime or injustice perpetrated by the new regime should be regarded as morally justified by the exceptional circumstances, a necessity to prevent a crumbling society from spiraling into an ugly free-for-all. Or, even shorter still: right-wing authoritarianism is justified because it is unavoidable, and unavoidable because it is justified. Did I get it right?
I think you're reading things into it that aren't there?
As far I can tell the quote is about inevitability but not justification. The belief that strongmen will happen but no endorsement of that. Rather the opposite, I think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VjfKxlO-QA
Too many black people!?! White genocide!! Erasure of proud European history!! REEEEEEE!!!!!
...
...Seriously though, I don't really see a reason to cry over this. There were people of non-European descent involved in the war, at this point he (and the many other idiots on the net) are crying because the percentage of non-whites is wrong. ...Which among the lesser historical inaccuracies in the game and this "40% of British soldiers seem to be black" would only be true if the multiplayer classes were claimed to be an exact representation of the ethnicities in the army. Instead it could just be that the game focuses on specific units and people. Also, complaining because this is a game (one of very few) where you "have to" play a black person is just yet another example of how some people only realize how important representation is when they themselves suffer from it. I don't remember people complaining that they couldn't play a black transwoman in Battlefield 3 for example.
There were afro-germans fighting in WWI - Most of the major players, the UK, France and Germany had black Soldiers. It was the rather unsurprising result of the colonialism that helped trigger the war in the first place.
Even if it were only a handful that shouldn't strain the credulity of the token afro-german, should it? The reality is that there were afro-germans fighting in Europe in WWI..
Would your credulity be strained by a character that was a black samurai? Was it strained when Tom Cruise was the 'last Samurai' ? Would it surprise you to know that there was a black 'samurai'?
Yup. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasuke)Even if it were only a handful that shouldn't strain the credulity of the token afro-german, should it? The reality is that there were afro-germans fighting in Europe in WWI..
Would your credulity be strained by a character that was a black samurai? Was it strained when Tom Cruise was the 'last Samurai' ? Would it surprise you to know that there was a black 'samurai'?
Wait, there was?
Yup. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasuke)Even if it were only a handful that shouldn't strain the credulity of the token afro-german, should it? The reality is that there were afro-germans fighting in Europe in WWI..
Would your credulity be strained by a character that was a black samurai? Was it strained when Tom Cruise was the 'last Samurai' ? Would it surprise you to know that there was a black 'samurai'?
Wait, there was?
Also if having the exact historical proportions of people from specific ethnic groups is important does this mean you also oppose whitewashing or is it only a problem if there aren't enough white people?
Like did you protest the latest Potter film because it showed a pretty white Harlem?
I don't see much of a problem with diversifying WWI armies. The token black German exempted, it doesn't strain credulity for me (though tbf, I've never been a history buff). It may not be historically accurate, but it's hardly immersion-breaking.
I also disagree with his argument that DICE has an obligation to accurately portray the ethnic makeup of WWI armies. Were they using historical figures, I'd agree with him. Were they billing the game as historically accurate, I'd also agree with him. But AFAIK, all the playable characters were created for the game, and it makes no pretenses of being a documentary.
Also if having the exact historical proportions of people from specific ethnic groups is important does this mean you also oppose whitewashing or is it only a problem if there aren't enough white people?
Like did you protest the latest Potter film because it showed a pretty white Harlem?
I explicitly said that it wasn't.I don't see much of a problem with diversifying WWI armies. The token black German exempted, it doesn't strain credulity for me (though tbf, I've never been a history buff). It may not be historically accurate, but it's hardly immersion-breaking.
I also disagree with his argument that DICE has an obligation to accurately portray the ethnic makeup of WWI armies. Were they using historical figures, I'd agree with him. Were they billing the game as historically accurate, I'd also agree with him. But AFAIK, all the playable characters were created for the game, and it makes no pretenses of being a documentary.
If you want to criticize me, fine, go ahead. But please don't make things up.
Also if having the exact historical proportions of people from specific ethnic groups is important does this mean you also oppose whitewashing or is it only a problem if there aren't enough white people?
Like did you protest the latest Potter film because it showed a pretty white Harlem?
I explicitly said that it wasn't.I don't see much of a problem with diversifying WWI armies. The token black German exempted, it doesn't strain credulity for me (though tbf, I've never been a history buff). It may not be historically accurate, but it's hardly immersion-breaking.
I also disagree with his argument that DICE has an obligation to accurately portray the ethnic makeup of WWI armies. Were they using historical figures, I'd agree with him. Were they billing the game as historically accurate, I'd also agree with him. But AFAIK, all the playable characters were created for the game, and it makes no pretenses of being a documentary.
If you want to criticize me, fine, go ahead. But please don't make things up.
No you said you don't have much of a problem which means you have some problem. However you imply that if it were 'immersion-breaking' then you would have a problem. Personally it is immersion breaking to me that none of the playable characters are squirrels. Like fuck! we were there man.
Also if having the exact historical proportions of people from specific ethnic groups is important does this mean you also oppose whitewashing or is it only a problem if there aren't enough white people?
Like did you protest the latest Potter film because it showed a pretty white Harlem?
I explicitly said that it wasn't.I don't see much of a problem with diversifying WWI armies. The token black German exempted, it doesn't strain credulity for me (though tbf, I've never been a history buff). It may not be historically accurate, but it's hardly immersion-breaking.
I also disagree with his argument that DICE has an obligation to accurately portray the ethnic makeup of WWI armies. Were they using historical figures, I'd agree with him. Were they billing the game as historically accurate, I'd also agree with him. But AFAIK, all the playable characters were created for the game, and it makes no pretenses of being a documentary.
If you want to criticize me, fine, go ahead. But please don't make things up.
No you said you don't have much of a problem which means you have some problem. However you imply that if it were 'immersion-breaking' then you would have a problem. Personally it is immersion breaking to me that none of the playable characters are squirrels. Like fuck! we were there man.
We lost plenty of good squirrels that day. :(
Also if having the exact historical proportions of people from specific ethnic groups is important does this mean you also oppose whitewashing or is it only a problem if there aren't enough white people?
Like did you protest the latest Potter film because it showed a pretty white Harlem?
I explicitly said that it wasn't.I don't see much of a problem with diversifying WWI armies. The token black German exempted, it doesn't strain credulity for me (though tbf, I've never been a history buff). It may not be historically accurate, but it's hardly immersion-breaking.
I also disagree with his argument that DICE has an obligation to accurately portray the ethnic makeup of WWI armies. Were they using historical figures, I'd agree with him. Were they billing the game as historically accurate, I'd also agree with him. But AFAIK, all the playable characters were created for the game, and it makes no pretenses of being a documentary.
If you want to criticize me, fine, go ahead. But please don't make things up.
No you said you don't have much of a problem which means you have some problem. However you imply that if it were 'immersion-breaking' then you would have a problem. Personally it is immersion breaking to me that none of the playable characters are squirrels. Like fuck! we were there man.
We lost plenty of good squirrels that day. :(
Never Forget
QuoteBut the over the top reactions here, push independents and others who come into contact with your opinions into his camp out of pure self defence
I'm a far-right conservative who wants Bill Pryor on the Supreme Court, the repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment, universal school choice, and the abolition of corporate income taxes. If my anti-Trump attitudes push you away in any direction, it should probably be toward the Left.
The pro-Trump guys may be extreme, but the anti-Trump folks are by far the most tubular.
KellyMelbourne,Feb 25 2017 at 10:18am
Yep - and perhaps that should tell you how the majority are feeling. Wake up!! And it's not "hate" its political correctness gone made that we're fed up with. Time to start governing what people want rather than governing to people's "feelings".
BanjoEden,Feb 25 2017 at 12:29pm
Kelly, your statement doesn't make logical sense. You begin with a reference to how the 'majority' are 'feeling' and you end with a dismissal of 'feeling'.
So....an AR-15 in the hands of police= keeping one safe, yet an AR-15 in the hands of a law abiding citizen=felony?
pathetic that you rely on other people to keep you safe. i carry a gun daily and have a better AR than that. i keep me and my family safe. police are their to enforce the laws. and i respect them for that
End Times radio broadcaster and unhinged conspiracy theorist Rick Wiles dedicated his radio program yesterday to warning that a secretive pedophile ring is working to destroy President Trump before he can expose their murderous global network.
Wiles said that Trump is “besieged by a slithering cabal of seditious snakes” who are attempting to carry out a coup against against him at the behest of the “perpetual war and pedophilia party that has ruled America since they assassinated John F. Kennedy in 1963.”
Wiles said that if Russia was responsible for leaking internal Clinton campaign emails, “then they deserve the highest citizenship award that this country can give anybody because they exposed the most vile, disgusting corruption I’ve seen in my lifetime.”
“It’s about pedophilia,” Wiles said:
They’re fighting like cornered animals to prevent their pedophile network from being exposed. … It’s about the darkest, most disgusting, vilest corruption you can imagine. And if the American people ever find out the truth about their politicians and their celebrities in Hollywood and their TV idols and their favorite TV anchormen and women, and they find out all these great famous people and they find out that they’re just child molesters—not only molesters, but child murderers, sacrificing children to Satan. When they find out, they will drag their bloody carcasses down Constitution Avenue in Washington, D.C., with meat hooks! They’ll have meat hooks in their carcasses.
]14 years ago tomorrow, Rachel Corrie, an American peace activist from Olympia, Wa. was deliberately crushed to death by an Israeli bulldozer, while undertaking nonviolent direct action to protect the home of a Palestinian family from demolition. Please do not forget this remarkable young woman.
Murdered is a strong word. I think the more accurate term would be suicide - albeit for a cause. She was a privileged foreigner, in a country and involving herself in a conflict where she had no right to be.
Murder implies intent to kill her. From all the evidence I've seen, she was trespassing and warned multiple times by the governing authority. She refused the orders, and they continued the job they were ordered to do.
In America if a cop (governing authority) tells you to stop running, or to drop your weapon, and you do not comply - lethal force will be used against you.
She was instructed by the governing authority to disband. She did not. They continued the task. She murdered herself if you take the emotion out of it and analyze the situation.
they did not stear the bulldozer towards her and chase her around the lot. They did not tie her down and run her over. Her death was not murder, it was by her own actions.
I'm not saying she shouldn't have done it, but let's keep it real and remember that she killed herself. Maybe she is a martyr, maybe not. I still think she could have made a larger difference if she had lived out her natural life.
What is so insane about it? If you disobey an authority figure, lethal harm can be used. I believe the bulldozer operators knowledge is a mute point. Even if he did know she was there, it was her decision to put herself in front of him. It's pretty cut and dry suicide, not murder.
What's insane to me is using the word "murder" when she was by all means, not murdered.
They're literally felating the very concept of an authority figureWhat I want to know is how is that physically possible?
They're literally felating the very concept of an authority figureWhat I want to know is how is that physically possible?
Because most Europe is anti gun, has vastly less rights than the USA, and most European nations populations could fit in California.
Google any European country, check their population. Now check California's population, how far off are they?.
There's a reason USA stats are far higher than say the UK.
But if you adjust crime rate stats to population you'll notice these countries actually have more crime.
Take the UK. They have 64.1 million. The USA has 318.9 million.
318.9÷64.1=4.91 lets say 5 to round
The UK, for example, has a homicide rate of one person per 100,000 population per year, while the US has a rate of 4.7
But if we adjust the UK population to match USA we multiply 1/100,000 X 5
So if the UK had equal population as the US the would have 5/100,000 murder rate while the USA has 4.7/100,000.
Without rounding it would be 4.9/100,000 to the USA's 4.7/100,000
http://www.cityam.com/1414945475/hong-kong-murders-city-still-one-safest-places-earth
QuotePlanned Parenthood is NOTHING like the NRA.You're right about this. The NRA protects a particular provision of the Bill of Rights, while Planned Parenthood is the most violent organization in the world today, which aims (among other things) to destroy fundamental human rights for an entire class of human beings it considers Lebensunwertes Leben. They are comparable in influence (both due and undue) but incomparable in policy.
There's a valid historical discussion to be had (if one is inclined to have it) about the relationships between the Eugenics movement, Planned Parenthood, and the Nazi regime.
There's also a valid public policy discussion to be had (again, if one is so inclined) about whether or not Planned Parenthood should be the recipient of Federal tax dollars given that a) they do, as a point of fact, provide abortions; and b) there exist both legal and moral questions surrounding the concept of said Federal funds going to abortion providers.
As for the subject of discussion, I love the liberal point of view:
"Everybody has the right to live! Yes, even violent, murdering Muslim terrorists....
Except for babies. Fuck them."
[W]hen [women] start to diminish men will most likely find it viable to cross the x-y line in order to flock to cute-boys to settle down with, and marry whom don’t have the hypergamous instinct of biological females.
...cute-boys are more feminine than western females and always eager to please/available for sex to a partner. They are more of a woman than any western whore and at the same time if you pursue them now there is no trouble, and also no ridiculous laws on what rape is(Which is everything nowadays) protecting them.
their reasons were that *real* [cis-] girls are awful in every last way. “Real” girls menstruate, are selfish, stuck up, don’t care about their man, can… get… pregnant, don’t like sex, etc. And the guys — each of them — said they moved up to trans-girls (again, I am certain they used the slur) because trans-girls were more feminine, cared more about keeping their man happy, can’t get pregnant, L*O*V*E* sex, and they don’t bleed once a month.
Question for any human females reading this, why don't you appreciate the guy who wants to kill you?
Fact is they are more of women than you, some claim to be straight but can be seduced still. They don’t complain often, and if they do try to cause an issue out of nowhere the gynocentric court won’t take them seriously.
I just think that it is a shame that it is 2017 and they can't just say, you know what, I'd rather have sex with men than women. Happier times for everyone as long as the men they have sex with are each other.
I just think that it is a shame that it is 2017 and they can't just say, you know what, I'd rather have sex with men than women. Happier times for everyone as long as the men they have sex with are each other.
Lots of people are attracted to trans women qua women, though. They might be also.
(like if you're attracted to men, why would your default action be to go for people who look as feminine as possible? It's not for plausible deniability, they are still calling us 'boys'. They might be chasers but I think chasers are usually straight)
The US is the most moral nation of the western world. We are the only one's that fought a war to end slavery, the only ones that conquer land and then return it to the people rather then holding it as a vassal state, hell compare our revolution to the barbarism of the French for example. While the US makes mistakes, it has always led the way in terms of right and wrong and set an example for the world - a moral leader.
Americans are so fat because we have so much cuisine. There's Mexican, Chinese, Italian, Indian, etc. food all on the same block. It's impossible to get tired of the food.
Whereas people in China only have Chinese food, people in Mexico only Mexican, etc. If you ate Chinese food 3 days in a row, if someone offered you some Lo Mein on day 4 you might say "No thanks, I don't feel for Chinese food today." That's why they're all so skinny.
Different strokes for different folks. But most people would collapse in relief at the sight of a couple Raptors flying overhead donning the American flag under the cockpit. Unless you grew up in a country where we just bombed you.
Hope. In any country I have visited (that number is at 25 or so) none of them share the air of restless ambition that I've found in the US. That their impossible dream is valid and possible, that they alone shape the course of their country, their state, or their city if they so desire, that they acknowledge their position and ask "are we capable of more?". I know I have not looked hard enough, for I am sure those people exist elsewhere. Maybe I've found it less present simply because no other country has our resources; but, nonetheless, it is lacking, that sheer hope that tomorrow will be better than today if only we have the courage to chase it.
When other people ask me what I miss most about living in the USA I answer with all of the lesser ones above, the food, the TV, or the nature; but, I've never said: "I miss being in a country which knows it is capable of greater things: that we will cure cancer and advance the sciences, that we will pursue corruption and combat poverty, that we will be the world's police to those who wish it harm and the world's shelter to those who have been harmed because that is our duty, that we will go back to the Moon and then on to Mars, because our forefathers forged our greatness and our children compel us to utilize it.
All that being said, [children] performing sexual favors so that one does not starve is preferable to horribly starving to death. I don't know why they criticize you when they brought up that hypothetical.Libertarians? Will they ever stop being the set up AND the punchline to the worst kind of Aristocrats jokes?
The Reapers whole existence was a logical fallacy. Destroying all civilization in order to stop civilization destroying civilization.... yeah...
The Catalyst was an intelligence created by the Leviathans (old Bioware). The Leviathans intentions were good, to create a system to stop organics and synthetics destroying each other but because of this, the Catalyst came to the conclusion that the leviathans needed to die because they held all the power (white privilege).
The Catalyst created the Reapers (new Bioware) in the exact image of the Leviathans and then the Reapers Destroyed them. Though the Reapers were using the Leviathans core logic (Mass effect 1-3), they had twisted it and deviated from the original intention (3rd wave feminism) creating an Inferior Solution (ME:Andromeda)
The Reapers seek the ultimate "fairness", through destruction and Indoctrination (MSM/Buzzfeed) the Reapers aim is to destroy the most advanced civilizations (evil white males) and leave the primitive one's (minorities) alone, leveling the playing field to create a perceived equality of outcome (Socialism).
In the end, Shepard (everyone who's not an SJW) has to make a choice as to how to defeat the Reapers. Control (reasoning by demonstrating new ideas), Destroy (Dismissal and mockery), or synthesis (Globalisation, giving up individuality).
looking back at ME3 we kind of just shrugged it off as Bioware botching the ending with poor writing. Fast Forward 5 years and ME3's ending is the parallel story of Bioware's demise and an ironic social commentary of the illogical reasoning from the regressive left. Was Casey Hudson a Genius or is this just a strangely prophetic accident?
.... I mean the Reapers literally live in a safe space........
TLDR : Andromeda is the product of a failed change in ideology. SJW's just make everything worse. Reapers = Anita Sarkesian, Cerberus are a bunch of cucks.
Has anyone else noticed that the chemtrails are intensifying since Trump took office, at first they completely stopped when Trump took office and at some point now there's day and night spraying all day every day.
Same thing with fucking busses; I, as well as a bunch of other people, got fucked over hard by Greyhound a few years back because keeping track of how many seats a schedule has at a given stop time is hard, somehow.
https://twitter.com/RealDanHensley/status/851537523667070976
A guy not only defending United, but saying the people who recorded footage of the event were the ones in the wrong, not the police who beat a man bloody for refusing to leave the plane "voluntarily"
here is a challenge for all the non believers , somebody give me a picture of the earth that is not CGI
just one
Science is the acquisition of knowledge capable of being reproduced.
You can’t reproduce Big Bang. It’s not science.
With flat earth, there are multiple lines of evidence that point in the same direction.
Many globe claims have been power of suggestion, reliance on authority, and black box frauds. As a thesis, flat earth is stronger in 2017 than 2007. …
Newton’s Third Law prohibits acceleration in space. You need a medium to move: floor, water, atmosphere. Space is not a medium. This would explain why NASA had to lie and fake a moon mission.
If Jews and masons tell me I’m on a spinning ball moving through the universe at near lightspeed, I believe them because they are experts and my eyes are lying to me.
I find it kinda shocking that so many people think we did. “The jews faked 6 million dead kikes with fake shower rooms, but faking the moon landing is impossible because of reasons.”
Globe theory hatched from the Jews.
Do your research.
Jews, Jesuits and freemasons pushed the globe fantasy.
What are all the thousands of photos of stars, galaxies and planets and why would they go to such extreme lengths to create such a dumb conspiracy? And why would they invent all of these apparently totally fictional satellites and go into great detail about their workings, specifications, and spend time making these elaborate and unnecessary ‘props’ in lab environments? Again, utterly stupid idea.
I can buy holocaust revisionism because that’s a conceivable lie. It’s about distorting the facts of something which already happened. … t’s very easy with a little examination to disprove the holohoax.
Maybe I am weird but I HATE FLATEARTH MORE THAN CHILD RAPING PAVEMENT APES. Why in the hell is Anglin posting this crap? This is disgusting beyond words. … Is this humor? It doesn’t seem to have any entertainment value. Is the entire goal of this video just to irritate me personally?
https://twitter.com/RealDanHensley/status/851537523667070976 (https://twitter.com/RealDanHensley/status/851537523667070976)
A guy not only defending United, but saying the people who recorded footage of the event were the ones in the wrong, not the police who beat a man bloody for refusing to leave the plane "voluntarily"
Yeah this guy is an idiot.
Ironbite-as is anyone "reporting" this.
Harry Potter was perhaps the first major shitlib touchstone to vault willing cuckoldry into the wider culture as some kind of moral imperative; it was beta orbiter Snape, a man with the worst case of oneitis imaginable because he was in love with a dead woman who when alive wanted nothing to do with him, who vowed to look after Harry, (the child of his oneitis by another man Snape hated), out of a misplaced sense of loyalty and maybe hope for an afterlife consummation.
Literally “alpha fux and beta bux” from beyond the grave. What independent, empowered modern woman wouldn’t love that?
99% of people do not study epistemology and have no intellectual standards, so they do not know how to digest claims.
Science is the acquisition of knowledge capable of being reproduced.
You can't reproduce Big Bang. It's not science.
With flat earth, there are multiple lines of evidence that point in the same direction.
Many globe claims have been power of suggestion, reliance on authority, and black box frauds. As a thesis, flat earth is stronger in 2017 than 2007.
You can't land on a lightning bolt. You can't land on the "sun" or "stars" or "planets," if they are electromagnetic plasma formations. We don't normally deal with plasma, or understand its properties, or understand the connection between plasma and consciousness, in terms of the concept, field.
Newton's Third Law prohibits acceleration in space. You need a medium to move: floor, water, atmosphere. Space is not a medium. This would explain why NASA had to lie and fake a moon mission.
I had not heard about flat-earth-Nazis, but I know a script writer who might be looking for ideas for a third Iron Sky film...
EDIT: You left out the best bit:Quote99% of people do not study epistemology and have no intellectual standards, so they do not know how to digest claims.
Science is the acquisition of knowledge capable of being reproduced.
You can't reproduce Big Bang. It's not science.
With flat earth, there are multiple lines of evidence that point in the same direction.
Many globe claims have been power of suggestion, reliance on authority, and black box frauds. As a thesis, flat earth is stronger in 2017 than 2007.
You can't land on a lightning bolt. You can't land on the "sun" or "stars" or "planets," if they are electromagnetic plasma formations. We don't normally deal with plasma, or understand its properties, or understand the connection between plasma and consciousness, in terms of the concept, field.
Newton's Third Law prohibits acceleration in space. You need a medium to move: floor, water, atmosphere. Space is not a medium. This would explain why NASA had to lie and fake a moon mission.
Yeah, this is where U.S. school choice programs are headed, and I do like the idea of creating competition in the primary education market... but I am keenly aware of how government funding tends to make institutions dependent on government. Just look at the private non-profit college market (particularly the religious institutions) here. They got hooked on publicly-backed student loans, and are finding themselves increasingly vulnerable to actual or proposed federal mandates that would require them to violate their mission (e.g. all-women's colleges having to admit individuals who were born with male anatomy). Or, hey, look at what's going on in Alberta, where Catholic schools are under increasing pressure from the government to repudiate Catholicism in order to stay open/funded.
My ancestors fought to take this land from the Indians, then say whatever the hell they wanted to the Crown (in that case to stick it), fought to form our own nation, and then later to tell the Union to stick it. They then later fought in other wars because they were told to because do-good assholes wanted to get us involved in Europe.
None of them fought for these bullshit progressive causes you're talking about. You're a liar to say so.
What did your ancestors fight for? Did they fight in the Revolution? Do they know what the rights of Englishmen are or for whom this country was founded?
Yeah, because destroying their most holy relic wouldn't just absolutely piss all of them off, and the murder of tens of thousands of civilians wouldn't piss everybody else in the world at us.
...Could you give that email to some media (or Democrat party) so that they can call them on their bullshit?
Sure, where could I send it, though?
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447365/jimmy-kimmel-baby-son-health-care-empathy (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447365/jimmy-kimmel-baby-son-health-care-empathy).
I'm DONE. Fuck. This.
The headline is "The Dangers of Empathy"
The DANGERS of EMPATHY. What the FUCK.
Direct quote. "Adolf Hitler was a master of empathy — for ethnic Germans in the Sudetenland, Austria, and elsewhere. The cause of nationalist empathy for the German tribe triggered profound moral blindness for the plight, and even the humanity, of Jews, Gypsies, and Slavs."
1. Very little of value has been written in Spanish. On the typical occidental Great Books reading list, only one piece of literature, Don Quixote, makes the cut. Minor languages, like Icelandic or Gaelic, have produced more enduring works of literature.
http://foreignlanguagestudyoptions.blogspot.fi/2011/04/why-not-to-study-spanish.html?m=1
Let's see, we have claims that anyone speaking Spanish is stupid. Like literally claims that nations where people speak Spanish people have lower IQs. And that special type of racism where everyone should stick to their own group and avoid any kinds of mixing.
Oddly enough he says that people with ancestors who spoke Spanish SHOULD learn Spanish because ancestry trumps everything else. So at least he is a consistent kind of racist.
Can't be bothered to point out all his mistakes because there's just so many. Like right from the start:Quote1. Very little of value has been written in Spanish. On the typical occidental Great Books reading list, only one piece of literature, Don Quixote, makes the cut. Minor languages, like Icelandic or Gaelic, have produced more enduring works of literature.
I am going to guess that he hasn't even tried to read important Spanish scientific or literary works.
http://foreignlanguagestudyoptions.blogspot.fi/2011/04/why-not-to-study-spanish.html?m=1
Let's see, we have claims that anyone speaking Spanish is stupid. Like literally claims that nations where people speak Spanish people have lower IQs. And that special type of racism where everyone should stick to their own group and avoid any kinds of mixing.
Oddly enough he says that people with ancestors who spoke Spanish SHOULD learn Spanish because ancestry trumps everything else. So at least he is a consistent kind of racist.
Can't be bothered to point out all his mistakes because there's just so many. Like right from the start:Quote1. Very little of value has been written in Spanish. On the typical occidental Great Books reading list, only one piece of literature, Don Quixote, makes the cut. Minor languages, like Icelandic or Gaelic, have produced more enduring works of literature.
I am going to guess that he hasn't even tried to read important Spanish scientific or literary works.
https://www.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/6auaey/anne_frank_memorial_in_idaho_vandalized/
Scroll to the bottom hidden comment. Proof that vegans are the worst
Speaking of age differences... Anyone notice the Macron memes? Huge deal made out of him being married to a wife who is 20 years older. Lots of men in politics have wives who are (at least) 20 years younger then their husband but that does not cause outrage.
Speaking of age differences... Anyone notice the Macron memes? Huge deal made out of him being married to a wife who is 20 years older. Lots of men in politics have wives who are (at least) 20 years younger then their husband but that does not cause outrage.
They also got involved when he was a) a teenager and b) her student.
Don't forget that he was making advances on her when she was married.
a) The official story is that they did NOT get involved when they had a student-teacher relationship. Not for his lack of trying, but she turned down his advances. Then years later he came to see her again and they hooked up.
He backs up and grabs his phone and calls 911. I get transferred to now Phoenix Police because I'm about 1/2 mile over the city jurisdiction. I then start to talk to the dispatch on the phone, when the man rushes me and grabs my Jersey (I still have it with his blood), he tried to 'hockey fight' me... (backstory, I'm was raised by an M.P. and a Firefighter, I can play any sport but tennis...) so of course it didn't work.
I want to remind you all my mom is standing right there... she yells "ASSAULT"...
I went boxing mode. I punched him 2x in the face. (Boxer fracture right hand).
He bleed over me. I knew he was not going to stop after he tried to stick in thumb in my left eye (I'm left eye dominate), and grab my testicles.
I was just reading about a guy on Prison Planet celebrating Trump pulling out of the Paris agreement by turning up the heat in his home to full blast all day in the middle of summer because it would "piss of libtards".It'll certainly piss of the genuine "libtards" who don't know how the power grid works, and I, as an environmentalist myself, am perfectly okay with that.
STILL CREEPY EVERY TIME I SEE IT!
Ironbite-you can smell the fedora.
Are you fucking seriously say that anything this 2 moron said is true? Because if you do you are not only an extremely stupid person "no quote here" or you have VERY BIG ISSUES with self confidence.
Either way you are fucking stupid if you think that ANYTHING these clowns are said are true.
Especially mr. love and lovemaking master here which is LMAO must be really true just look at the guy and just listen to him for a few seconds.
Everything he says about his personal life is a complete fucking lie. This loser is either virgin or only had 1 MAXIMUM 2 relationship and he was such a pussy with these micro bullshit that they were rather cheating on him which I HONESTLY can understand.
Show less
Wow, you're a ragey little reactionary aren't ya
If people are stupid like you, sure I'am. You could say that I'm ALLERGIC to the amount of bullshit you people can come up with and it's trying to listen to your fucking SJW-Feminist fucking bullshit.
And do you know what's even worse? You encourage people to be little oversensitive PUSSIES instead of teaching them TRUE values and teaching them that NOT everyone will like or tolerate their bullshit in life. That you teach them that they are special when they are not but if they happened to be a white male (I'm not white before you bringing that up) they should be ASHAMED of themselves.
Your kind of people CLOSED an Elementary Catholic School ONLY because they didn't want to teach FUCKING SECOND GRADERS how do the gay people make love and how many shitty made up mentally challenged genders exist when in fact there is ONLY 2.
IT get's FUCKING annoying to see how weak kids and even man are nowadays that if I hit them in their shoulder out of affection they are crying like little pussies instead of giving me back and have a good manly laugh.
It's fucking annoying that people now about more micro aggression and safe space than what the C.I.A did back in the 60's when they literally find how to successfully brainwash and Mind Control people.
FUN FACT they even come CLEAN about this fact and OFFICIALLY released the documents for ANYONE to read about it under MK ULTRA but people are rather read about what a degenerate ugly fat loser says about feminism and about how many rights and "privilege" a white man has.
All the while you don't even fucking recognize how wrong EVERYTHING you fucking idiots are bring up and teach to those poor kids who want to belong to somewhere and don't want to be alone all the time.
Only ONE good thing comes out from this whole bullshit and it is that when there is a PC t-shirt wearing moron who hits the gym everyday to be huge I can actually tell them that they are still overgrown little pussies and that the while system is build upon lies and special rights system. It really makes me laugh a lot at how concerned they are if they should start to fight with me or not because by your bullshit "system" I'm one of the WORST(least) privileged person. I could use those "special rights" but you know what? I'm not a pussy.
I want to work and prove the world that everything I have I got it myself and I didn't belong to the pussified generation.
Oh and yes I did have a luck a few time and I could actually piss some PC guys off in the gym that they actually did fight with me. Those few times were one if the best things I've ever experienced. To push those fucking losers so hard that they either couldn't get up or they had some kind bullshit CRYING about me breaking their ribs.
This is where we are in this fucking world. Even those who go the gyms are STILL FUCKING PUSSIES.They don't even know how to fight and how to protect themselves.
TL;DR
Your kind of people ruin everything including the little children. Last time they clsoed a fucking catholic school because according to one of those disgusting looking landwhales kids in the 2ND FUCKING GRADE should be aware how many degenerated mentally ill genders exist and even further that fucking whale were angry because they didn't teach them how to make love with those kind of people.
Other than that EVERY KID and EVEN THE MAN nowadays are a fucking joke. You fucking made them little oversensitive pussies.
But not only their personality. Even those retarded fucks PC people who go to the GYM are STILL a fucking joke. I told to that they are all oversensitive pussies a few months ago just to see if they would stand up against me.
First they didn't want to hurt me because I have an extremely small almost non existent privilege being a FUCKING GYPSY. I could cry and have a movement to have more right for Gypsy's who DOESN'T have currently any country or rights and is hated all around the words and have no country to live in.
But when they finally decided to fight me a little bit from the GYM I could fucking believe what I've seen even now that I was still very weak and was still far away from being healthy.
Even that was I punched one of them who passed out. I punched the other one who had a broken rib. The other one was so scared that I just couldn't bother with him and just punched in the stomach.
And while it made me feel AMAZING to beats those little fuckholes up I also felt ashamed of how extremely weak they were. It was unbelievable.
And that is ALL your fault!!! You the brain damaged zombie like oversensitive pussies who ruin the children and EVERYTHING ELSE too!!!!!
Oh and yes I did have a luck a few time and I could actually piss some PC guys off in the gym that they actually did fight with me. Those few times were one if the best things I've ever experienced. To push those fucking losers so hard that they either couldn't get up or they had some kind bullshit CRYING about me breaking their ribs.
The greatest damage has already been done, and that is the shattering of beloved myths and comforting relationships by the proxy of television and nostalgia. Bill Cosby is Cliff Huxtable, regardless of what the critics say. … It is ridiculous to argue that a man who was capable of creating the character that fathered a generation did not, at some deep level, possess those nurturing characteristics.
And yes, he is an adulterer who admitted to giving women drugs for sex. He has confessed in a secular confessional to betraying the trust of his wife, and perhaps of the women who considered him a mentor before he moved them to another spot on the sliding scale of human interaction. But I am allowed to refuse to believe that it includes rape.
Not that I am, but what's wrong with being nationalist? You realize white nationalist=/= white supremacist.
What do you have against individual cultures? If you force every culture mix you have no culture left. I believe every nation should have their own culture, I don't believe in a global culture because that's the idea of a racist democrat.
The world is a beautiful rainbow of cultures, beliefs, and people. What you want is to mix all those into some big pile of nothing, where everyone loses their culture and what makes them unique.
Miss Helsinki 2017...evidence Whites R being replaced...#whitegenocide #whitelivesmatter#pegida #diversity #ukip #waronwhites#antiwhite
If #WhiteGenocide isn't real then why is #Obama referred to as black and not mixed race?
The globalists are using cats to depopulate whites. Because cats act as surrogate babies they cause white women to not want to have kids. Cats are like a parasite that sucks the maternal instinct from white women.
The problem with these polls is the questions are one-sided.
Do you like X? (Y/N) or some variant thereof.
There's never any consideration of the cost of X, or the impact of X on the person being asked the question. Since presumably the person being polled would consider those things to some degree (accuracy of assumptions notwithstanding), not working that facet into the question makes it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions.
Here's a better way to do it: Give income ranges equal to the five quintiles and get that demographic information. Then, ask everyone: what percentage of your income would you be willing to pay in taxes to ensure that X is funded.
Poll that type of question across all of the major budget drivers and you could actually get an idea of what people of all income levels are willing to pay for their government and what type of revenues would be popularly available.
Not that this type of question should DRIVE the budgeting process, but it would definitely be a good way to INFORM the budgeting process.
What in the world was he thinking? Like what the fuck man?
I, too, tend to think that one person's beliefs should not be shoved down another person's throat, especially on pain of the government threatening to step in and assign massive fines if you refuse to swallow. That's why I support Masterpiece Cakeshop.
QuoteI, too, tend to think that one person's beliefs should not be shoved down another person's throat, especially on pain of the government threatening to step in and assign massive fines if you refuse to swallow. That's why I support Masterpiece Cakeshop.
In reference to Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado.
Same-sex marriage is not a belief; it's secular law.
QuoteI, too, tend to think that one person's beliefs should not be shoved down another person's throat, especially on pain of the government threatening to step in and assign massive fines if you refuse to swallow. That's why I support Masterpiece Cakeshop.
In reference to Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado.
Same-sex marriage is not a belief; it's secular law.
For firm heterosexuals, their choice of wording is quite... awkward.
I find this very confusing because like. Sex work is a thing. If you want sex as opposed to emotional intimacy this is a mostly solved problem.
I find this very confusing because like. Sex work is a thing. If you want sex as opposed to emotional intimacy this is a mostly solved problem.
I find this very confusing because like. Sex work is a thing. If you want sex as opposed to emotional intimacy this is a mostly solved problem.
Keep in mind that in the US prostitution is banned in most places (except Nevada, and there it's only legal in less populous counties, and you can't do sex work there if you've done it elsewhere).
Up here, selling sex is legal, but buying it is illegal.
So you're running a definite risk by going to a sex worker, depending on what part of the world you're in.
Although if the Supreme Court finds in favour of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado, I can't wait for people to claim it's their sincere religious belief that they have to have sex with prostitutes whenever possible.
2) No laziness. Know what the subreddit is about and don't define incel as merely a lack of sex that can be fixed by going to a prostitute.
I find this very confusing because like. Sex work is a thing. If you want sex as opposed to emotional intimacy this is a mostly solved problem.Sex isn't really what they want so much as the status of having sex with the "right" people.
Yes, but if there is no corpsefuckery, how can the Incels join Ramsay Bolton's Twenty Good Men?Look man, I don't know what shagging corpses while starving yourself in a publicized protest to shag the living achieves exactly.
You know the moment a group starts using "virtue signaling" unironically is the moment a group loses all credibility.
The concept is based on the belief that people can't really be nice and are merely pretending. To me it just seems like projecting...
As far as scientific opinion, this is another case where the similarity to climate warming theory comes in play.
The liberal side stifles and suppresses any research that contradicts their viewpoints and refuses to provide the raw data and their testing methodology then expects everyone else to accept it as scientific law. This kind of behavior is why many independents and right wing folks have plenty of justifiable ridicule of liberal scientific theories.
That and it doesn't help when your most visible proponents flew into town in a private jet to lecture on why everyone should live frugually
Makin the damn fish gay!
I blame dolphins. Those damn giggling bastards are smiling all the time. They must be scheming something.
Ah... Game of Thrones fan, then...I blame dolphins. Those damn giggling bastards are smiling all the time. They must be scheming something.
They are, it just usually involves spree killing and/or rape.
Makin the damn fish gay!
“I have been on estrogen for about 6 months now. It all started when I got my new therapist three months before that. Who referred me to a new general practitioner he knows. Obviously I told him nothing about being incel or hating females. Only that I always felt like a girl, which was a massive lie. I just wanted to get hormones to attempt a gender transition and hopefully become attracted to dudes like the other trans on reddit. Who so ironically betray themselves and their cause by casually posting truth.”
I'm pretty sure that's not how that works.
anecdotally, HRT can have an effect on sexual orientation but it's not reliable and it's not major so probably not a good way to hack attraction to men (this is generally true of every other way to hack sexual orientation; does not work reliably, best case scenario might move you one point in the Kinsey scale)
anyway I don't really think this is real but transitioning if you're not dysphoric is a bad idea please don't do it. If it is real I'm hoping she's just in denial about dysphoria and chooses this narrative to deal with it. Certainly better than the alternative.
This sub is actually adorable. I don't know if you guys read any of the posts men post or even if men post here at all and I'm breaking rules or something... but whatever.
Really cool to see lots of women encouraging each other and sharing their stories. Actually brings a huge grin to my face reading these. It's so interesting to get a female perspective. I am fairly young, and I think I do pretty creative stuff for dates, but it's curious to see a post titled "I just had the best sex of my life", and then 90% of the post be about how the date was amazing and they watched Moulin Rouge after cruising on a parkway, going to a botanical garden or something, maybe some stargazing after dinner the guy cooked for the girl or they cooked together...
I dunno it's just refreshing to see those romantics out there. Makes me have some more faith in humanity and introduces another different view of sex than I normally have. Women are just fascinating creatures I will never understand.
EDIT: Jesus Christ the over-sensitivity killed it for me. Just take it with a fucking grain of salt. I'm not going for a "lol look at the zoo animals things" tone... Holy shit...
Wait. You are females... What is the problem with that word? Why can't older women be adorable? Why is adorable condescending? What the hell! I came here to say that I am grateful for the new perspective and you all seem to think I'm patronizing you... something something red tents something something everything I say is wrong.... <---THAT'S condescending, not what I said above.
You seem like one of those militant feminist types of people that are looking to start fights. "Dealing" with being the wildly better looking sex from an artistic standpoint and thinking that being called "beautiful" or "adorable" and "hard working" or "successful" or "fierce and accomplished" or "smart" are mutually exclusive is a fucking joke.
Of course I am going to be frustrated when people take something I am saying with pure intent to be something that makes me feel like I've maligned them. You seem to think I lack empathy without knowing anything about me, when you seem to lack empathy about my situation, which was to post something I thought would brighten someones day or make people feel appreciated and was met with general distaste!
Imagine my shock when I logged in and saw that 3 people had upvoted it with a 100% upvoted rate, and then suddenly I have a bunch of angry women banging down my door lol.
I didn't want to post something that turns into an argument, but I really am offended you would go out of your way to start a fight. I can't just let that go unanswered. Absolutely preposterous. I'm sorry that you reacted so unfavorably to this, and I'm sorry you were offended by my post. Hopefully not everyone sees it through whatever tint of glass you're looking.
Also sorry if this is formatted terribly. Im posting on my phone!
I don't even understand this discussion. Nazis are bad, and murdered millions. These guys in Charlottesville were carrying swastikas, came with weapons, that's not free speech, that's hate. It's disgraceful. Who the fuck brings weapons to a peaceful protest?
If you believe they had the right to protest about white equality by espousing hatred, bigotry, and violence, then you need to take a long look in the mirror, because that makes you a bigot and a racist.
QuoteI don't even understand this discussion. Nazis are bad, and murdered millions. These guys in Charlottesville were carrying swastikas, came with weapons, that's not free speech, that's hate. It's disgraceful. Who the fuck brings weapons to a peaceful protest?
If you believe they had the right to protest about white equality by espousing hatred, bigotry, and violence, then you need to take a long look in the mirror, because that makes you a bigot and a racist.
I don't like what you're saying, so stop saying it!
QuoteI don't even understand this discussion. Nazis are bad, and murdered millions. These guys in Charlottesville were carrying swastikas, came with weapons, that's not free speech, that's hate. It's disgraceful. Who the fuck brings weapons to a peaceful protest?
If you believe they had the right to protest about white equality by espousing hatred, bigotry, and violence, then you need to take a long look in the mirror, because that makes you a bigot and a racist.
I don't like what you're saying, so stop saying it!
Research show prejudice, not free-speech principles, often underpin free-speech defense for racists. (https://news.ku.edu/2017/05/01/research-shows-prejudice-not-principle-often-underpins-free-speech-defense-racist)
Many free countries have hate speech laws and many authoritarian nations openly allow hate speech against politically convenient minorities. I think America is over-due for constitutional interpretations removing free speech protections for hate speech. It has no place in civilized societies.
QuoteI don't even understand this discussion. Nazis are bad, and murdered millions. These guys in Charlottesville were carrying swastikas, came with weapons, that's not free speech, that's hate. It's disgraceful. Who the fuck brings weapons to a peaceful protest?
If you believe they had the right to protest about white equality by espousing hatred, bigotry, and violence, then you need to take a long look in the mirror, because that makes you a bigot and a racist.
I don't like what you're saying, so stop saying it!
Research show prejudice, not free-speech principles, often underpin free-speech defense for racists. (https://news.ku.edu/2017/05/01/research-shows-prejudice-not-principle-often-underpins-free-speech-defense-racist)
Many free countries have hate speech laws and many authoritarian nations openly allow hate speech against politically convenient minorities. I think America is over-due for constitutional interpretations removing free speech protections for hate speech. It has no place in civilized societies.
And then what I'm worried about is who gets to define what "hate speech" is, because if that sort of thing were put in place now, it'd be uber-racist Jeff Sessions and a Supreme Court that could well have a majority of mini-Scalias in the next few years.
EDIT: And of course all the lower federal courts that Trump is putting people on.
...A spree killer who said his motivation was that he didn't get sex and was envious of men who got sex. Also it is somehow the fault of the women.
And based on the picture he wasn't even unattractive looking (well, that's just my opinion though) so I am gonna make a wild fucking guess that his personality was the biggest problem he had.
Goddamn "niceguys" blaming others for their own problems. I admit that sex and intimacy are important for most people but a) There are ways to improve yourself to make yourself more attractive to others. b) Prostitution is always an option.
And for the record: Murderer-fandom is really fucking creepy.
"White Privilege" is a fake word.
It looks like Elliot Rodgers to be.It is indeed Rodgers and was found on r/Incels.
Of course, you're right that, if Democrats would stop advocating abortion rights, it would be a great deal easier to vote for them. As it stands, the average centrist Catholic voter (who is both pro-life and supports Democratic anti-poverty programs) has to weigh the body count from Republican budget cuts against the body count of Democratic abortion policy. And any honest arithmetic drives them into the Republican column as a result.
QuoteOf course, you're right that, if Democrats would stop advocating abortion rights, it would be a great deal easier to vote for them. As it stands, the average centrist Catholic voter (who is both pro-life and supports Democratic anti-poverty programs) has to weigh the body count from Republican budget cuts against the body count of Democratic abortion policy. And any honest arithmetic drives them into the Republican column as a result.
FETUSES AREN'T PEOPLE YOU FUCKING MORON!
QuoteOf course, you're right that, if Democrats would stop advocating abortion rights, it would be a great deal easier to vote for them. As it stands, the average centrist Catholic voter (who is both pro-life and supports Democratic anti-poverty programs) has to weigh the body count from Republican budget cuts against the body count of Democratic abortion policy. And any honest arithmetic drives them into the Republican column as a result.
FETUSES AREN'T PEOPLE YOU FUCKING MORON!
If you're pro-life, they are.
QuoteOf course, you're right that, if Democrats would stop advocating abortion rights, it would be a great deal easier to vote for them. As it stands, the average centrist Catholic voter (who is both pro-life and supports Democratic anti-poverty programs) has to weigh the body count from Republican budget cuts against the body count of Democratic abortion policy. And any honest arithmetic drives them into the Republican column as a result.
FETUSES AREN'T PEOPLE YOU FUCKING MORON!
If you're pro-life, they are.
Then God is the world's greatest abortion doctor, and his already substantial murder count from what's been documented in the Bible keeps going up daily.
QuoteOf course, you're right that, if Democrats would stop advocating abortion rights, it would be a great deal easier to vote for them. As it stands, the average centrist Catholic voter (who is both pro-life and supports Democratic anti-poverty programs) has to weigh the body count from Republican budget cuts against the body count of Democratic abortion policy. And any honest arithmetic drives them into the Republican column as a result.
FETUSES AREN'T PEOPLE YOU FUCKING MORON!
If you're pro-life, they are.
Then God is the world's greatest abortion doctor, and his already substantial murder count from what's been documented in the Bible keeps going up daily.
Man, I'm not pro-life. But it's not like their position is hard to understand. If you believe that human life begins at conception, an opposition to abortion naturally follows.
Smart pro-lifers, like one of my friends in Arkansas, pair that with support for more awareness of and in some cases financial support for birth control, so that abortions aren't necessary in the first place. But it's not like their position is any more arbitrary than your own decision on when human life begins.
Oh c'mon man, "pro life" just means "women not being forced to be barefoot and pregnant from 14 to 40 makes them uncomfortable".
Life's got nothing to do with it, look at their support for the death penalty and every military campaign to bomb the crap out of somewhere foreign ever!
You can actually be pro-life because you've thought it through and decided that that's what makes sense. Just because I don't get it doesn't mean it's dumb, and not every pro-lifer is a clone of Adam4d.
Sure... but unless it's coupled with policies that reduce the demand for the procedure you're trying to ban, I'll still think you're a misogynistic idiot looking for some sort of justification for your deeper prejudice.
(https://i.imgur.com/fQfS96n.jpg)
I enjoyed the gratuitous racism at the end. It really cemented the whole "I'm completely unlikable" thing he seemed to be aiming towards.
The definition of oppression is not “failure to see your disgusting opinions about the relative human value of other living breathing people reflected in society at large.” Being shamed, including in public, for holding intolerant, bigoted opinions is not an infringement of your free speech. You are not fighting oppression. You are, at best, fighting criticism. If that’s the hill you really want to die on, fine, but don’t kid yourself it’s the moral high ground. I repeat: You cannot be a rebel for the status quo. It would be physically easier to go and fuck yourself, and I suggest you try. (https://thebaffler.com/war-of-nerves/you-are-not-a-rebel)
Crap, old man moment.The definition of oppression is not “failure to see your disgusting opinions about the relative human value of other living breathing people reflected in society at large.” Being shamed, including in public, for holding intolerant, bigoted opinions is not an infringement of your free speech. You are not fighting oppression. You are, at best, fighting criticism. If that’s the hill you really want to die on, fine, but don’t kid yourself it’s the moral high ground. I repeat: You cannot be a rebel for the status quo. It would be physically easier to go and fuck yourself, and I suggest you try. (https://thebaffler.com/war-of-nerves/you-are-not-a-rebel)[/s]
Tol, I think you have posted this in the wrong thread.
People keep talking about how the Russians are infringing on our democracy and are trying to influence the will of the people, but all I see are Jews.
Jewish media, Jewish lawyers, Jewish politicians, Jewish special interest groups...
I know this is a touchy subject.
I have to say, I did not start life thinking like this, and I actually don't consider myself an antisemite. As a matter of fact, my viewpoints about the state of Israel/Palestine can be considered quite conservative (though I have grown ambivelent in some respects).
And yet, I just kept noticing all these strange "coincidences"...
If you break off the people for whom health insurance would be affordable and let the market work, and combine that with a government program designed to cover the otherwise-uninsurable, you lower both direct premiums to the individual AND total overall cost of insurance.
The government program would obviously need to be paid for by tax dollars, which would come from income taxes, and not be directly tied to an individual's ability to pay for their care.
There's a lot of devil in the details of such a concept, but please explain why you think such a concept wouldn't work from a total AND per capita direct cost perspective.
Because the free market is bullshit and buying what is essentially your life is terminally moronic.
this is what they want to turn gaming into some gay multicultural jerk off session not on my watch #GamerGate
I can beat any minority, homosexual, or woman at any video game. This is what makes me the leader of #GamerGate
I didn't ask for these women and gays in gaming #GamerGate
Well, apparently several Gamergaters turned up to defend him even if he is a poe. Also they are ganging up on the actor and trying to make him believe that they support diversity and are inclusive ("unless it is forced or politicized" which means in practical terms that they always oppose it.)
From Twitter user "heterogamingvet"Quotethis is what they want to turn gaming into some gay multicultural jerk off session not on my watch #GamerGate
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJ7wsR9UIAAWrhd.jpg:large)
This was shared by a actor that I follow on FB with the comment "What's it like being an incredible scumbag?"
Personally, I'm just impressed that it's been three years and Gamergate is still apparently a thing. At least they seem to have dropped the pretence that it has anything to do with journalism and the ethics involved therein.You're surprised that angry, annoying stalky types on the internet is a thing?
Your Refusal To Date Conservatives Is One Reason We Have Donald Trump (http://thefederalist.com/2017/09/19/refusal-date-conservatives-one-reason-donald-trump/)
Assortative mating serves to intensify this polarization. It amplifies an already significant ingroup-outgroup mentality around contentious social issues. Social and cultural issues create severe disagreement because they trigger the emotional part of the brain: the disagreement challenges a core part of group identity. This is exacytly the type of schism that an arrogant demagogue like Trump exploits.
If a progressive doesn’t want to date a conservative and vice versa, that’s perfectly fine. Everyone has deal-breakers. But as a political protest, this form of virtue-signaling is counterproductive in the long run.
Tol, that was the article I linked just before your comment.Apologies, jumping the gun there.
The writer does have a point in that Hefner held and promoted a very unhealthy image of women and treated the playboy bunnies like shit. She ignorantly condemns all porn - specially kinkier one - but it doesn't mean she hasn't got a point otherwise. Porn industry has its problems and the example Hefner gave of treating the women who were looking to work in the industry (and women in general) did not help at all.
Which makes him a mixed bag. When someone like him dies there is nothing wrong in pointing out in the middle of all the glorification that they had their dark sides, too, and ignoring them is unfair for the people that he harmed.
On the other hand, in most civilized Western societies, disparaging the recently dead is seen as a pretty huge breach of etiquette. And given that he died, uh... yesterday, I'd say that's pretty recent.This part of etiquette needs shaking up a bit. If you are an influential person your whole resume should be up to discussion. With our tendency to glorify the recently dead instead of an honest evaluation I have no problem with people putting out dissenting opinions.
Which makes him a mixed bag. When someone like him dies there is nothing wrong in pointing out in the middle of all the glorification that they had their dark sides, too, and ignoring them is unfair for the people that he harmed.
There's discussing controversies about the deceased in an obituary, and then there's this. Hefner wasn't a terrorist, or a dictator, or a serial killer. I won't deny that he had his dark sides, but did he really deserve this?
Hypothetically, if Bill Clinton died tomorrow, how would you feel if - for example - Breitbart claimed that he shouldn't be mourned because of his sexual misconduct allegations?
Besides, the article was written by Julie Bindel, an openly misandristic political lesbian (http://www.radfemcollective.org/news/2015/9/7/an-interview-with-julie-bindel). I'm not exactly going to assume she had good intentions when she wrote this.
This part of etiquette needs shaking up a bit. If you are an influential person your whole resume should be up to discussion. With our tendency to glorify the recently dead instead of an honest evaluation I have no problem with people putting out dissenting opinions.
Anyway, in my view, when you're dead, your history is every bit as much a mix of its positive and negative parts as it was when you were alive. Ignoring one part or the other is being dishonest.
I, on the other hand, believe that there should at least be a grace period of a certain amount of time. Not for any religious reasons, but out of respect for grieving family and close friends. Imagine you're Hugh Hefner's nephew or something and you're sad as fuck that your uncle died, and you turn to Twitter to see "Anyone who calls themselves a feminist isn't going to mourn this evil man"? You're not gonna be happy about it.And how are you going to feel if you are someone who has awful memories from her time as a playboy bunny being subjected to shitty treatment by Hefner and nobody acknowledges this? Everyone just glorifies the person who treated you like a decorative item instead of a human being? When a person was influential it's not only their family whose feelings are influenced by the media coverage.
It's not about trying to change history or ignore bad things that people have done. It's about respect for the grieving.
- The poster is using the influx of interest in the now-dead celebrity to get a bigger audience (clickbaiting)
- The poster is deliberately averting "respect for the dead" in order to be subversive (edgelording)
- The poster prefers to criticize people who cannot defend themselves (defaming)
- The poster wants to upset the grieving (trolling)
And how are you going to feel if you are someone who has awful memories from her time as a playboy bunny being subjected to shitty treatment by Hefner and nobody acknowledges this? Everyone just glorifies the person who treated you like a decorative item instead of a human being? When a person was influential it's not only their family whose feelings are influenced by the media coverage.
I, on the other hand, believe that there should at least be a grace period of a certain amount of time. Not for any religious reasons, but out of respect for grieving family and close friends. Imagine you're Hugh Hefner's nephew or something and you're sad as fuck that your uncle died, and you turn to Twitter to see "Anyone who calls themselves a feminist isn't going to mourn this evil man"? You're not gonna be happy about it.And how are you going to feel if you are someone who has awful memories from her time as a playboy bunny being subjected to shitty treatment by Hefner and nobody acknowledges this? Everyone just glorifies the person who treated you like a decorative item instead of a human being? When a person was influential it's not only their family whose feelings are influenced by the media coverage.
It's not about trying to change history or ignore bad things that people have done. It's about respect for the grieving.
- The poster is using the influx of interest in the now-dead celebrity to get a bigger audience (clickbaiting)
- The poster is deliberately averting "respect for the dead" in order to be subversive (edgelording)
- The poster prefers to criticize people who cannot defend themselves (defaming)
- The poster wants to upset the grieving (trolling)
- The poster sees that the celebrity suddenly gets a lot of attention in the media since they just died and thinks this coverage is one sided and doesn't give the whole picture.
The article doesn't exist in an informational void and isn't a scholarly paper. It's fair to assume that the reader has heard the other side several times already so it's unnecessary to repeat what others keep shouting from the rooftops when the whole point is to give an opposing viewpoint.I, on the other hand, believe that there should at least be a grace period of a certain amount of time. Not for any religious reasons, but out of respect for grieving family and close friends. Imagine you're Hugh Hefner's nephew or something and you're sad as fuck that your uncle died, and you turn to Twitter to see "Anyone who calls themselves a feminist isn't going to mourn this evil man"? You're not gonna be happy about it.And how are you going to feel if you are someone who has awful memories from her time as a playboy bunny being subjected to shitty treatment by Hefner and nobody acknowledges this? Everyone just glorifies the person who treated you like a decorative item instead of a human being? When a person was influential it's not only their family whose feelings are influenced by the media coverage.
It's not about trying to change history or ignore bad things that people have done. It's about respect for the grieving.
It's not either/or. You can acknowledge that while still not running a hatchet job against him.
- The poster is using the influx of interest in the now-dead celebrity to get a bigger audience (clickbaiting)
- The poster is deliberately averting "respect for the dead" in order to be subversive (edgelording)
- The poster prefers to criticize people who cannot defend themselves (defaming)
- The poster wants to upset the grieving (trolling)
- The poster sees that the celebrity suddenly gets a lot of attention in the media since they just died and thinks this coverage is one sided and doesn't give the whole picture.
Even if that was their motivation, that still doesn't justify focusing entirely on the bad. I'm fine with a balanced perspective on the deceased, and giving the other side a chance to speak. But there's a difference between a balanced perspective and a hatchet job. What Ms. Bindel wrote was the latter.
Reasonable, intelligent, liberal (in the broadest sense of the term) people know that nationalism is bound for the scrapheap of history. Apparently, someone forgot to tell the Catalonians. Perhaps a little violent suppression will bring them to their senses.
(https://i.imgur.com/6JTon2C.png)
"Mr. Rogers is on that communist propaganda machine of PBS so we got to find someway to connect him to the sinfully nature of the secular world!"
https://notalwaysright.com/an-electronic-alarm/97272/
Yes, it's NAR... but if that story's true... holy shit. I thought zero-tolerance couldn't get any worse.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DHiCOriUwAATio6.png)So...you're asking all your fellow Nazis to behave nicely in public.
https://notalwaysright.com/an-electronic-alarm/97272/ (https://notalwaysright.com/an-electronic-alarm/97272/)
Yes, it's NAR... but if that story's true... holy shit. I thought zero-tolerance couldn't get any worse.
Schools honestly believe that no students have any rights whatsoever. So they treat them as criminals when they're in class. It's the way of the world honestly.
Ironbite-and it's stupid.
I wonder how the fuck anyone at Bethesda let Antifa's rallying cry get thrown in with their marketing lmao.
If they want to virtue signal and glorify modern McCarthyism-style witch hunting, then I'm fine just pirating the game instead of paying for it like I had planned to. I'll pop it right off my steam wishlist and "vote with my wallet".Note, punching cyborg-Nazis is now a McCarthy style witch hunt.
"I'm a bit conflicted on this"
I'm not; these idiots have mishandled a marketing campaign so badly that some people in the year 2017 are going to side with the Nazis in a fucking Wolfenstein game. You know how hard it is to fuck up that bad?
The good thing about the Left’s insistence on “you are either with us or a Nazi” is that they’re pushing people into the welcoming arms of the Right.
Probably why they associated the "Alt-Right" with white nationalists: to deny centrists a banner to rally under that would declare their dissociation with the Left as well as the traditional Right.
I don't think it's gone as planned.
I legitimately don't know how they screwed this up.
I was gonna get the game after having fun with the first one, but then the marketing guys doubled down on the whole contemporary politics thing.
I rather not give my money to a group that supports labeling people as Nazis and then condoning the assault of them.
The Soul: Back in the 5th century B.C., the philosopher Parmenides persuasively argued that, because it is impossible and absurd for something not to exist (because if it doesn't exist, it isn't something and can't be spoken of), all change and difference are impossible. He proved that, under the basically materialist physical theories of the world that dominated Greek science to that point, the observable universe could only exist as an utterly undifferentiated, eternal, motionless, and changeless infinity of matter. Since this flew in the face of all observable evidence (the world does, in fact, change!), the next several centuries were spent trying to dig physicalism out of the hole Parmenides had pushed it into. Some people tried saying, "Well, that's just silly, obviously change exists and motion happens," so Parmenides' follower Zeno came up with his famous motion paradoxes in order to say, "No, YOU'RE silly. Obviously change and motion are impossible and absurd, and your contrary observations -- not to mention you yourself -- are merely a delusional phenomenon of the eternal changeless mass of undifferentiated matter."
More serious attempts to defeat the Parmenidean problem included Plato's theory of ideas, but the most convincing and most economical theory (in my opinion) was Aristotle's (http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/metaphysics.html), which introduced accidental and substantial immaterial forms into physical theory -- entities which, through union with matter, reduce actually-existing potencies to actually-existing acts. This sidestepped the Parmenidean problem rather neatly by giving an account of change that does not require the affirmation of non-existent entities "coming into being." The universe was now a sea of potencies being reduced to act and back again. It remains the best account ever given of how change is possible, and (after throwing out the baby with the bathwater in the Cartesian revolution), I think philosophers are finally starting to recognize that again (http://www.jonathanschaffer.org/grounds.pdf). Of course, forecasting trends in human understanding has only a slightly better success rate than divination, so I could be wrong about whether academic philosophy is finally on the cusp of a new Aristotelianism -- but I still think Aristotle's theory of forms is the best explanation for the observable universe.
In Catholic thought, what is popularly referred to as the "soul" is simply the substantial form of the body, more or less as Aristotle conceived it. Catholics are hylomorphists rather than dualists. Which is to say, a person is not an immaterial soul floating around in a material body somehow, but rather a person is an immaterial substantial form (a soul) united with particular matter (a body), without which neither soul nor body are intelligible. This is the best explanation for the observable universe that we have. (I don't think this is dogmatically defined for Catholics, so it could change if some superior physical theory came along, but hylomorphism has quite a bit of inertia at this point and -- for my money -- no particularly good challengers.)
This is, incidentally, one of those big differences between Protestants and Catholics -- I'd bet money Drollinger's a dualist, and dualists have a whole range of problems with their theory, even though they use the same word ("soul") to describe the occult immaterial entity floating around inside the body that somehow interacts with it. And then you try and fix those problems, and then you end up talking about monads, and everyone is sad except Liebniz... but I digress.
Point is: does the observable universe exist, in some form other than as an eternal undifferentiated mass of changeless matter? In other words, are we having this conversation right now? Then, if Aristotle is right, accidental and substantial forms must exist, and the soul is (in Catholic thought) merely the substantial form of the human being. So if human beings exist, so do souls.
What this theory subscribes you to: Immaterial entities exist, which cannot be directly observed yet have definite effects on the observable universe, and humans are not altogether material entities. (Neither are lions, fungi, chairs, particular rocks, or -- this was a fun paper to write -- holes.)
What this theory does NOT subscribe you to: The immortality of the human soul. (You'll notice that is not even touched on above.) The specialness of the rational soul as compared to, say, the soul of a rock. Any of the nonsense desperate evangelicals sometimes spout about how when people die they weigh slightly less because the soul leaves their body.
God: While it is entirely possible that the universe/multiverse has existed from eternity (indeed, talking about time at all gets weird back at the Big Bang), we nevertheless observe that some things in the universe are changed by other things. If we ask, "What caused this to change?" in succession, we must ultimately reach a first cause, because the chain of casuation cannot regress into infinity or there would be no observable motion today (think Zeno again). Basic enough -- that's just Aristotle's Physics (not even his Metaphysics!). Everybody reads that one page in the Summa Theologiae for some reason (even though the Summa was a deliberate exercise in corner-cutting in order to distill complex ideas for first-year seminary students) and thinks Aquinas came up with this, but Aquinas himself makes clear in the much more complete and effective cosmological argument (http://dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles1.htm#13) in the Summa Contra Gentiles that he's just cribbing Aristotle again.
"Yes, sure," you may say, "I'm happy to stipulate that there's a first cause, but it could be the universe itself, or the multiverse, or some other thing that isn't what we commonly understand as 'God.'" And, fair enough. Way too many people run a simple first-cause argument and then think they're done, but all they've done is prove a first cause and slapped a name on it, not proved any of its attributes.
And yet, as Aquinas goes on to show (I think convincingly) if the first cause is immutable, as Aristotle contends, this has several logical entailments: the first cause must be eternal (http://dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles1.htm#15), with no passive potency (http://dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles1.htm#16), thus no physical form (http://dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles1.htm#17) or body (http://dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles1.htm#20), and it must have no composition (http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1003.htm#article2), while no limitation (http://dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles1.htm#20) may be placed on its power.
Bracketing the question of whether the first cause is good, or indeed intelligent at all, a single omnipotent immaterial being that caused everything would seem to be a reasonably good candidate for the name "God." (Aquinas says that goodness and intelligence can be predicated of God only analogically, and I am not at present altogether convinced by the arguments leading to even that limited claim.)
So, you want to see God's measurable effect on the observable universe? You have an observable universe -- there's your effect. :)
And there you go: God and souls, and that's pretty much all from a pre-Christian philosopher who wasn't particularly religious and who was regarded with deep suspicion by Christian authorities when first re-introduced to the West.
What this subscribes you to: a pretty limited form of deism. The abandonment of many objections to more explicitly religious claims ("there's no evidence of an omnipotent sky-being who created the universe!" Well, no, actually, there is, although we can debate the name we want to give it).
What this doesn't subscribe you to: any particular religious claim based on revelation. This argument addresses common objections to revelation, as mentioned above, but provides no positive evidence for revelation. Also, this account of God is limited enough that you don't run into the Problem of Evil.
Christ: I'll prove to you Christ existed based on the measurable impact he has on the observable universe as soon as you prove to me that Diogenes -- or Julius Caesar -- existed based on the measurable impact he has on the observable universe.
But, of course, that is impossible. Historical claims cannot be evaluated the same way that scientific, mathematical, or philosophical claims can be evaluated. Because history is by definition unobservable, and its effects on us today are not completely evident, we can never progress from theory to certainty when it comes to history; we only have what we've been told through the historical record, and what we've discovered through the good offices of archaeology and so forth.
I'll be the first to admit that the life of Jesus of Nazereth cannot be proved with certainty. But his life and acts are pretty well attested for a non-government figure in 1st-century Palestine. We have five sources that claim to be eyewitness accounts, and our best Biblical scholarship has concluded that four of them (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Acts) were written within the probable lifetimes of the Apostles, while the fifth (John) is iffy. We do not find contemporary contradictions of their claims, even though they inhabited a relatively literate and highly interconnected empire (where books like the Gospels could spread in a matter of months, not years), even though they claimed thousands of eyewitnesses, many of whom (Pontius Pilate comes to mind) would have had strong motivation to refute the basic claims of the Gospels.
We do not find that the Apostles had motivation to lie, either. Although much about many of their lives remains unknown, it certainly appears from the concrete historical record that St. Peter (who was likely responsible for Mark's Gospel, either through direct dictation or through his followers putting his teachings to paper within 10 years of his death) lived a painful, often cowardly life before being executed by crucifixion on Vatican Hill while still insisting that what he claimed was true. Unverified but plausible traditions about each of the other Apostles tell a similar tale.
(Incidentally, this, to me, is the main reason I don't buy into Islamic revelation. It all sounds plausible enough -- angel in a cave talks to a guy, reveals God's words, whatever, that's basically Moses and Mary for ya -- but the only guy we have to verify this is Mohammed himself, who had no eyewitnesses, performed no public miracles, and whose religion led him to conquest, glory, many women, riches, and a peaceful death rather than impoverished suffering and public execution.)
To my knowledge -- college dorm room showings of Zeitgeist aside -- there is simply no serious historical debate about whether Jesus of Nazereth, often called Christ, existed. He's sufficiently well-attested that everybody pretty well agrees he happened, that he preached at least some of the things the synoptic Gospels say he taught, and that he was executed. The debate is about whether Christ's miracles, and in particular his alleged resurrection, actually happened. And a lot of that debate, IMO, comes from unwarranted skepticism about the possibility of miracles because way too many people fell for David Hume's ridiculous standard of evidence for miracles. Since we've already accepted that an omnipotent immaterial Creator exists, above, the claims the Gospels (and Acts) make don't require an especially high standard of proof.
Are the Gospels' claims plausible? Given what we already know about God's omnipotence, yes, these are plausible claims. Do they contradict anything we know about the universe? No. Are they contradicted by other contemporary sources? No. Are they reinforced by one another and by other contemporary and subsequent sources? As well as could be expected in 1st-century Palestine, though not as well as I'd like -- I'd love for Josephus and Clement of Alexandria to have been a little earlier and quite a bit more thorough. Are they more plausible than contradictory claims made by other religions? I think so... although, if you get to the end of this and decide Zoroastrianism makes claims more plausible than Christianity, you go where your reason tells you. Does accepting these claims explain anything useful about today's world? Yes: we can finally stop forcing ourselves to explain away each and every single supernatural claim ever made as a trick or a delusion; we can just take the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima (for instance) and say it may have happened (or may not have happened). Accepting the Jesus hypothesis answers a few related questions as well.
That's not a proof, because historical "proofs" do not exist, but it's good enough reason, I think, to repent of my sins and believe in the Gospel.
What this subscribes you to: Christianity
What this doesn't subscribe you to: organized Christianity (although, once you take the Gospels as read, I admit it's not a long jump from Point A to Point B). Also, accepting some form of Christianity does not necessarily exclude at least some other religious claims.
Heaven: Jesus talks about Heaven a lot in the Gospels. If you think the Gospels correctly conveyed Jesus's words, and that Jesus was probably the god he claimed to be, then Heaven probably exists. If not, then we still must accept an immaterial state of being, because of souls and God and so forth, but this state would not have any of the attributes Christians generally associate with Heaven.
What this subscribes you to: nothing particularly
We see from the foregoing that atheism and materialism are both false, and so, while tolerating the error for the sake of human freedom, we should also work to prevent their demonstrably flawed conclusions and "completely unfounded assumptions" from influencing public policy.
Proof that souls, God, Jesus, and Heaven all exist!QuoteThe Soul: Back in the 5th century B.C., the philosopher Parmenides persuasively argued that, because it is impossible and absurd for something not to exist (because if it doesn't exist, it isn't something and can't be spoken of)....
Proof that souls, God, Jesus, and Heaven all exist!QuoteThe Soul: Back in the 5th century B.C., the philosopher Parmenides persuasively argued that, because it is impossible and absurd for something not to exist (because if it doesn't exist, it isn't something and can't be spoken of)....
Made it that far before my brain said "that is the dumbest fucking thing" and refused to read further.
He proved that, under the basically materialist physical theories of the world that dominated Greek science to that point, the observable universe could only exist as an utterly undifferentiated, eternal, motionless, and changeless infinity of matter. Since this flew in the face of all observable evidence (the world does, in fact, change!), the next several centuries were spent trying to dig physicalism out of the hole Parmenides had pushed it into.
Proof that souls, God, Jesus, and Heaven all exist!QuoteThe Soul: Back in the 5th century B.C., the philosopher Parmenides persuasively argued that, because it is impossible and absurd for something not to exist (because if it doesn't exist, it isn't something and can't be spoken of)....
Made it that far before my brain said "that is the dumbest fucking thing" and refused to read further.
I'd read further, because he gives his refutation in the next paragraph.
EDIT: In fact, in the next few sentences...QuoteHe proved that, under the basically materialist physical theories of the world that dominated Greek science to that point, the observable universe could only exist as an utterly undifferentiated, eternal, motionless, and changeless infinity of matter. Since this flew in the face of all observable evidence (the world does, in fact, change!), the next several centuries were spent trying to dig physicalism out of the hole Parmenides had pushed it into.
Proof that souls, God, Jesus, and Heaven all exist!QuoteThe Soul: Back in the 5th century B.C., the philosopher Parmenides persuasively argued that, because it is impossible and absurd for something not to exist (because if it doesn't exist, it isn't something and can't be spoken of)....
Made it that far before my brain said "that is the dumbest fucking thing" and refused to read further.
I'd read further, because he gives his refutation in the next paragraph.
EDIT: In fact, in the next few sentences...QuoteHe proved that, under the basically materialist physical theories of the world that dominated Greek science to that point, the observable universe could only exist as an utterly undifferentiated, eternal, motionless, and changeless infinity of matter. Since this flew in the face of all observable evidence (the world does, in fact, change!), the next several centuries were spent trying to dig physicalism out of the hole Parmenides had pushed it into.
I don't think that refutes the part I quoted. Also, I read further. Lots of shifting goal posts, conflation of ideas, typical stuff. Could probably do a point-by-point refutation but, like most everything, that seems really pointless.
I just generally dislike long, English-language, philosophical arguments. Too much sesquipedalian loquaciousness (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SesquipedalianLoquaciousness), and not enough use of actual mathematical proof or scientific experimentation. I mean, how is "if it doesn't exist I cannot talk about it" a valid syllogism? I can talk about my third arm, despite not having one, and I can talk about married bachelors, which cannot exist even in principle.
The fantastic message of love of Marc Lepine
Why a red ribbon? Is it not the color of the AIDS campaign already? We would have liked to find an original color, but all colors are already taken. White, red, green, blue, yellow, brown, black, even intermediary colors like lime, cherry or fuschia: they have all been taken by some social cause or left-wing campaign, much to the point that certain colors are shared now by more than one institution or fundraiser. Facing such a difficult choice, Red vs White seemed the best solution.
The Red Ribbon campaign makes plain to all that Marc Lepine is in fact a kind of liberator and that December 6 could finally become something positive. Liberator, how so? He liberates women from the unhealthy thoughts of genocide and gendercide that were prevalent in the feminist discourse since the days of Valerie Solanas and Mary Daly, and helps them STOP their planned monstrosities. The message is here: stop hurting men and be good to them, and they will stop hating you. They could even start to like you again some day. This is the Red Ribbon message of Marc that we can oppose to the White Ribbon of shame, guilt and hatred.
Marc Lepine tells women and feminists YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE MONTERS ANYMORE. He tells these thousands of women and feminists who have stolen their partner's house, their car, their money, he tells those who have stolen their ex-husband's children, their jobs and drove them to suicide: STOP TO BE MONSTERS, stop to secretly dream of killing men and planning gendercide, and we will perhaps begin again to love you some day. This is a powerful message, A MESSAGE OF LOVE, worthy of a new Christ.
The Red Ribbon campaign aims at ''unmonster'' women. It gives back their dignity to former feminazis, and allows those who performed atrocities without clearly realizing it, or misguided by their peers and under orders from the feminist war machine, to choose the path to REDEMPTION. To proudly wear this Red Ribbon is to show the world that YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE MONTERS ANYMORE, there is a way to salvation. Marc has given back women their dignity: he says ''be good and men will immediately stop to hate you, even start to like you again''. This is the powerful MESSAGE OF LOVE, and message of hope of Marc Lepine. Stop planning gendercide and stop acting like monsters, and we will start to love you again!
BUT WHY SHOULD WE LOVE YOU?
Why not? The killer saint tells them: ''let's save the planet from genocide. You don't have to read these books of vengeance anymore, like Mary Daly and Valerie Solanas, you don't have to plan massacres of male children in our hospitals anymore''. The iconic killer tells them: ''I'm ready to forgive you my children''. According to him, he would even be willing to forgive them the destruction of the environment which has been caused qui by feminine franctic consumerism for more than a century. Ladies, join this campaign of love of Marc: throw away this white ribbon of hate and replace it with the red color of love. Together, let us ''unmonster'' our society !
I just generally dislike long, English-language, philosophical arguments. Too much sesquipedalian loquaciousness (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SesquipedalianLoquaciousness), and not enough use of actual mathematical proof or scientific experimentation. I mean, how is "if it doesn't exist I cannot talk about it" a valid syllogism? I can talk about my third arm, despite not having one, and I can talk about married bachelors, which cannot exist even in principle.
And then he goes on to basically steal his entire argument from Aquinas, who himself (by his own admission) stole it all from Aristotle.
Anyway...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5000962/Jenna-Jameson-likes-transphobic-tweets-Playboy-diss.html (link contains implied nudity)
Playboy just had their first transgender playmate. So what does Jenna Jameson (who was never a playmate) do?
Go on a huge transphobic Twitter rant.
Since I don't think this is quite crazy enough to go in the Crazy Things thread:
(http://78.media.tumblr.com/0e4a5aed4ecfe903c2240645984224ca/tumblr_inline_oyhfqphGxI1rwn40l_500.jpg)
Playing Devil's Advocate for a second, Ann does have something resembling a point. I'm...not too partial towards giving tax breaks to those who reproduce; or, at the very least, those who reproduce past two children. We're going to start feeling the weight of horrific overpopulation, likely in my lifetime, unless we do SOMETHING to either a) teach people to be more responsible (and make taking such responsibility easier) or b) disincentivise people from reproduction beyond replacement rate. The more people we have, the more mouths we have to feed, and having a child is pretty much the single most environmentally unfriendly thing one can do.
This is true. Of course, try telling the Vatican and other forced-birth cultists that.
(https://scontent-arn2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/25497939_1881323912177629_3046588100283676147_n.jpg?oh=3ad4272c06caabb37a5899bffb216867&oe=5AC9375D)
They really need their boogeymen.
Imagine if the BLM and ANTIFA had even half the power and numbers that the these people think they do...
(https://scontent-arn2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/25497939_1881323912177629_3046588100283676147_n.jpg?oh=3ad4272c06caabb37a5899bffb216867&oe=5AC9375D)
They really need their boogeymen.
Imagine if the BLM and ANTIFA had even half the power and numbers that the these people think they do...
How incompetent does this idiot think the Secret Service is? And since when does BLM have commandos?
Call me all you want. You wouldn't last 10 minutes in a debate about any subject within politics, philosophy, sociology or economics with me anyway. Or would you? Because so far, all I see is that you're just another sad millenial that has only ever learned anything about conservatism or the right via some random snowflake on youtube, Tumblr or Twitter. Or even worse, from a canned commie history teacher in school. Do you fap to hentai still living with mom too? I really hope you don't. The mere fact you mentioned the word "fascist" and Nazi towards my person gives away the fact you are clueless just like 99% of the SJWs, Antifas, Blackblocs.
Feel welcome to invite me to a debate if you want. Until then, you can downvote and play the 20-something year old millenial with college debt you probably are all you want, I won't mind. Feel free to say I was triggered by you. Would entertain me even further if you did.
Assume I'm 40, then. Can you debate a 40 yr old conservative if you're so sure you're on the "good side of the force"?
Or does my "high and mighty intellect" posing scare you so much all you can do is to keep calling conservatives (which is more than clear you know zero about) things like "fascist" and "nazi" (and you don't even know what these mean! lol lol)? At least you know what a snowflake is to acknowledge my tease on millenials.
Perhaps you guys want to be right, instead of accepting whatever is right. Perhaps that's why you guys need to appeal to trolling, bullying, censoring, reporting/nuking accounts, breaking stuff, all in the name of your supposed "justice" (which again, you people have no idea of what it actually is or means). Perhaps you really can't handle pure reasoning. Perhaps you can just be driven by how you feel about things, because debating requires actually knowing what you are talking about, doesn't it?
Is your knowledge about what you think you defend so shallow and weak this is the best you can pull off? You are still closing your eyes and ears and screaming "lalala pedo nazi-fash lalala". Left wing stereotypes really are hard to miss.
You might assume I'm a nazi for the Korra pinup. But I'm definitely not assuming you know why the Nazis hated the jews (even less why the Left is against Israel while at the same time defending the same "melanin-filled" muslims who... Hitler allied with... Against the jews...). But yeah, makes perfect sense that right-wingers are nazis. Total sense.
QuoteHitler didn't like Jews because he's a horrible piece of shit?
And that, folks, is the level of millenials/SJW/Antifas/Blackblocs when it comes to debate. Because that's why a syndicalist socialist party that literally condemned "reactionaries" (aka conservatives) in their official hymn decided to tackle jewish people: because nazis were assholes? hahaahahahahahah is the school system really that fucked?
That's all you need to know to be smart enough to go around calling conservatives "nazis"? And definitely enough to say I am "the bad guy"? Hahahah oh man
Little hint: no, it had nothing to do with "judeo-bolshevism". The "jews" behind big-banks and the media are enemies of Judaism (that's why they attack Israel via the media all the time). The original Jews were the creators of what later became known as the "bourgeois". That is why Hitler ostensively claimed "Wenn wir Sozialisten sind, dann müssen wir definitiv Antisemiten sein." ("if we're socialists, then we must definitevely be antisemites"). Jews are the very foundation of what anyone today calls "conservatism". The idea of meritocratic free-market capitalism came from them. And you brain-dead millenials call us "nazis" and "fascists" while defending the agenda and religion that killed actual jews and christians, and even allied with the nazis back in the days.
(oh, and has it ever crossed your mind that... maybe I drew this piece because someone paid me to draw it, just like I've drawn pretty much anything? If I draw gay sex, doesn't mean I'm gay.)
It's just the way he draws faces. It's among the least horrible of his faults.
(https://i.imgur.com/czgPast.png)
...What a snowflake.
Ever wonder why jews were so hated by germans? It was not for no reason. Very good reasons in fact. Such as international jewry officially declaring war on germany in 1933 after hitler was elected and kicked out the bankers and freemasons and recovering the economy, as well as sinking 2 cruise ships full of civilian families, and selling germany out in ww1 (look up the Balfour Declaration)
What does your wife think of posts like that?
Speaking of which, my boyfriend is not getting sex the next time he wants it.
Oh look, another Jewey show trying to normalize anti-white narratives.
QuoteOh look, another Jewey show trying to normalize anti-white narratives.
If anyone has the faintest idea how Bob's Burgers is anti-white, I'm honestly curious.
Libertarians:(click to show/hide)
I actually understand the point they're trying to make but it's completely insane one.
Ironbite-don't try going down this rabbit hole, it leads nowhere good.
......no that's not how that works Tucker.
Ironbite-you raging idiot.
......no that's not how that works Tucker.
Ironbite-you raging idiot.
It is if you think America = majority white. The ethno-nationalism is so obvious it's hard to call it implicit.
As a side note, I agree with Ta-Nehisi Coates about what is probably going to happen when whites will soon become a minority in the US: the definition of "white" is going to be changed. The latinos are (edit: relatively) suddenly going to become white and the order of things is going to stay more comfortable.
As a side note, I agree with Ta-Nehisi Coates about what is probably going to happen when whites will soon become a minority in the US: the definition of "white" is going to be changed. The latinos are (edit: relatively) suddenly going to become white and the order of things is going to stay more comfortable.
Probably the Asians before the Latinos.
Like they did with the Irish and Italians back at the turn of the century? Yeah, that makes sense. Pull the race color card once more slot. They've already decided Catholics are Christian (only) when counted on the census.
Like they did with the Irish and Italians back at the turn of the century? Yeah, that makes sense. Pull the race color card once more slot. They've already decided Catholics are Christian (only) when counted on the census.
this is a column by a Finnish reporter where he complains about the waves of the "me too" movement hitting Finland. The union of journalists had a survey on how many reporters have faced sexual harassment and came up with the results being 50% ...This reporter then complains that since the survey only asked 2% of journalists in Finland this means that only 1% have ever been victims of harassment and men are merely being portrayed as harassers. Which in itself shows that they have no idea how surveys work.
QuoteMy position on abortion remains the same. Don't want one? Don't have one.Ah, yes, I call this one the "Jefferson Davis" position.
Ah, yes, I call this one the "Jefferson Davis" position.Because abortion = slavery ?? ???
QuoteAh, yes, I call this one the "Jefferson Davis" position.Because abortion = slavery ?? ???
Also vaguely ironic - not for the Yankee Godwin, but for the fact that most evangelical pro-'life'rs kinda heart JD deep down. (Abortion - WW'JD'D? Fundie head asplodes...)
It'd be a bit like pulling an actual Godwin on Stormfront. Depending upon context and execution - either classy trolling, or a massive fail.
Libertarians: Everything is slavery and rape.
Also Libertarians: ...except slavery and rape.
(https://i.imgur.com/wgjLTQh.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/wxgdJ6e.png)
https://www.reddit.com/r/Libertarian/comments/7qxyaq/this_is_the_quality_of_debate_you_can_expect_on/dst84f9/?context=8
(https://www.dailydot.com/wp-content/uploads/067/5e/whiguyblink.gif)
Really, I just... I can't think of anything to say. That's downright delusional.
QuoteAh, yes, I call this one the "Jefferson Davis" position.Because abortion = slavery ?? ???
Also vaguely ironic - not for the Yankee Godwin, but for the fact that most evangelical pro-'life'rs kinda heart JD deep down. (Abortion - WW'JD'D? Fundie head asplodes...)
It'd be a bit like pulling an actual Godwin on Stormfront. Depending upon context and execution - either classy trolling, or a massive fail.
Oh, it's not trolling. He's firmly pro-life.
"Sargon of Akkad" just called his alt right fans a buncha slurs for black, gay and Jewish people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfFai-0hqH0
Also laments they're being "disrespectful" to him, hence him calling them a bunch of n***er f****ts.
Now, where the fuck is my popcorn?
Make no mistake, as emperor, Palpatine is a dictator--but a relatively benign one, like Pinochet.
Yeah the embodiment of the Dark Side of the Force who authorizes the building of planet destroying weapons is totally a benevolent person. What with his flat out refusal to acknowledge that non-human species had any intrinsic value whatsoever except as a cheap labor force. No he's totally on our side here.
Ironbite-idiot.
In the old canon Thrawn enslaved nations (like the Noghri) used torture, mass murder, terror and subterfuge to reach his goals.
He supposedly just wanted to unite the galaxy to be able to fight the Juuzhan Vong but you'd think that just saying "Dudes! There's these alien warmonger horde and it's coming right for us! We gotta fight together!" (or some more eloquent way to phrase that) would have also been effective AND it would not have caused millions of deaths in a unnecessary war that simply made the galaxy weaker.
...But that's just me and I don't know what the current canon on him is because Season 2 of the Rebels is still unavailable on Netflix...
(https://i.redd.it/3uh2cehkx1g01.png)
...I have no words.
QuoteI'm still having trouble getting my head round the idea that the shooter wasn't old enough to buy booze, but was old enough to own an assault weapon.
On that point, we allow people to serve their country when they're 18. Seems like allowing them to own a gun, generally speaking, isn't that big of a leap.
Put another way, if there's a reason to prevent them from having their gun, it shouldn't be JUST because of their age.
QuoteThe sheer fact that you can buy a gun at a younger age than alcohol is insane.
Besides, it is a great leap.
In the military, people are trained, supervised and if necessary, disciplined when they screw up.
They don't stack up guns like other people stack diapers, when in the military. A soldier has one assault rifle and one hand gun, normally. Ammunition is handed to the soldier for certain purposes, they can't garner it sky high in their rooms.
That is a huge difference.
In civilian life, any moron of a hillbilly can buy guns until his house is filled with them and stack up ammunition like crazy. No supervision, no discipline, no training.
You take a shot at 'hillbillies' as 'morons' but I'd be willing to bet that the people you're referring to are more knowledge about gun use and applicable gun laws than the people committing these crimes. Also, there's legit reasons to have guns in some parts of this country where people (and help) are farther away and wild animals can pose a real threat to safety.
Here's a question for the European/Australian crowd who likes to tell us Americans what terrible people we are: Have you ever met/talked with/directly engaged anyone that falls into the group that you think so little of, or is it just an internet stereotype for you?
PS: I think the drinking age is fine where it is, but I'd be in favor of an exception for service members specifically because you don't get to serve without being able to have some discipline in your life. The fact that an Army Private can get blown up by a Taliban IED in Afghanistan but can't order a Bud Light when he finishes his tour rubs me the wrong way. That Private has earned it, IMO (subject to the same laws everyone else is subject to - ie drunk driving, etc.)
That's your argument? Protection from wild animals?
There's a reason why they call them assault rifles. I've never heard of these protection rifles you speak of.
Please explain to me why you need a semi-automatic of full-automatic rifle to defend yourself from a bear.
Well first off, those are two different things. Generally speaking, fully automatic weapons are illegal.
As to semi-autos, what's wrong with those? Put in the context we're talking about, given the closing speed of a bear and the stopping power required to take it down, do you really want to trust that a) you'll hit your first shot with a bolt action rifle and b) that you'll get a kill shot the first time, or at least a wounding shot that gives you enough time to re-cock? That MIGHT be the case, but a semi-auto gives you more margin of error --> higher chance of surviving.
And it's not just bears. Mountain lions and other large cats are a thing to.
Then there's pack animals. If you have a pack of coyotes going after your livestock, you'll need to eliminate that threat as quickly as possible, as each animal you lose is taking money out of your pocket.
So it's not as cut and dried as you'd like to think.
QuoteOk then let me ask you this, imagine a general gun ban is issued in the US. Do you think the number of people who will fall victim to leathal animal attacks will be over or under the number of people who currently get shot in the streets?
That strikes me as the wrong question.
We already have laws against shooting people in the streets. Enacting such a ban wouldn't add to the criminality of homicide.
At the same time, you'd be actively taking away people's ability to protect themselves, their families and their investments, creating new victims that didn't exist before solely because of government action.
Is that the position you intended to advance?
Just one word: WOW!
To elaborate: when you make it harder for people to get guns in the first place, you're going to have fewer gun crimes being committed.
Thanks for putting my astonishment into words.
Another note:
The big thing I think you're missing here is that restricting (note: restricting, not banning) gun ownership will not mean that you will have these additional gun deaths on top of whatever's already going on, it means that the latter number will decrease, and very likely drastically so. Are there people who will end up dead because of a lack of guns? Probably. But that number will almost certainly be far outweighed by the number of people who will be alive because of that same lack of guns.
It's essentially the same rhetorical trick often used by opponents of single-payer in the US when proponents cite the cost as being $32 trillion over ten years while the cost of the current system is $49 trillion over those same ten years. They pretend that single-payer would cost $32 trillion over and above the $49 trillion already being spent, rather than being honest, which is that it will cost $32 trillion instead of $49 trillion. ("Can't afford to do single-payer? No, we can't afford not to do single-payer... plus we'd have a better system overall.") That's essentially the trick being pulled here, pretending that the deaths attributable to a lack of guns (of which there will no doubt be some) will be added on top of all the deaths already happening, which is simply not the case.
This trick is deceitful, it's dishonest, it doesn't work on anyone paying attention, and I thought you were better than that, Another note:
The big thing I think you're missing here, Armus, is that restricting (note: restricting, not banning) gun ownership will not mean that you will have these additional gun deaths on top of whatever's already going on, it means that the latter number will decrease, and very likely drastically so. Are there people who will end up dead because of a lack of guns? Probably. But that number will almost certainly be far outweighed by the number of people who will be alive because of that same lack of guns.
It's essentially the same rhetorical trick often used by opponents of single-payer in the US when proponents cite the cost as being $32 trillion over ten years while the cost of the current system is $49 trillion over those same ten years. They pretend that single-payer would cost $32 trillion over and above the $49 trillion already being spent, rather than being honest, which is that it will cost $32 trillion instead of $49 trillion. ("Can't afford to do single-payer? No, we can't afford not to do single-payer... plus we'd have a better system overall.") That's essentially the trick being pulled here, pretending that the deaths attributable to a lack of guns (of which there will no doubt be some) will be added on top of all the deaths already happening, which is simply not the case.
This trick is deceitful, it's dishonest, it doesn't work on anyone paying attention, and I thought you were better than that.
Western Imperialism duh.
The US will win. The US backed by the Wehrmacht and the Waffen SS are able effectively combat the Vietcong. The Vietcong often wore civilian clothes. The US was reductant to kill civilians. The Wehrmacht particularly the Waffen SS didn't have this problem. The Wehrmacht and Waffen SS was prepared to risk collateral damage when dealing with partisans. With the supply and rear areas secure, the Americans are able to invade North Vietnam and succeed. The Vietcong was the only reason for the American defeat in Vietnam. As the Germans are expert in counterpartisian warfare, they are able to help the Americans combat the unconventional Vietcong. The Americans and the Germans excelled at conventional warfare so are able to win against the north Vietnamese army. The Wehrmact and Waffen SS also excel at unconventional combat and are able to give the North Vietnamese a taste of their medicine.
The US was reductant to kill civilians.The Germans, on the other hand, were apparently perfectly oxidant to kill civilians.
QuoteThe US was reductant to kill civilians.The Germans, on the other hand, were apparently perfectly oxidant to kill civilians.
Read the foreword, by Eric Metaxas. He says “many serious Christians” embrace this president because they understand God’s grace better than others. He says moralizing naysayers are like “the elder brother in the parable of the Good Samaritan.”
https://www.reddit.com/r/uncensorednews/comments/7x025t/migrant_ghettos_will_become_a_nuclear_bomb_in_the/du50p5q/
Fuck everyone and everything. That is the most infuriating and hilarious thread I have ever seen. A bunch of racists were being racists and complaining with their dog whistle codes about der untermensch when one of them suddenly realized that they are talking about different groups. Cue a trainwreck of a thread where they argue whether Jews or Muslims are worse. Also bad science. So bad science as they debate how much "black DNA" different groups have. I just had to stop reading the thread when my limit for "stupid fucking stuff seen in one day" was reached. And it's not even late yet.
Silly Nazis, calls for violence are only allowed on left-wing subreddits!
Fuck you Lana.
Silly Nazis, calls for violence are only allowed on left-wing subreddits!
Just so you know, the next time you ask why people say that you carry water for Nazis, either I or someone else will just quote this post and say nothing more.
Silly Nazis, calls for violence are only allowed on left-wing subreddits!
Silly Nazis, calls for violence are only allowed on left-wing subreddits!
Fuck you Lana.
Don't get me wrong, the ban of r/uncensorednews was well deserved. But the fact that r/latestagecapitalism can get away with advocating violence means that there is a double standard.
Lana gonna waaaaaaaaaaaah, and talk about poor, oppressed Nazis.
Thank you, the BASELINE is theft, violence, oppression, and hate. Rising up against these forces is SELF-DEFENSE, not assault.
Kill the pigs, I dunno. Happy thanksgiving
I had to explain this to my co-worker just last week when she said punching nazi's is just stooping to their level. I said this and then added that committing genocide against innocent people is stooping to their level. Beating the shit out of a nazi is called being a good person. So sick of American liberals that have zero fucking balls.
“but free speech!” and “you shouldn’t punch someone if they haven’t hit you first”
srsly guys?
Being born into a wealthy family warrants a mandatory guillotine. Especially if everything you say is shitting on the poor.
Silly Nazis, calls for violence are only allowed on left-wing subreddits!
Are those seriously the best examples you have of inciting violence?
We've also done the is it ok to punch someone who advocates genocide dance before.
Some of those are almost as terrible as 'die cis scum'.
Silly Nazis, calls for violence are only allowed on left-wing subreddits!
Silly Nazis, calls for violence are only allowed on left-wing subreddits!
The funny thing is that uncensored news, T_D and plenty of other racist right-wing subreddits have been spewing hatespeech and inciting violence for years on Reddit. They get taken down if/when they get on the news and otherwise ignored. You claim that left-wing subreddits can call for violence but I'm saying that calls for violence or rebellion on Reddit are ignored by the admins more often than not regardless of who is saying it.
In fact, one of the current memes on Reddit is "valuable discussion" which was used by Spez as defense for why he let's Neo-Nazis and other right-wingers spew hate and death threats on Reddit.
Uncensored news is a good example because this ban didn't come from nowhere and it wasn't immediate. You can get a pass with a lot of hate on Reddit as long as you don't violate a few special rules: a) Don't end up on news to make Reddit look bad. b) Delete posts if Admins ask you to.
That Uncensorednews survived as long as it did despite violating several rules of Reddit is a disgrace but the fact that there are people who actively reported racists posts helped give them notoriety and eventually Reddit admins gave them a warning which they ignored and they got banned.
If you report something awful that LSC does and they don't cut that shit out then maybe they too will get banned.
As for T_D, the mods pin racist posts, they encourage racism and hate and ban people who disagree. They then delete these posts after and only if the posts are linked elsewhere or someone reports them. There are months old death threats and racist posts on T_D that have thousands of upvotes and then disappear after someone takes a screencap and posts it to Againsthatesubreddits or similar group and T_D tries to cover their tracks. They pinned the "unite the right" rally advertisement on T_D and actively promoted it but soon after the terror attack during the rally they removed that post and have repeatedly claimed that they never supported the rally.
T_D mods brag about operating 60 separate accounts to fight "downvote wars" and complain about mods banning some of those accounts: https://www.reddit.com/r/AgainstHateSubreddits/comments/84o9s2/tder_and_rconspiracy_user_admits_to_operating/
They started spewing hate against Hawking the moment they got the news about his death: https://www.reddit.com/r/AgainstHateSubreddits/comments/84beyl/the_donald_praising_stephen_hawkings_death_this/ Also note how one of the comment lists racist subreddits and LSC is there because people who oppose racism don't just pick on the right, they oppose hate no matter where it comes from politically.
Racism on T_D: http://archive.is/QX5yY
Calling for deaths of police officers: http://archive.is/TgiUF
There are subreddits like Jewhate, Jewishworldorder, Millionshekelsurpreme and who knows how many subreddits that exist only to spread hate.
Your dad should have.Oh come on. Everyone knows that doesn't work.
Your dad should have.
yeah but there are no contraceptively sound jokes to be made.I think that's a hard pill to swallow.
I can't think of a good IUD pun.
So watching some Far Cry 5 gameplay footage. Becomes clear that this is some communist game. You are part of something called the "resistance" and your logo is a communist fist. You are fighting against a "cult" which has Templar symbols representing "far-right". Don't buy.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DS36yVfWkAIcXRq.jpg:small)
Oy! *facepalm*
I'm morbidly curious who they thought they were going to convince with that dumpster fire of a tweet.
It is the biggest normie cope bullshit ever. You can not attract girls with self-improvement. You attract them with looks, and money and status is just a even bigger bonus.
• "Work on your personality bro"
• "Have some confidence"
• "Lift some weights, girls love muscles"
• "Read some books and become smarter"
• "Get some new hobbies"
• "Get an interesting life"
• "Get some new clothes"
• "Get a good degree"
• "Get a good job"
• "Get a nice car"
• "Get a nice house"
• "Take your daily shower"
• "After that girls will come from everywhere just wait for them bro" - How long do we have to wait tho?
There is nothing else you can improve or fake so you can attract them.. well ofc there is the beta provider cucked way but who wants to go this way tbh
Incels need to accept their fate and LDAR with drugs/alcohol and try to cope as much as possible with non - degenerate interests and hobbies.
The incels are rather depressing to read.
You know what group doesn't have enough people judging them and accusing them of not being adequate or not really being what they claim to be? Transpersons. /s
(https://i.redditmedia.com/rHWXJ_tptkIHijfuR3P6pAWAR69hqAxpNrOowpF7b3U.jpg?w=801&s=1c5106618717a2a587661a7082c38f55)
For fucks sake, targeting young transpersons in particular makes this twice as shitty.
You know what group doesn't have enough people judging them and accusing them of not being adequate or not really being what they claim to be? Transpersons. /s
(https://i.redditmedia.com/rHWXJ_tptkIHijfuR3P6pAWAR69hqAxpNrOowpF7b3U.jpg?w=801&s=1c5106618717a2a587661a7082c38f55)
For fucks sake, targeting young transpersons in particular makes this twice as shitty.
I don't know, this seems like an attack on transtrenders to me.
I think its some weird kind of Tumblr Drama.
Better off ignored if you ask me.
Purity policing on Tumblr shouldn't be ignored? When it's genuinely funny I'd agree!I think its some weird kind of Tumblr Drama.
Better off ignored if you ask me.
If you say so.
Lana, IIRC you said that you have a relative who is trans so I'm going to word this very carefully:
Teenagers in general have a tough time trying to fit in or trying to find out who they are, for trans this is even more so. Going around and claiming that someone who says that they are trans isn't and is merely doing it for the sake of being "cool" is a really dick move. This is made even worse by the fact that they are more likely to suffer from depression ...Gee, turns out that when the society (or even your own family) doesn't accept you for what you are it can cause problems for your mental health?!
Lana, IIRC you said that you have a relative who is trans so I'm going to word this very carefully:
Teenagers in general have a tough time trying to fit in or trying to find out who they are, for trans this is even more so. Going around and claiming that someone who says that they are trans isn't and is merely doing it for the sake of being "cool" is a really dick move. This is made even worse by the fact that they are more likely to suffer from depression ...Gee, turns out that when the society (or even your own family) doesn't accept you for what you are it can cause problems for your mental health?!
I understand where you're coming from, and if this were merely saying "some trans people aren't acksually trans because I personally disapprove of them," I'd be inclined to agree with you. But the person in the cartoon is saying things like "you don't need dysphoria to be trans", "gender is a feeling", and "truscum don't interact." It seems to me like this may not be a case of purity policing, but a case of somebody criticizing "tucute" types who think being trans is some kind of trendy fashion they can put on. I may not be trans myself, but I'm bisexual and pretty heavily involved in LGBT circles, so I think I know about this dispute more than many people. However, I've been wrong before, so if you or somebody else can prove that the artist means to say what you think they're saying, I'll back down on this.
Lana, IIRC you said that you have a relative who is trans so I'm going to word this very carefully:
Teenagers in general have a tough time trying to fit in or trying to find out who they are, for trans this is even more so. Going around and claiming that someone who says that they are trans isn't and is merely doing it for the sake of being "cool" is a really dick move. This is made even worse by the fact that they are more likely to suffer from depression ...Gee, turns out that when the society (or even your own family) doesn't accept you for what you are it can cause problems for your mental health?!
I understand where you're coming from, and if this were merely saying "some trans people aren't acksually trans because I personally disapprove of them," I'd be inclined to agree with you. But the person in the cartoon is saying things like "you don't need dysphoria to be trans", "gender is a feeling", and "truscum don't interact." It seems to me like this may not be a case of purity policing, but a case of somebody criticizing "tucute" types who think being trans is some kind of trendy fashion they can put on. I may not be trans myself, but I'm bisexual and pretty heavily involved in LGBT circles, so I think I know about this dispute more than many people. However, I've been wrong before, so if you or somebody else can prove that the artist means to say what you think they're saying, I'll back down on this.
I think you are factually wrong about the prevalence of people who "think being trans is some kind of trendy fashion they can put on". I'm not going to say they don't exist, there's a lot of people out there, but the majority of people criticised as 'transtrenders' are people who have real gender issues of some sort or another and are trying to use the tools available to them to deal with them, including transition. That they sometimes look or act different from other trans people is entirely meaningless; some trans guys are more masculine than others (much like cis guys). What matters is if their life is improved by transition, a question this view entirely sidesteps in favour of checking to see if they conform to stereotypes.
It kind of reminds me of the autogynephilia bullshit used against a group of bisexual or lesbian trans women who don't fit the existing stereotypes that you see by looking at primarily straight trans women. It's interesting how when they don't like AFAB people calling themselves trans they dismiss them as silly children who are following a fashion trend, and when they don't like AMAB people calling themselves trans they dismiss us as sexual deviants (a gendered pattern replicated in attitudes towards cis gay people).
'Transtrenders' is a word used to police conformity to an established narrative about gender in trans people, in the same way heteronormative society treats the entire LGBT+ community, and it's an attitude that should have no place in queer spaces.
Also: you don't need dysphoria to be trans, gender can accurately be described as a feeling, and 'truscum' are wrong.
Also: you don't need dysphoria to be trans, gender can accurately be described as a feeling, and 'truscum' are wrong.
I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on this, because I have yet to see any solid scientific or medical evidence for this claim. Quite the contrary, countless studies appear to support the "truscum" stance on what is required to be trans. I believe I discussed studies on the brains of pre-transition transgender people that point to differences in brain structure as the root cause of being trans. This seems to indicate that being trans is more than just a "feeling." Rather, it seems like there are biological causes for being trans. I'm willing to entertain the possibility that I'm wrong, like the geologists who doubted Alfred Wegener's theories on continental drift. And I don't like people who mistreat tucutes simply for their views and opinions. But until I see firm evidence otherwise, I'm going to respectfully disagree with tucutes and their supporters.
Also: you don't need dysphoria to be trans, gender can accurately be described as a feeling, and 'truscum' are wrong.
I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on this, because I have yet to see any solid scientific or medical evidence for this claim. Quite the contrary, countless studies appear to support the "truscum" stance on what is required to be trans. I believe I discussed studies on the brains of pre-transition transgender people that point to differences in brain structure as the root cause of being trans. This seems to indicate that being trans is more than just a "feeling." Rather, it seems like there are biological causes for being trans. I'm willing to entertain the possibility that I'm wrong, like the geologists who doubted Alfred Wegener's theories on continental drift. And I don't like people who mistreat tucutes simply for their views and opinions. But until I see firm evidence otherwise, I'm going to respectfully disagree with tucutes and their supporters.
I am not making a medical claim, because I don't think being trans is a medical condition.
To be clear: there are studies suggesting people who transition tend to have different brain structures than people of their ASAB, yes. There are almost certainly underlying biological causes for people deciding to transition. But being trans is not the same thing as those causes; being trans is a reaction to internal experiences of gender.
I think reifying the idea that trans people are just 'brain intersex' is a mistake. If tomorrow a new and better study comes out disproving that theory, my position on trans people's rights will remain unchanged. If someone decides to scan everyone and it turns out a bunch of people who have happily transitioned and think their lives have been improved by it don't have the specific brain structures... then what? Do we revoke their trans license? Tell them 'Sorry, ScienceTM says you are really a member of your ASAB and not True Trans after all, please stop HRT immediately and change your name back'?
No. We don't. I believe transition is about taking ownership of your own self and body and living a life that makes you happier, and there are probably biological factors correlated with being the kind of person whose life is improved by transition, but there's no reason to limit it to people with those biological correlates. It's possible that in the future we will find out that we can predict with much more accuracy who will and won't be happier after transition, and that will be interesting, but we are not there yet and might never be.
And as long as that doesn't happen, literally the only guide we have to whether people will be happier or not transitioning is their internal feelings about their gender.
Also an outsider looking in, but while I've seen the not wanting to transition part, the lack of dysphoria while still being trans is a bit strange to me.
Also an outsider looking in, but while I've seen the not wanting to transition part, the lack of dysphoria while still being trans is a bit strange to me.
RED PILL ALERT
All women are, to a greater or lesser extent, whores. The exceptions are virgins, who can only maintain chastity through unrelenting force. What you are describing is in fact what all women come to when given complete freedom. My dear European, I’m not sure if you’ve been with many women like me, perhaps better that you shouldn’t, but anyone that’s spoken to an honest woman knows this. They want it this way, because it’s power. We all as men inherently desire women, and not just one (though we can be contented with one). The reverse is true for them, but in freedom they can have all men. Rich guys with small dicks are easy Street for them. A bitter, cruel, yet releasing truth.
Women need control, not freedom.
All humans do, but only men create laws, rules, regulations, etc. Don’t forget that in the bible, it’s not clear that God ever intended to make a woman; rather, it was observed that the man needed company. My favorite part is helpmeet.
Comment yes if you agree!The link leads into an article that discusses how the Finnish population would decrease without immigration. Both the original post itself and the original post with the screen capture have been removed apparently because of the sexual content. The commenters in the post with the linked screen capture speculate the first post with the screen capture was reported to Facebook and both it and the source ended up being removed.
The population growth of Finland is not on a robust basis if it relies on immigration. A healthy nation state needs new Finns.
"Without immigrants the Finnish population would have decreased since early in the year 2695 more people have died than have been born."
[link into an article]
The image text: Close the borders... ...open the limbs. [Pun: raja = border, raaja = limb]
It's weird when a sex positive [person] doesn't like spreading the limbs. *more mockery of feminism*
What leftist leaders in history most faithfully executed communism/ made the greatest jump from capitalism to communism?
I suppose in terms of the sheer size of the productive forces and the consequent threat they posed to the capitalist-imperialist hegemony you would have to say Stalin’s USSR and Mao’s China, although both of those societies are better described as semi-feudal before their revolutions. Despite the enormity of the threats, challenges and setbacks these nations faced in building socialism, they achieved rapid industrialisation and huge rises in living standards. They rose to become global counter-hegemonic powers. And all this without the imperialist plunder of other nations.
Edit: Oh and these great leaders are among the most demonised figures in the history books of the imperialist west. Gee, I wonder why?
(https://i.redditmedia.com/xknxwSF-NgA8WkhHuXiYoxPOTtwZ5BJXvnWUczLi5vo.png?w=580&s=b3e7b0f0b179d961b91de64d2e464308)
Whats that? They made a comic where Captain America opposes Fascism? This must mean that Marvel hates USA...
(https://i.redditmedia.com/xknxwSF-NgA8WkhHuXiYoxPOTtwZ5BJXvnWUczLi5vo.png?w=580&s=b3e7b0f0b179d961b91de64d2e464308)
Whats that? They made a comic where Captain America opposes Fascism? This must mean that Marvel hates USA...
Let's not build BS Lana, he's not merely complaining about antifa, he's saying that because the author has said stuff he disagrees with he hates America, and Captain America to boot.(https://i.redditmedia.com/xknxwSF-NgA8WkhHuXiYoxPOTtwZ5BJXvnWUczLi5vo.png?w=580&s=b3e7b0f0b179d961b91de64d2e464308)
Whats that? They made a comic where Captain America opposes Fascism? This must mean that Marvel hates USA...
He's not complaining about Cap opposing fascism, but about the (supposed, I haven't read the comic) support for Antifa. Let's not build strawmen.
(https://i.redditmedia.com/xknxwSF-NgA8WkhHuXiYoxPOTtwZ5BJXvnWUczLi5vo.png?w=580&s=b3e7b0f0b179d961b91de64d2e464308)
Whats that? They made a comic where Captain America opposes Fascism? This must mean that Marvel hates USA...
He's not complaining about Cap opposing fascism, but about the (supposed, I haven't read the comic) support for Antifa. Let's not build strawmen.
And without strawmen can you tell me what is the purpose of Antifa?
And you seem to have skipped all the other stuff that was said, does supporting anti-Fascism mean that you hate "America?" Does it make you racist? And what about the comment about Mr. Coates? Do you think Marvel shot itself in the foot when they hired a black writer for Captain America?
Is the Red Skull a Fascist, or is the definition sufficiently narrow as to exclude supervillains?
Is the Red Skull a Fascist, or is the definition sufficiently narrow as to exclude supervillains?
Oh, he's definitely a fascist.
Is the Red Skull a Fascist, or is the definition sufficiently narrow as to exclude supervillains?
Oh, he's definitely a fascist.
So Captain America has always been antifa - well done para-anal.
Is the Red Skull a Fascist, or is the definition sufficiently narrow as to exclude supervillains?
Oh, he's definitely a fascist.
So Captain America has always been antifa - well done para-anal.
Against fascism =/= Antifa.
Is the Red Skull a Fascist, or is the definition sufficiently narrow as to exclude supervillains?
Oh, he's definitely a fascist.
So Captain America has always been antifa - well done para-anal.
Against fascism =/= Antifa.
except that is exactly what it equals. It's quite literally what it means. Other than that it is an extremely disparate collective. It's just like saying "not believing in god =/= atheist"
The Antifa (English: /ænˈtiːfə/ or /ˈæntiˌfɑː/) movement is a conglomeration of autonomous, self-styled anti-fascist militant groups in the United States. The principal feature of antifa groups is their opposition to fascism through the use of direct action.
No but it encompasses everyone who uses direct action, which is what Captain America does (Some Antifa don't condone violence but Captain America has fuckloads of violence):QuoteThe Antifa (English: /ænˈtiːfə/ or /ˈæntiˌfɑː/) movement is a conglomeration of autonomous, self-styled anti-fascist militant groups in the United States. The principal feature of antifa groups is their opposition to fascism through the use of direct action.
No but it encompasses everyone who uses direct action, which is what Captain America does (Some Antifa don't condone violence but Captain America has fuckloads of violence):QuoteThe Antifa (English: /ænˈtiːfə/ or /ˈæntiˌfɑː/) movement is a conglomeration of autonomous, self-styled anti-fascist militant groups in the United States. The principal feature of antifa groups is their opposition to fascism through the use of direct action.
I think you're trying to cram a square peg into a round hole. AFAIK, Cap's never been a member of a vigilante group whose primary purpose was direct action against fascism. I don't think he ever joined a group that had "anti-fascist" or a variation in its name.
Cap's never been a member of a vigilante group whose primary purpose was direct action against fascism.By virtue of being a superhero he's a vigilante.
No but it encompasses everyone who uses direct action, which is what Captain America does (Some Antifa don't condone violence but Captain America has fuckloads of violence):QuoteThe Antifa (English: /ænˈtiːfə/ or /ˈæntiˌfɑː/) movement is a conglomeration of autonomous, self-styled anti-fascist militant groups in the United States. The principal feature of antifa groups is their opposition to fascism through the use of direct action.
I think you're trying to cram a square peg into a round hole. AFAIK, Cap's never been a member of a vigilante group whose primary purpose was direct action against fascism. I don't think he ever joined a group that had "anti-fascist" or a variation in its name.
Ahem... Captain America has literally been the leader of a vigilantee group that was specifically created for direct action against Fascism.
They called it "The Avengers" and they fought against a warlord who were imprisoning people without a trial based purely on profiling. (Civil war, Cap was running the rogue Avengers team against Stark and SHIELD who went full Fascist to imprison all mutants and other superheroes.)
Cap was part of the Allied Forces, an organization created specifically to, amongst other things, make fascistsgooddead.
Yeah yeah yeah. We learned 70 years ago what to do with fascists and their cronies. Remind me, what happened to Italy in the 40s, again?
You smug fuck. Jesus Christ, anyone with access to Wikipedia can figure out the answers to that: the Years of Lead. The Marxist movement in Italy made a catastrophically destructive ass of themselves and were basically terrorists. Does the name Dylann Roof ring a bell, you blatantly smug honkie?
Yeah yeah yeah. We learned 70 years ago what to do with fascists and their cronies. Remind me, what happened to Italy in the 40s, again?
And by the way, I'm only half honkie. And you're the one who got the condescension ball rolling:
AFAIK at least the people calling themselves Antifa in USA haven't killed anyone. Few people have been hit (which is riskier than Hollywood tells you) and they've done some property damage but that's about it. Meanwhile the Neo-Nazis have shot people, driven over people with cars, beaten up people and usually have been the ones to instigate violence.
But my point was that if sending an army to topple a Fascist regime is OK in Lana's books, then why the hell does she complain so much about Nazis getting punched?
Apart from the violence actually perpetrated by these fucking Nazis, it is important to remember that these fucktards are promoting genocide, not their bullshit white genocide either. Their stated goal is to establish a white ethnostate in the US. How the fuck do you do that without violence and genocide? You can't crackers.
They say 'oh look the other ethnicities will want to move, once the ethnostate is established'. Well that's complete bullshit. If it weren't there would be segregated ethnostates already. Moreover people don't like to move. Even in the shittest of circumstances people stick around. Because its fucking hard to leave your home and your family and all you've worked for.
So no punching a nazi is not responding with violence to their free and open exchange of ideas.
If the other half is paragon I guess that's technically true.You smug fuck. Jesus Christ, anyone with access to Wikipedia can figure out the answers to that: the Years of Lead. The Marxist movement in Italy made a catastrophically destructive ass of themselves and were basically terrorists. Does the name Dylann Roof ring a bell, you blatantly smug honkie?
Good, now we're getting somewhere! But not quite far enough. What do you know about its influence on the Italian right of the era?
And by the way, I'm only half honkie. And you're the one who got the condescension ball rolling:
Slytherin?
(Bolding mine)AFAIK at least the people calling themselves Antifa in USA haven't killed anyone. Few people have been hit (which is riskier than Hollywood tells you) and they've done some property damage but that's about it. Meanwhile the Neo-Nazis have shot people, driven over people with cars, beaten up people and usually have been the ones to instigate violence.
But my point was that if sending an army to topple a Fascist regime is OK in Lana's books, then why the hell does she complain so much about Nazis getting punched?
Simple. There's a world of difference between toppling a regime you're at war with and attacking people who have committed no crime besides holding distasteful political views. I'm fine with punching Nazis - or even outright killing them - if it's done in self-defense or the defense of others. On the other hand, picking fights with them when they haven't done anything yet makes you the aggressor.
I missed it because I don't care but Lana......don't do this again. Please.
Ironbite-you already got fucking outed don't do this again.
What's that? Is Lana using Alt-right as a source for her claims again?
https://itsgoingdown.org/eugene-alt-right-trolls-behind-boston-antifa-exposed/
Oh wow. Look at that. Your proof that the Big Bad Bully ANTIFA is a meany-meany organization is from a troll account run by (and shared by) Neo-Nazis. Who would have guessed that you do this again?
Oh and the entire "picking fights with Nazis" thingy is more than a little lie because when the Neo-Nazis roll into town they come armed for a fight any most of the fights have been instigated by them. Take a look at the "Unite the Right" rally for example, Nazis came in with guns and clubs and shields and were more than willing to throw the first punch.
And if you think that the only bad thing about Nazis is that they have an unpopular political opinion then you must have closed your eyes on purpose.
You know, I was just thinking that America is a touch overdue for a school shooting. You guys certainly don't disappoint.
Against fascism =/= Antifa.
Against fascism =/= Antifa.
Lets try a little deductive reasoning:
Anti- means opposed to, or against.
Anti-fa is short for anti-fascism.
Therefore...
Wait, if I don't live in France, then where did I get this baguette...?
Against fascism =/= Antifa.
Lets try a little deductive reasoning:
Anti- means opposed to, or against.
Anti-fa is short for anti-fascism.
Therefore...
Cute, but wrong. Antifa is a specific subset of people who don't like fascism. You might as well be saying everybody who lives in a republic lives in France.
Against fascism =/= Antifa.
Lets try a little deductive reasoning:
Anti- means opposed to, or against.
Anti-fa is short for anti-fascism.
Therefore...
Cute, but wrong. Antifa is a specific subset of people who don't like fascism. You might as well be saying everybody who lives in a republic lives in France.
(https://i.imgur.com/EDSanlx.jpg)
Ironbite-5 yard penalty, repeat 3rd down.
>Implying her majesty successfully proved anything
Against fascism =/= Antifa.
Lets try a little deductive reasoning:
Anti- means opposed to, or against.
Anti-fa is short for anti-fascism.
Therefore...
Cute, but wrong. Antifa is a specific subset of people who don't like fascism. You might as well be saying everybody who lives in a republic lives in France.
(https://i.imgur.com/EDSanlx.jpg)
Ironbite-5 yard penalty, repeat 3rd down.
>Implying her majesty successfully proved anything
Against fascism =/= Antifa.
Lets try a little deductive reasoning:
Anti- means opposed to, or against.
Anti-fa is short for anti-fascism.
Therefore...
Cute, but wrong. Antifa is a specific subset of people who don't like fascism. You might as well be saying everybody who lives in a republic lives in France.
(https://i.imgur.com/EDSanlx.jpg)
Ironbite-5 yard penalty, repeat 3rd down.
>Implying her majesty successfully proved anything
(https://i.imgur.com/RCDz7rp.jpg)
Ironbite-5 yard penalty, 3rd down.
Against fascism =/= Antifa.
Lets try a little deductive reasoning:
Anti- means opposed to, or against.
Anti-fa is short for anti-fascism.
Therefore...
Cute, but wrong. Antifa is a specific subset of people who don't like fascism. You might as well be saying everybody who lives in a republic lives in France.
(https://i.imgur.com/EDSanlx.jpg)
Ironbite-5 yard penalty, repeat 3rd down.
>Implying her majesty successfully proved anything
(https://i.imgur.com/RCDz7rp.jpg)
Ironbite-5 yard penalty, 3rd down.
No, honey. Queenie's the one using fallacies. The idea that X=Y because Y is a subset of X is completely illogical.
Against fascism =/= Antifa.
Lets try a little deductive reasoning:
Anti- means opposed to, or against.
Anti-fa is short for anti-fascism.
Therefore...
Cute, but wrong. Antifa is a specific subset of people who don't like fascism. You might as well be saying everybody who lives in a republic lives in France.
(https://i.imgur.com/EDSanlx.jpg)
Ironbite-5 yard penalty, repeat 3rd down.
>Implying her majesty successfully proved anything
(https://i.imgur.com/RCDz7rp.jpg)
Ironbite-5 yard penalty, 3rd down.
No, honey. Queenie's the one using fallacies. The idea that X=Y because Y is a subset of X is completely illogical.
(https://i.imgur.com/3DYim0d.jpg)
Ironbite-Team will be assigned a 20 yard penalty on the kickoff.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35EB6MgfrSs
Lana, I'm gonna let you finish, but you sound like this guy when you try to debate.
Against fascism =/= Antifa.
Lets try a little deductive reasoning:
Anti- means opposed to, or against.
Anti-fa is short for anti-fascism.
Therefore...
Cute, but wrong. Antifa is a specific subset of people who don't like fascism. You might as well be saying everybody who lives in a republic lives in France.
(https://i.imgur.com/EDSanlx.jpg)
Ironbite-5 yard penalty, repeat 3rd down.
>Implying her majesty successfully proved anything
(https://i.imgur.com/RCDz7rp.jpg)
Ironbite-5 yard penalty, 3rd down.
No, honey. Queenie's the one using fallacies. The idea that X=Y because Y is a subset of X is completely illogical.
(https://i.imgur.com/3DYim0d.jpg)
Ironbite-Team will be assigned a 20 yard penalty on the kickoff.
Nice try. Come back when you have actual arguments.
Not that it matters but Paranal's example is also wrong. If Antifa is a specific subset of those against fascism then all antifa are by definition against fascism.
So rather than saying 'you may as well say France is a Republic so all people who live in republics must be French', Paranal is saying France can't be a Republic because there are other Republics.
But we all know what our g.i.r.l. paranal is saying is "there are good people on both sides", "I feel triggered by media which has people attacking Nazi's", "Wolfenstein just lost a customer", "Sieg - wait who let that camera in here"
When did I say Antifa weren't against fascism? At least, I think that's what you're going on about.
Against fascism =/= Antifa.
When did I say Antifa weren't against fascism? At least, I think that's what you're going on about.Against fascism =/= Antifa.
Times like this, I wish I still smoked the devil's reefer. I would love to read this thread. LERLS
I think that is quite unfair to take what was said less than a week back out of context like that. I think you'll find that Para-anal was 'tired', 'upset' or 'didn't read what they posted'.
Perhaps it would be better if we were told about the trans/not trans brother/ cousin now.
When did I say Antifa weren't against fascism? At least, I think that's what you're going on about.Against fascism =/= Antifa.
Times like this, I wish I still smoked the devil's reefer. I would love to read this thread. LERLS
Ohhhh, now I think I know where you got that impression. Looks like there was a miscommunication. I meant that being against fascism didn't necessarily mean you were Antifa, not that Antifa wasn't against fascism.
When did I say Antifa weren't against fascism? At least, I think that's what you're going on about.Against fascism =/= Antifa.
Times like this, I wish I still smoked the devil's reefer. I would love to read this thread. LERLS
Ohhhh, now I think I know where you got that impression. Looks like there was a miscommunication. I meant that being against fascism didn't necessarily mean you were Antifa, not that Antifa wasn't against fascism.
(https://i.imgur.com/V4UZ4Qk.jpg)
Ironbite-15 yard penalty, third down.
If anyone understood what the fuck happens with gridiron. I think it's time we stopped discussing how much Lana loves Nazis and start talking about why either of the Rugby codes or soccer are much better games than Gridiron.
You know, I was just thinking that America is a touch overdue for a school shooting. You guys certainly don't disappoint.
I was just thinking the other day that Australia is about 20 years overdue for a mass shooting. What gives?
Just a hint.
If a student is a 1) loner, 2) quiet, 3) is bullied, 4) loves violent video games and 5) wears a trench coat to school - you can pretty much profile them as a potential mass shooter.
Analyses of mass homicide perpetrators themselves have not identified substantial links with violent video games. A 2002 analysis by the US Secret Service (United States Secret Service and United States Department of Education, 2002) suggested that school shooters tended to consume relatively low amounts of violent media compared to normative levels for same-age peers. This finding does not mean that if violence-prone youth watched more violent videos, they would be less likely to be violent. This finding simply means that no link has been found between school shooters and their videogame habits.
"Most of the initial reporting was wrong," wrote Dave Cullen, a journalist who spent 10 years researching and writing a book about Columbine. "We were so anxious to answer that burning question for you that we jumped to conclusions on tiny fragments of evidence in the first days, even hours."
One of the earliest misrepresentations was in profiling the two shooters and laying out their motives. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were initially reported as goths and loners who were part of the "Trench Coat Mafia." The media said they were bullied by jocks and sought revenge on classmates who treated them as social outcasts. Nineteen years later that profile still persists. But it's a myth.
Well Antifa must be as bad as the fascists because they showed that Lana's post aboit "Boston Antifa" was just a bunch of her alt-right buds masquerading as antifas and that made Lanas argument look silly.
Those mean old antifas!
Trust me, there's plenty of evidence of them being horrible. Ask a Berkeley resident.
You know, I was just thinking that America is a touch overdue for a school shooting. You guys certainly don't disappoint.
I was just thinking the other day that Australia is about 20 years overdue for a mass shooting. What gives?
Every time a would be shooter pops up, the drop bears get him before anything can come of it.
That's rich coming from the woman who conflated "doesn't like fascism" with "Antifa".
Technically, black is not a color, but it is the lack of color.
Trust me, there's plenty of evidence of them being horrible. Ask a Berkeley resident.
I don't believe you. Cite your sources.
That's rich coming from the woman who conflated "doesn't like fascism" with "Antifa".
You seem to conflate "does not like X" with "Has been known to kill X, with guns, melee weapons and his bare fucking hands. Will fight X wherever he sees it and does not compromise."
Because that is what Captain America does to Fascism and I'm sure that everyone except you will agree that this is a lot more violence and death than what has been done by people wearing the Antifa colours.
Yes. But my point has always been that Steve Rogers is not Antifa except in the broadest possible terms.
He's not complaining about Cap opposing fascism, but about the (supposed, I haven't read the comic) support for Antifa. Let's not build strawmen.That was your original claim where you first started defending the Neo-Nazi complaining about the comic.
I think you're trying to cram a square peg into a round hole. AFAIK, Cap's never been a member of a vigilante group whose primary purpose was direct action against fascism. I don't think he ever joined a group that had "anti-fascist" or a variation in its name.
Yes. But my point has always been that Steve Rogers is not Antifa except in the broadest possible terms.
(https://i.imgur.com/EDSanlx.jpg)He's not complaining about Cap opposing fascism, but about the (supposed, I haven't read the comic) support for Antifa. Let's not build strawmen.That was your original claim where you first started defending the Neo-Nazi complaining about the comic.
Then you moved onto this:I think you're trying to cram a square peg into a round hole. AFAIK, Cap's never been a member of a vigilante group whose primary purpose was direct action against fascism. I don't think he ever joined a group that had "anti-fascist" or a variation in its name.
And as we have tried to point out repeatedly, Cap has been in vigilantee groups, several of them, that fought against Fascism. For some of those groups it was in fact the primary purpose.
So, Lana... Are you familiar with the Civil war storyline in Marvel or not? Because one of the main motivations for Cap to oppose the registration is that he saw where that kind of thing leads to. Concentration camps and lists of people is literally what the Nazis did, it's what the US did to Japanese-Americans and it's close enough to Fascism for him.
Lana, why do you keep trying to convince people here of "BUT BOTH SIDES!" when everyone can 1) see through you and 2) has rejected BUT BOTH SIDES thoroughly?
Interesting you brought up Berkeley, because if I recall telling you, that's the city where the alt-right cut a deal with the coppers to disarm antifa but not the alt right before thumping any lefties antifa or non antifa alike. I guess political violence with police approval is ok.
But, both sides. Amiright?
But not the alt right, who went on a bashing frenzy.Interesting you brought up Berkeley, because if I recall telling you, that's the city where the alt-right cut a deal with the coppers to disarm antifa but not the alt right before thumping any lefties antifa or non antifa alike. I guess political violence with police approval is ok.
But, both sides. Amiright?
The source you keep citing only claims that the police disarmed Antifa to some extent...
But not the alt right, who went on a bashing frenzy.Interesting you brought up Berkeley, because if I recall telling you, that's the city where the alt-right cut a deal with the coppers to disarm antifa but not the alt right before thumping any lefties antifa or non antifa alike. I guess political violence with police approval is ok.
But, both sides. Amiright?
The source you keep citing only claims that the police disarmed Antifa to some extent...
Of course political violence is bad, on both sides, on both sides. Never mind that only one side has historically and presently actually had the full attention of law enforcement in the US! (https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2018/5/18/17368328/black-identity-extremist-fbi-klan-white-supremacy-black-lives-matter-balogun)
That assessment discussed both white nationalists and protesters, but it did so in a telling way: It marked the protesters as the most imminent source of violence, warning that “anarchist extremists’ use of violence as a means to oppose racism and white supremacist extremists’ preparations to counterattack anarchist extremists are the principal drivers of violence at recent white supremacist rallies”
National-Socialism is truly the civil rights issue of our time.
You seem to be confusing the threat assessment with the article. The fact the threat assessment wasted time fretting about anarchists only underscores the fact that they were woefully unprepared for alt righters firing live rounds at unarmed leftists, openly beating black men yards from a police station, forming literal torch weilding mobs-oh and vehicular homicide. All this reveals is the deep cultural problem within US law enforcement when it comes to accurately assessing right wing threats.
But fine people. But both sides.
You seem to be confusing the threat assessment with the article. The fact the threat assessment wasted time fretting about anarchists only underscores the fact that they were woefully unprepared for alt righters firing live rounds at unarmed leftists, openly beating black men yards from a police station, forming literal torch weilding mobs-oh and vehicular homicide. All this reveals is the deep cultural problem within US law enforcement when it comes to accurately assessing right wing threats.
But fine people. But both sides.
They were basing things off recent events. I agree that they were woefully unprepared, but I don't think it's because of political bias.
Actually, I have a question. Is it wrong to condemn violent acts committed by Antifa? I'm excluding acts of self-defense, of course.
And as we have tried to point out repeatedly, Cap has been in vigilantee groups, several of them, that fought against Fascism. For some of those groups it was in fact the primary purpose.
He's a Nazi?
You seem to be confusing the threat assessment with the article. The fact the threat assessment wasted time fretting about anarchists only underscores the fact that they were woefully unprepared for alt righters firing live rounds at unarmed leftists, openly beating black men yards from a police station, forming literal torch weilding mobs-oh and vehicular homicide. All this reveals is the deep cultural problem within US law enforcement when it comes to accurately assessing right wing threats.
But fine people. But both sides.
They were basing things off recent events. I agree that they were woefully unprepared, but I don't think it's because of political bias.
Actually, I have a question. Is it wrong to condemn violent acts committed by Antifa? I'm excluding acts of self-defense, of course.
Isn't it always self defence against Nazis?
And as we have tried to point out repeatedly, Cap has been in vigilantee groups, several of them, that fought against Fascism. For some of those groups it was in fact the primary purpose.
He's a Nazi?
*record scratch*
Que? How the fuck is "Has been in several vigilante groups that fought against Fascism, and it was the main purpose of some of those groups"="He's a Nazi"? No. Please. Explain. Direct question invoked. I want your explanation for this one.
That was your original claim where you first started defending the Neo-Nazi complaining about the comic.
National-Socialism is truly the civil rights issue of our time.
Why doesn't anyone think of the Nazis!
You seem to be confusing the threat assessment with the article. The fact the threat assessment wasted time fretting about anarchists only underscores the fact that they were woefully unprepared for alt righters firing live rounds at unarmed leftists, openly beating black men yards from a police station, forming literal torch weilding mobs-oh and vehicular homicide. All this reveals is the deep cultural problem within US law enforcement when it comes to accurately assessing right wing threats.
But fine people. But both sides.
They were basing things off recent events. I agree that they were woefully unprepared, but I don't think it's because of political bias.
Actually, I have a question. Is it wrong to condemn violent acts committed by Antifa? I'm excluding acts of self-defense, of course.
Local and university pokice acted under similar assumptions, allowing white nationalists to move freely even after the violence on August 11.
You seem to be confusing the threat assessment with the article. The fact the threat assessment wasted time fretting about anarchists only underscores the fact that they were woefully unprepared for alt righters firing live rounds at unarmed leftists, openly beating black men yards from a police station, forming literal torch weilding mobs-oh and vehicular homicide. All this reveals is the deep cultural problem within US law enforcement when it comes to accurately assessing right wing threats.
But fine people. But both sides.
They were basing things off recent events. I agree that they were woefully unprepared, but I don't think it's because of political bias.
Actually, I have a question. Is it wrong to condemn violent acts committed by Antifa? I'm excluding acts of self-defense, of course.
I think it's petty and sleazy coming from you specifically as you're trying to conflate lethal and genocidal Nazis with their opponents and claiming that the Nazis psychotic violence equates with leftists fighting them in self defence.
Also you missed the very next paragraph aftwe the one you're trying to use as your "gotcha" from the Vox article.QuoteLocal and university pokice acted under similar assumptions, allowing white nationalists to move freely even after the violence on August 11.
So, their freaking out over a vastly overhyped antifa 'threat' caused them to overlook the ones screaming "blood and soil" and causing blood to soak the soil. Criminal negligence, at best!
You seem to be confusing the threat assessment with the article. The fact the threat assessment wasted time fretting about anarchists only underscores the fact that they were woefully unprepared for alt righters firing live rounds at unarmed leftists, openly beating black men yards from a police station, forming literal torch weilding mobs-oh and vehicular homicide. All this reveals is the deep cultural problem within US law enforcement when it comes to accurately assessing right wing threats.
But fine people. But both sides.
They were basing things off recent events. I agree that they were woefully unprepared, but I don't think it's because of political bias.
Actually, I have a question. Is it wrong to condemn violent acts committed by Antifa? I'm excluding acts of self-defense, of course.
I think it's petty and sleazy coming from you specifically as you're trying to conflate lethal and genocidal Nazis with their opponents and claiming that the Nazis psychotic violence equates with leftists fighting them in self defence.
I specifically excluded self-defense. Try again.
Not that it matters. I mean, pointing out the obvious here is like shouting at a brick wall. It just begs the philosophical question whether a point truly has meaning if no intelligent observer is there to evaluate and understand said point. Essentially, the old "if a tree falls on Helen Keller, and no one is around, does she make a sound?"
Nevertheless, here I go: Lana, the timing of the protest coupled with the police action is suspect. It was after Charlottesville, where the alt-right killed a peaceful protestor. Disarming the group that is clearly less violent, while allowing literal Nazis to carry weapons in the wake Charlottesville, was clearly not borne of a desire to maintain peace: it was to leave protestors defenseless to Nazi attacks.
You seem to be confusing the threat assessment with the article. The fact the threat assessment wasted time fretting about anarchists only underscores the fact that they were woefully unprepared for alt righters firing live rounds at unarmed leftists, openly beating black men yards from a police station, forming literal torch weilding mobs-oh and vehicular homicide. All this reveals is the deep cultural problem within US law enforcement when it comes to accurately assessing right wing threats.
But fine people. But both sides.
They were basing things off recent events. I agree that they were woefully unprepared, but I don't think it's because of political bias.
Actually, I have a question. Is it wrong to condemn violent acts committed by Antifa? I'm excluding acts of self-defense, of course.
I think it's petty and sleazy coming from you specifically as you're trying to conflate lethal and genocidal Nazis with their opponents and claiming that the Nazis psychotic violence equates with leftists fighting them in self defence.
I specifically excluded self-defense. Try again.
Fighting Nazis, esp. if you belong to any of the groups that they literally want to wipe from the face of the Earth. Is always self-defense.
Only LanaGon would take away from Charlotsville that the "alt right fought in self defense", tell me Lana, what was Heather doing to that alt right guys car from over thirty metres away before the alt-righter squished her with it?You seem to be confusing the threat assessment with the article. The fact the threat assessment wasted time fretting about anarchists only underscores the fact that they were woefully unprepared for alt righters firing live rounds at unarmed leftists, openly beating black men yards from a police station, forming literal torch weilding mobs-oh and vehicular homicide. All this reveals is the deep cultural problem within US law enforcement when it comes to accurately assessing right wing threats.
But fine people. But both sides.
They were basing things off recent events. I agree that they were woefully unprepared, but I don't think it's because of political bias.
Actually, I have a question. Is it wrong to condemn violent acts committed by Antifa? I'm excluding acts of self-defense, of course.
I think it's petty and sleazy coming from you specifically as you're trying to conflate lethal and genocidal Nazis with their opponents and claiming that the Nazis psychotic violence equates with leftists fighting them in self defence.
I specifically excluded self-defense. Try again.Also you missed the very next paragraph aftwe the one you're trying to use as your "gotcha" from the Vox article.QuoteLocal and university pokice acted under similar assumptions, allowing white nationalists to move freely even after the violence on August 11.
So, their freaking out over a vastly overhyped antifa 'threat' caused them to overlook the ones screaming "blood and soil" and causing blood to soak the soil. Criminal negligence, at best!
You mean they operated under the assumption that, based on past events, Antifa would attack and the alt-right would fight in self-defense? I agree that they should have taken greater measures in case the alt-right started things, but it's not as biased as you claim it to be.
I mean, rich people pick fights with communists all the time. Now it is mainly by putting money into propaganda and bribing politicians to make sure that capitalist countries won't have powerful communist parties, but it is not unheard of for rich people to tell USA to invade a country and take down their government or give money to terrorists and help them smuggle drugs into Europe. United fruit company for example did both. Then again, times have changed, last time it was proven they did either was back in the distant 2007 and I'm sure they learned their lesson after that.
...But I was going somewhere with this. Oh that's right, if you see communists saying that they want to kill people just for being rich or being born into certain families then sure, that's bad and all but all the communists, socialists and whatnot that I've seen in real life (and not as strawmen) are just talking about equality and boring stuff like living wages or basic income. Meanwhile the Nazis I've seen are still quite open about wanting death camps. Almost as if the two groups are not the same.
Only LanaGon would take away from Charlotsville that the "alt right fought in self defense", tell me Lana, what was Heather doing to that alt right guys car from over thirty metres away before the alt-righter squished her with it?You seem to be confusing the threat assessment with the article. The fact the threat assessment wasted time fretting about anarchists only underscores the fact that they were woefully unprepared for alt righters firing live rounds at unarmed leftists, openly beating black men yards from a police station, forming literal torch weilding mobs-oh and vehicular homicide. All this reveals is the deep cultural problem within US law enforcement when it comes to accurately assessing right wing threats.
But fine people. But both sides.
They were basing things off recent events. I agree that they were woefully unprepared, but I don't think it's because of political bias.
Actually, I have a question. Is it wrong to condemn violent acts committed by Antifa? I'm excluding acts of self-defense, of course.
I think it's petty and sleazy coming from you specifically as you're trying to conflate lethal and genocidal Nazis with their opponents and claiming that the Nazis psychotic violence equates with leftists fighting them in self defence.
I specifically excluded self-defense. Try again.Also you missed the very next paragraph aftwe the one you're trying to use as your "gotcha" from the Vox article.QuoteLocal and university pokice acted under similar assumptions, allowing white nationalists to move freely even after the violence on August 11.
So, their freaking out over a vastly overhyped antifa 'threat' caused them to overlook the ones screaming "blood and soil" and causing blood to soak the soil. Criminal negligence, at best!
You mean they operated under the assumption that, based on past events, Antifa would attack and the alt-right would fight in self-defense? I agree that they should have taken greater measures in case the alt-right started things, but it's not as biased as you claim it to be.
I mean, rich people pick fights with communists all the time. Now it is mainly by putting money into propaganda and bribing politicians to make sure that capitalist countries won't have powerful communist parties, but it is not unheard of for rich people to tell USA to invade a country and take down their government or give money to terrorists and help them smuggle drugs into Europe. United fruit company for example did both. Then again, times have changed, last time it was proven they did either was back in the distant 2007 and I'm sure they learned their lesson after that.
...But I was going somewhere with this. Oh that's right, if you see communists saying that they want to kill people just for being rich or being born into certain families then sure, that's bad and all but all the communists, socialists and whatnot that I've seen in real life (and not as strawmen) are just talking about equality and boring stuff like living wages or basic income. Meanwhile the Nazis I've seen are still quite open about wanting death camps. Almost as if the two groups are not the same.
Lana: BUT BUT BUT! I CAN FIND REDDIT POSTS! AND...AND TUMBLR QUOTES! AND TWEETS! BOFF SIDES!! WAAAH BOFF SIDES!! WAAH!
Tensions rose. The black bloc pushed forward, as if to scale the waist-high barriers that officers put up to secure the park. Alameda County sheriff’s deputies began putting on helmets and gas masks – a sign of trouble to come.
Then, police radios crackled: “Please be advised – we are not deploying,” the dispatcher said.
With that, police pulled back from the park, and the black bloc surged in. Fights and scuffles broke out. Right-wing demonstrators, badly outnumbered, found themselves mobbed by the black-clad protesters. They struggled to break away and flee.
Lana can I ask you to stop? Like seriously. Just stop.
Ironbite-you lost long ago.
Everyone here has dismissed your arguments as frivolous and lacking in merit. You have convinced no one of anything, save that you think that protecting Nazis right to gather more Nazis and spread their hateful doctrine is more important than protecting oneself against Nazis. Take the L, already.
Lana can I ask you to stop? Like seriously. Just stop.
Ironbite-you lost long ago.
No I haven't.
Everyone here has dismissed your arguments as frivolous and lacking in merit. You have convinced no one of anything, save that you think that protecting Nazis right to gather more Nazis and spread their hateful doctrine is more important than protecting oneself against Nazis. Take the L, already.
That is a strawman. I have no problem with people protecting themselves from Nazis, but starting fights with them is not self-defense. Period.
I'm having a hard time figuring out why Lana Dragagon has taken this hill to die on. I mean come on, it's Nazis. We know what they're about.
Ironbite-these are not good people and their ideology should've been wiped from the face of the earth in 1950.
I'm having a hard time figuring out why Lana Dragagon has taken this hill to die on. I mean come on, it's Nazis. We know what they're about.Hey, the last incarnation was defending sex offenders on 4chan. At least it's in character!
Ironbite-these are not good people and their ideology should've been wiped from the face of the earth in 1950.
I'm having a hard time figuring out why Lana Dragagon has taken this hill to die on. I mean come on, it's Nazis. We know what they're about.
Ironbite-these are not good people and their ideology should've been wiped from the face of the earth in 1950.
Is it impossible to hate both Nazis and Antifa?
EDIT:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mNQ2SpHkNI
Right from the Fascist-horse's mouth: They do not care about free-speech and are only using it as a tool.
Kid, you aren't "winning" this debate and I believe understanding why that is, is going to help you a lot in life.
This is not a game, there are no rules and referees (other than the forum rules but that's a separate matter) in this. You don't score points or win anything by trying to get a "gotcha" out of people. Most importantly, no matter how well you write your comments, no matter how many people you have helping you find articles that defend the indefensible, you can't "win" by trying to argue that up is down.
This is real life debate and there are only two things that matter: a) can you make people believe that you are correct? b) what is the correct answer to the debated issue?
For the first part, you haven't convinced anyone that Nazis are the real victims that need protection or that Antifa is somehow really, really bad. For the latter part the answer is pretty much the same, Nazis bad, Antifa hooligans who band together because they don't like Nazis.
And here's another thing: We don't really care about making you admit "defeat" either. This isn't a game for us. When we see someone jump in to defend Nazis and fictional Nazis and complain about people who oppose Nazis we get upset because that's a pretty shitty thing to do. If it looks like everyone is ganging up on you it's just because there's no one else here who uses every single excuse to defend Nazis.
Heck, I've talked about non-violence before when some folks (*cough* Niam *cough) go over board, but even I know that Nazis are the real villains here.
And as another person who would get a bullet in the head if they take charge this is not an idle topic. In fact, simply as a person who opposes genocides I take personal interest in the "should Nazis be allowed to freely preach their hate and gain political power" matters.
Lana can I ask you to stop? Like seriously. Just stop.
Ironbite-you lost long ago.
Everyone here has dismissed your arguments as frivolous and lacking in merit. You have convinced no one of anything, save that you think that protecting Nazis right to gather more Nazis and spread their hateful doctrine is more important than protecting oneself against Nazis. Take the L, already.
EDIT:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mNQ2SpHkNI
Right from the Fascist-horse's mouth: They do not care about free-speech and are only using it as a tool.
But you seem to believe that I hold the position I do because I hold alt-right sympathies. I do not, as I have repeatedly explained.
But you seem to believe that I hold the position I do because I hold alt-right sympathies. I do not, as I have repeatedly explained.
Actions speak louder then words.
You are constantly making a thing about defending the free speech of alt-righters, frequently in situations where they aren't actually losing them. But you never seem to care about alt-righters being violent or suppressing free speech unless we raise the matter. Hell I once asked you if sending death threats to feminists was censorship and you seriously tried to weasel out of answering, saying their were "subtle nuances" on the issue.
I think you have alt-right sympathies because of your double standards, not because you disagree. If you acted as someone who was against violence and censorship in general I wouldn't think that.
When was the last time any of you suggested censoring or assaulting... say, Nation of Islam members? If you talked about that, I'd be defending their rights too.Not if your posting history is anything to go by.
When was the last time any of you suggested censoring or assaulting... say, Nation of Islam members? If you talked about that, I'd be defending their rights too.Not if your posting history is anything to go by.
Your role around here seems to be tireless defence of anything socially conservative to alt-right while claiming the mantle of social liberalism. It all smacks of concern trolling.
Allow me to illustrate why this explanation is a pile of rancid dingos kidneys.When was the last time any of you suggested censoring or assaulting... say, Nation of Islam members? If you talked about that, I'd be defending their rights too.Not if your posting history is anything to go by.
Your role around here seems to be tireless defence of anything socially conservative to alt-right while claiming the mantle of social liberalism. It all smacks of concern trolling.
My posting history is only the way it is because you guys keep saying we should censor or assault certain groups and individuals. It's extremely flawed logic.
Let me illustrate this for you:
You: These people should be censored.
Me: No they shouldn't.
You: These people should be attacked.
Me: No they shouldn't.
*repeat ad nauseum*
You: Nazi sympathizer!
Me: WTF?
Allow me to illustrate why this explanation is a pile of rancid dingos kidneys.When was the last time any of you suggested censoring or assaulting... say, Nation of Islam members? If you talked about that, I'd be defending their rights too.Not if your posting history is anything to go by.
Your role around here seems to be tireless defence of anything socially conservative to alt-right while claiming the mantle of social liberalism. It all smacks of concern trolling.
My posting history is only the way it is because you guys keep saying we should censor or assault certain groups and individuals. It's extremely flawed logic.
Let me illustrate this for you:
You: These people should be censored.
Me: No they shouldn't.
You: These people should be attacked.
Me: No they shouldn't.
*repeat ad nauseum*
You: Nazi sympathizer!
Me: WTF?
You: Help help, sound the alarm. Nazis and sexists are being mistreated.
Everyone else: (counts the fucks not given...)
You: YEW MONSTAS!!!
Everyone else: (speculation on why you spend so much damn time defending Nazis..)
If you disagree with someone's philosophical or religious beliefs, attack the belief, not the person.
Disagreements will happen. Try to argue in good faith and don't immediately leap to the worst possible interpretation of your opponent's words.
PHILADELPHIA—In response to the abrupt cancellation of the hit series Roseanne the media watchdog group FactCheck.org blasted ABC Tuesday for its unrealistic portrayal of racists actually facing consequences for their actions. “This just does not represent how things actually work in America,” said spokesperson Rachel Donnelly, adding that the network’s decision to end production of a popular primetime comedy merely because the eponymous lead described a black, senior advisor to the former president as an “ape” grossly mischaracterizes the reality that racists can get away with whatever they want unchecked. “For years, ABC has presented us with an honest and true-to-life view of blatant racism, but today, by moving to punish Roseanne Barr for repugnant, prejudiced remarks, network executives have shown that they are completely out of touch with modern sensibilities.” At press time, Donnelly claimed that ABC’s parent company, Disney, deserved special blame for exposing impressionable children to such a lurid portrayal of repercussions for racial bigotry.
Something that never ceases to amaze me is just how many Nazis are fans of a feminist show about a racially diverse society singing about friendship. Just how do they not implode under the shear weight of their contradictory existence?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcreC5Qk94o
Stoneman Douglas High School shooter, Nikolas Cruz, shows off his psychotropic induced mentality, mixed with modern-day Autism.
I will continue to say that Autism will be a danger to American society until parents, schools and the general public stop coddling these spoiled life-losers!
Ghost is a fucking moron and a prime example of the Dunning–Kruger effect.
The very same. His Gab account can be found here. https://gab.ai/politicsghostGhost is a fucking moron and a prime example of the Dunning–Kruger effect.
Which "Ghost" are we talking about? I'm guessing it's the True Capitalist Radio guy, but I'd like to make sure.
Isn't Ghost at least partially an act to gain listeners who want to troll him for fun because they can get him to say more dumb stuff/get angry at all the remixes and prank calls he gets?
Fuck, I can't believe that's 15 years ago.
Did the War in Iraq officially end? What about the one in Afghanistan?
Did the War in Iraq officially end? What about the one in Afghanistan?
https://allmalesocialistsociety.tumblr.com (https://allmalesocialistsociety.tumblr.com)
Yeah, no satire involved at all in that blog.
The problem is that Aryan founded civilized nations (Slavs and Asians do not do this) view the sub-Saharan blacks as equals/victims/inferiors-who-need-'help.' This artificially grows the population, but never improves their 'civilization' because they naturally keep having offspring until resources run out and then there is starvation ect… that requires more 'help' that further balloons their population, while shrinking the Aryan population as these resources are not going to Aryans who require a higher-standard of living i.e. more resources for each child. The 'help' also now means directly importing feral black males into Aryan homelands… who can we thank for this 'enrichment' lol
The fantasy example would be Elves (the stupid elf meme is equivalent to the holyjew dumb blonde meme) feeling sorry for the orcs/trolls being stupid, ugly, and aggressive and giving them everything they have including their females, till their are no more Elves to care for the greatly increased numbers of orcs/trolls and they go back to fighting over what is left, and nature once again rules.
Pathological altruism is embedded in the western mind via the devolutionary mind virus of Christianity, Communism, and now 'Social Justice'… interestingly enough all these anti-nature dogmas are creations of Jews.
If you really wanted to help the Blacks (I don't know why you should care if you are not Black) the answer is to institute a one child policy for black women, and sterilize black males. This would gradually make an improved hybridized version of their race, while still retaining the main characteristics as black genetics are dominant. A good example of this is Somalia, where Arabs have raped their black sex slaves for millennia. More recent examples include Chinese men in Africa impregnating black women… the result is the Blasian, AMxBF is an example of good hybridization. In contrast BMxWF produces basically just more blacks. Genetically a coal-burner's offspring will be Black. The Coal-burner will have more in common genetically with a random white person than her own children.
Being altruistic is a bad thing now.
Thanks alt-right.
“I can’t wait for the vigilante squads to start gunning journalists down on sight,”
Andrew Anglin, the neo-Nazi editor of the Daily Stormer, was especially pleased. He wrote that “killing journalists is an awesome position to promote,” and that doing so might successfully rebrand Yiannopoulos: “Now that is a sentiment I can get behind.”
"Diversity of thought" is a phrase used by Neo-Nazis though. Also by conservatives, Libertarians and anti-feminists.
https://www.theroot.com/diversity-of-thought-is-just-a-euphemism-for-white-supr-1825191839
The article has plenty of examples like Marshall DeRosa, a Florida Atlantic University professor teaches that "black supremacy" caused the US civil war, when confronted about this he used the term" diversity of thought" as a defense.
This is all part of Alt-Right and other racists using "free speech" as a shield when promoting hate. And you really have to consider who uses this phrase. You are likely to see people demanding "diversity of thought" so that they can go to a Pride rally and shout that Transwomen are just guys who chopped off their dick, preach that feminism is cancer in front of a women's shelter or go to a school and teach that the US civil war was all about states rights. What you won't see is someone demanding that a KKK rally should include a speaker from the ACLU so that there would be diversity in the speeches given.
The real problems with that post is
A) People saying feminism is bad aren't necessarily Nazis. They could be MRAs/MGTOW (which are bad, but not genocidal, lumping them together is wrong)
B) Not sure how "active" the parents are if they think its a sudden jump to the feminism is cancer part of youtube.
C) They blame youtube for hosting the videos but don't offer any feasible solution for how they should change the algorithm or w/e to prevent the "nazi" videos from being found by their son.
The real problems with that post is
A) People saying feminism is bad aren't necessarily Nazis. They could be MRAs/MGTOW (which are bad, but not genocidal, lumping them together is wrong)
B) Not sure how "active" the parents are if they think its a sudden jump to the feminism is cancer part of youtube.
C) They blame youtube for hosting the videos but don't offer any feasible solution for how they should change the algorithm or w/e to prevent the "nazi" videos from being found by their son.
I lumped in those groups because in this instance they use the same dog whistle term for the same reason. Their requests for diversity are in fact attempts to silence opinions and facts that they do not like particularly when those opinions and facts favour feminism or condemn racism.
The real problems with that post is
A) People saying feminism is bad aren't necessarily Nazis. They could be MRAs/MGTOW (which are bad, but not genocidal, lumping them together is wrong)
B) Not sure how "active" the parents are if they think its a sudden jump to the feminism is cancer part of youtube.
C) They blame youtube for hosting the videos but don't offer any feasible solution for how they should change the algorithm or w/e to prevent the "nazi" videos from being found by their son.
A) True, but there is a not inconsiderable amount of overlap between the two.
B) YouTube's recommendations are slipshod at the best of times. I've had it recommend things from that particular area after watching something from Jim Fucking Sterling, Son or YongYea, as examples.
C) Is for "curation." By actual people, not algorithms, not even well-trained neural networks. As it is, Google is almost totally hands-off when it comes to the content on YouTube. Kinda like Steam. Have real, actual humans look over reports of hate channels and/or videos, and make a determination according to established standards and practices. Start spouting Nazi bullshit? Start calling women "femoids" and anyone who can actually manage to get their dicks wet either "Chads" or "cucks?" Users would report that, and warm, human bodies would look at that shit and be like "Yeah, these people are cumstains, GTFO."
There's nothing wrong with diversity, whether of opinions, viewpoints or types of people. It's just that the example you used was a person who clearly identified the Nazi-dogwhistle term and as usual you keep defending Nazis "accidentally" by trying to claim that others use the same dogwhistle.
If you google the phrase "diversity of thought" pretty much everyone using it is doing so to attack "liberals" in USA and make them seem hateful.
BTW, I have talked with MRAs and the overlap with Nazis is very real. They share values AND enemies and whether a person is a member of both groups or simply considers the other group to be an ally of theirs varies but it does happen.
I'd rather Google not censor people, thank you very much.
Eh, it's just more pissing and moaning from right-whingers who confuse being called out, belly laughed at or mocked for actual oppression. You want to see how much conservatives love diversity of thought? Say something like Australia's Senator Hanson Young did when she opined that "men who rape women are pigs!" Guess who spearheaded the attack on her? "Libertarian" Senator David Leyonhjelm who accused her of hating on all men and told her to "stop shagging men." Diversity of thought for me not thee is the "libertarian" position. No surprises there.
As for the Daluth thing, one flawed policy that's cited as feminist inspired does not throw shade on the notion that women should be treated as political and social equals which is what feminism is. If I cited one particular Republican's statement that God is a white supremacist as emblematic of the GOP overall you can bet Lana would be up in arms. In fact if you pointed to GOP voter suppression as an example of racist tendencies in today's GOP she'd be more so.
I'd rather Google not censor people, thank you very much.
CURATION IS NOT CENSORSHIP. You don't have a RIGHT to be on youtube or steam.
Oh goody we've reached the freeze peach part of the debate.
Ironbite-where Lana et al completely forgets nobody is owed a platform.
Oh look a colossus of straw, shall we peek in side? Are there straw Trojans within?
-Feminism as a whole shouldn't be dismissed because of one flawed policy.
-This one guy is proof that all libertarians are hypocrites.
Pick one.
Oh look a colossus of straw, shall we peek in side? Are there straw Trojans within?
-Feminism as a whole shouldn't be dismissed because of one flawed policy.
-This one guy is proof that all libertarians are hypocrites.
Pick one.
Hey, not all libertarians are conservatives or crypto-fascists with beards, Noam Chomsky's alright.
The definition of feminism is contested mostly by people who describe themselves as non feminists, like you, who benefited massively from the battles feminists fought for them but that's a topic for another day, and feminists who believe in the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.
As for the Daluth thing, one flawed policy that's cited as feminist inspired does not throw shade on the notion that women should be treated as political and social equals which is what feminism is.
Most libertarians in English speaking countries subscribe to right wing libertarianism, certainly the Libertarian Party of the US does, Australia's David Leyonhjelm absolutely does and those libertarians are chiefly concerned with the maintenance of their own property rights. That's not something they themselves are contesting. The notion that feminist women have an agenda against men is something contested by feminists frequently.
I note that David Leyonhjelm had a twitter tantrum when a comedy show took the Mickey out of him (https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/06/29/free-speech-senator-david-leyonheljm-complains-about-free-speech_a_21421709/) and Rand Paul opposes locally elected representatives getting power to spend locally raised money. (https://www.thenation.com/article/rand-paul-r-stunning-hypocrisy/) All of which is what happens when your dominant form of libertarianism is chiefly concerned with property rights. (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Libertarianism#Philosophical_problems)
I'd rather Google not censor people, thank you very much.
CURATION IS NOT CENSORSHIP. You don't have a RIGHT to be on youtube or steam.
That sounds to me like you're willing to let private companies determine who gets to be a part of their platform. So why were you so upset when Steam relaxed its policy?
Hey Lana, was Steam de-platforming Hatred censorship?
You can still buy the game in America and a bunch of other countries, nothing's stopping you.Hey Lana, was Steam de-platforming Hatred censorship?
Yes.
You can still buy the game in America and a bunch of other countries, nothing's stopping you.Hey Lana, was Steam de-platforming Hatred censorship?
Yes.
What, so if they do sell it but didn't before, when it was freely availiable elsewhere you are being censored?You can still buy the game in America and a bunch of other countries, nothing's stopping you.Hey Lana, was Steam de-platforming Hatred censorship?
Yes.
Yes, because Steam put it back on (https://www.vg247.com/2014/12/17/gabe-newell-apologises-for-pulling-hatred-from-steam-greenlight/).
What, so if they do sell it but didn't before, when it was freely availiable elsewhere you are being censored?You can still buy the game in America and a bunch of other countries, nothing's stopping you.Hey Lana, was Steam de-platforming Hatred censorship?
Yes.
Yes, because Steam put it back on (https://www.vg247.com/2014/12/17/gabe-newell-apologises-for-pulling-hatred-from-steam-greenlight/).
You've never been prevented by Steam from playing the stupid thing, ever!
If every store doesn't carry everything that falls under it's umbrella of products, it's censoring them! Obviously! Deciding "hey, what does giving this product a place to spread its message, or to funnel money to the kinds of people who'd make this say about us?" Not liking the answer, and deciding to pull it is censorship! Also, I see you just skipped past where I answered your question.
Well duh. If I walked into a bookstore with manuals on conversion therapy and kids books depicting lambs frolicking with veliciraptors on the Ark and found a Potter book I'd think someone was hilariously trolling them! No I don't mean a book by the Potter's House.If every store doesn't carry everything that falls under it's umbrella of products, it's censoring them! Obviously! Deciding "hey, what does giving this product a place to spread its message, or to funnel money to the kinds of people who'd make this say about us?" Not liking the answer, and deciding to pull it is censorship! Also, I see you just skipped past where I answered your question.
So is it okay for a Christian bookstore to not carry Harry Potter books?
...Yes? Just like I wouldn't sell Bibles in my bookstore. Or serve store brand coffee at my restaurant. A private entity is entitled to the determination as to what products it sells. Just because Chick-fil-A doesn't sell tacos doesn't mean you can't go to Pancho Villa and down all the Tex-Mex you can handle.
Hey Lana KFC Australia once had an ad of a white bloke soothing a rowdy West Indies crowd with buckets of fried chicken which was pulled after it caused the internets to asplode. Are KFC Australia being oppressed?
Or does the company just want to keep selling buckets of salted grease and not be forever branded KKKFC. Could impact sales.
But a seller wanting to pull a product from their shelves is? I thought you were at least sympathetic to libertarians, who are you to tell someone what to do with their shelf?Hey Lana KFC Australia once had an ad of a white bloke soothing a rowdy West Indies crowd with buckets of fried chicken which was pulled after it caused the internets to asplode. Are KFC Australia being oppressed?
Or does the company just want to keep selling buckets of salted grease and not be forever branded KKKFC. Could impact sales.
No. A business choosing to pull a commercial due to poor general reception is not being oppressed.
But a seller wanting to pull a product from their shelves is? I thought you were at least sympathetic to libertarians, who are you to tell someone what to do with their shelf?Hey Lana KFC Australia once had an ad of a white bloke soothing a rowdy West Indies crowd with buckets of fried chicken which was pulled after it caused the internets to asplode. Are KFC Australia being oppressed?
Or does the company just want to keep selling buckets of salted grease and not be forever branded KKKFC. Could impact sales.
No. A business choosing to pull a commercial due to poor general reception is not being oppressed.
...Yes? Just like I wouldn't sell Bibles in my bookstore. Or serve store brand coffee at my restaurant. A private entity is entitled to the determination as to what products it sells. Just because Chick-fil-A doesn't sell tacos doesn't mean you can't go to Pancho Villa and down all the Tex-Mex you can handle.
What if we're talking not talking about a single community bookstore? Imagine a bookstore chain that holds a near-monopoly nationwide. Would it be okay for them to not carry Harry Potter books?
...Yes? Just like I wouldn't sell Bibles in my bookstore. Or serve store brand coffee at my restaurant. A private entity is entitled to the determination as to what products it sells. Just because Chick-fil-A doesn't sell tacos doesn't mean you can't go to Pancho Villa and down all the Tex-Mex you can handle.
What if we're talking not talking about a single community bookstore? Imagine a bookstore chain that holds a near-monopoly nationwide. Would it be okay for them to not carry Harry Potter books?
...Yes? Just like I wouldn't sell Bibles in my bookstore. Or serve store brand coffee at my restaurant. A private entity is entitled to the determination as to what products it sells. Just because Chick-fil-A doesn't sell tacos doesn't mean you can't go to Pancho Villa and down all the Tex-Mex you can handle.
What if we're talking not talking about a single community bookstore? Imagine a bookstore chain that holds a near-monopoly nationwide. Would it be okay for them to not carry Harry Potter books?
Then... you... go to another chain? Where they're laughing and rolling in the dough because one of their biggest competitors decided to not sell one of the best-selling book series of all time?
Is it left anything to demand a left wing bookseller stock copies of Mein Kampf just because you want to leaf through it?But a seller wanting to pull a product from their shelves is? I thought you were at least sympathetic to libertarians, who are you to tell someone what to do with their shelf?Hey Lana KFC Australia once had an ad of a white bloke soothing a rowdy West Indies crowd with buckets of fried chicken which was pulled after it caused the internets to asplode. Are KFC Australia being oppressed?
Or does the company just want to keep selling buckets of salted grease and not be forever branded KKKFC. Could impact sales.
No. A business choosing to pull a commercial due to poor general reception is not being oppressed.
Left-libertarians. I believe in preserving the rights of individuals, whether it be from the government, big business, or their fellow citizens.
And big business never stopped anybody buying the Hatred game. It just meant briefly that you had to order through the publishers website instead of the curators. Any inconvenience is not automatically a breach of your fundamental rights!
Which is why this is bloody surreal. I'm a socialist arguing to a libertarian that imposing obligations on businesses to stop them deciding that they don't want to sell media for whatever reason constitutes an unreasonable restriction on their property rights.
And big business never stopped anybody buying the Hatred game. It just meant briefly that you had to order through the publishers website instead of the curators. Any inconvenience is not automatically a breach of your fundamental rights!
Indeed! Also, it's possible to argue that the one good thing about capitalism is that you're gonna be able to find someone, somewhere, to sell you what you wanna buy. Might take you a bit of looking, but they're out there. They've got what you want. And they're willing to part with it. If you have the cash.
Also, yeah. "What if there's a near monopoly?!" Well, that why we have (had) anti-trust laws. To prevent LITERALLY THAT. A lot of other stuff too, but that's definitely on the list.
Is it left anything to demand a left wing bookseller stock copies of Mein Kampf just because you want to leaf through it?But a seller wanting to pull a product from their shelves is? I thought you were at least sympathetic to libertarians, who are you to tell someone what to do with their shelf?Hey Lana KFC Australia once had an ad of a white bloke soothing a rowdy West Indies crowd with buckets of fried chicken which was pulled after it caused the internets to asplode. Are KFC Australia being oppressed?
Or does the company just want to keep selling buckets of salted grease and not be forever branded KKKFC. Could impact sales.
No. A business choosing to pull a commercial due to poor general reception is not being oppressed.
Left-libertarians. I believe in preserving the rights of individuals, whether it be from the government, big business, or their fellow citizens.
And big business never stopped anybody buying the Hatred game. It just meant briefly that you had to order through the publishers website instead of the curators. Any inconvenience is not automatically a breach of your fundamental rights!
Also a science fiction scenario of one book behemoth is not a threat to you any more than a Dalek or a Xenomorph!
Lana, I am going to indulge in a hyperbolic example here, and use it to ask you a few direct questions. It's not necessarily realistic, and I'm not saying that your argument invariably leads to this, so it's not a slippery slope. It might be a bit reductio ad absurdum, but I'm also not saying that you are necessarily supporting this.
So. A man owns a clothing store. Among other things, they sell T-shirts. Note, please, this is not a secondhand store. One day, a person comes in, wants to sell a shirt emblazoned with an black eagle holding a black wreath. Encircled in the wreath is a black swastika on a white background. Above this is the word Sieg. Below is Heil. On the back is an image of Hitler and a bunch of silhouettes saluting him, in the manner that is their custom. Is the man obligated to order a hundred of these shirts and sell them? What if he's black? Jewish? Roma? Gay? Any combination of these? Is he still obligated to do it?
Now, say the shirts aren't full of hate. Say, instead, that they're ratty, with holes worn or chewed in them. Is he obligated to sell them in his store? What if the shirts are obviously stolen? What if they're none of these, but the images of them aren't hateful, just... not his? (For example, what if the image is Mickey Mouse, and this man is not at all a representative of the Disney corporation. He's Joe Blow from the trailer park with 2 DUIs and who got busted for meth a while back. He don't work for Disney.) When, if ever, can someone refuse to carry a product?
...Yes? Just like I wouldn't sell Bibles in my bookstore. Or serve store brand coffee at my restaurant. A private entity is entitled to the determination as to what products it sells. Just because Chick-fil-A doesn't sell tacos doesn't mean you can't go to Pancho Villa and down all the Tex-Mex you can handle.
What if we're talking not talking about a single community bookstore? Imagine a bookstore chain that holds a near-monopoly nationwide. Would it be okay for them to not carry Harry Potter books?
Then... you... go to another chain? Where they're laughing and rolling in the dough because one of their biggest competitors decided to not sell one of the best-selling book series of all time?
Again, "near-monopoly nationwide." We're assuming that it's impractical to go somewhere else.
Is it left anything to demand a left wing bookseller stock copies of Mein Kampf just because you want to leaf through it?But a seller wanting to pull a product from their shelves is? I thought you were at least sympathetic to libertarians, who are you to tell someone what to do with their shelf?Hey Lana KFC Australia once had an ad of a white bloke soothing a rowdy West Indies crowd with buckets of fried chicken which was pulled after it caused the internets to asplode. Are KFC Australia being oppressed?
Or does the company just want to keep selling buckets of salted grease and not be forever branded KKKFC. Could impact sales.
No. A business choosing to pull a commercial due to poor general reception is not being oppressed.
Left-libertarians. I believe in preserving the rights of individuals, whether it be from the government, big business, or their fellow citizens.
And big business never stopped anybody buying the Hatred game. It just meant briefly that you had to order through the publishers website instead of the curators. Any inconvenience is not automatically a breach of your fundamental rights!
Also a science fiction scenario of one book behemoth is not a threat to you any more than a Dalek or a Xenomorph!
This is a thought experiment.
Lana, I am going to indulge in a hyperbolic example here, and use it to ask you a few direct questions. It's not necessarily realistic, and I'm not saying that your argument invariably leads to this, so it's not a slippery slope. It might be a bit reductio ad absurdum, but I'm also not saying that you are necessarily supporting this.
So. A man owns a clothing store. Among other things, they sell T-shirts. Note, please, this is not a secondhand store. One day, a person comes in, wants to sell a shirt emblazoned with an black eagle holding a black wreath. Encircled in the wreath is a black swastika on a white background. Above this is the word Sieg. Below is Heil. On the back is an image of Hitler and a bunch of silhouettes saluting him, in the manner that is their custom. Is the man obligated to order a hundred of these shirts and sell them? What if he's black? Jewish? Roma? Gay? Any combination of these? Is he still obligated to do it?
Now, say the shirts aren't full of hate. Say, instead, that they're ratty, with holes worn or chewed in them. Is he obligated to sell them in his store? What if the shirts are obviously stolen? What if they're none of these, but the images of them aren't hateful, just... not his? (For example, what if the image is Mickey Mouse, and this man is not at all a representative of the Disney corporation. He's Joe Blow from the trailer park with 2 DUIs and who got busted for meth a while back. He don't work for Disney.) When, if ever, can someone refuse to carry a product?
...You actually make good points. Maybe I should re-evaluate my stance on free speech as it pertains to consumer goods.
Isn't the valve controversy more about offensive games like "Active Shooter"? I know they need to be tighter about quality control but they still have policies against asset flips that they sometimes still act on and nobody is really opposed to.They pulled it (http://fortune.com/2018/05/31/active-shooter-video-game-may-still-be-released/), unfortunately they seem to have the Reddit/Facebook school of moderation. EG they'll remove something if it becomes a PR shitstorm. Quality and/or good taste don't seem to be the primary drivers here.
...Yes? Just like I wouldn't sell Bibles in my bookstore. Or serve store brand coffee at my restaurant. A private entity is entitled to the determination as to what products it sells. Just because Chick-fil-A doesn't sell tacos doesn't mean you can't go to Pancho Villa and down all the Tex-Mex you can handle.
What if we're talking not talking about a single community bookstore? Imagine a bookstore chain that holds a near-monopoly nationwide. Would it be okay for them to not carry Harry Potter books?
Then... you... go to another chain? Where they're laughing and rolling in the dough because one of their biggest competitors decided to not sell one of the best-selling book series of all time?
Again, "near-monopoly nationwide." We're assuming that it's impractical to go somewhere else.
Dude.
You can buy games in stores all over the world. You can even buy games online. In fact, since you seem too lazy to use google: https://store.destructivecreations.pl/ Tadah! The company has a webstore of their own. You literally don't have to get off from your computer if you want to buy your violence-porn nihilist-fantasy game.
Same goes with a lot of other products today. Even if Wallmart doesn't sell something it doesn't mean that it is impossible for people to get it.
Heck, you seem to think that the tragedy of making it harder to buy edgy videogames is as big as Texas shutting down every abortion clinic in the state. And that my little Neo-Nazi is the difference between one store refusing (for a while) to sell a videogame and people being denied service and rights.
In fact, similar cases can be seen in other instances as well. A Republican politician who is thrown out of a restaurant will still find another restaurant that is willing to serve them and they can easily afford to go elsewhere. Depending on where you live in USA the nearest open abortion clinic could just be so far away that you can't afford to go there or will be greatly inconvenienced by the cost. The gay couple who won't get a marriage certificate likewise can't just go to a competitor to get one and them being denied service is a problem.
Someone being denied a platform to call people cucks or nigger-whores on Youtube or Reddit is still able to do so on other sites and that's not a major inconvenience for them.
Yeah, that's why they pulled a bunch of their raunchier visual novels; some fambly valyoos fuckos decided games like HuniePop were bayud fer da yoof and threw a tantrum until Steam caved.
Isn't the valve controversy more about offensive games like "Active Shooter"? I know they need to be tighter about quality control but they still have policies against asset flips that they sometimes still act on and nobody is really opposed to.They pulled it (http://fortune.com/2018/05/31/active-shooter-video-game-may-still-be-released/), unfortunately they seem to have the Reddit/Facebook school of moderation. EG they'll remove something if it becomes a PR shitstorm. Quality and/or good taste don't seem to be the primary drivers here.
Eh, I'm not under any delusions that their primary driver isn't the profit motive. If there's money to be made off of weirdos living out their mass shooting fantasies they'll go for the money every time and if it costs them more in other sales or legal hassles they'll back off. That was my point.Well, yes, obviously. Moderation for companies at that scale exists exclusively for the purpose of preventing PR issues. Why on Earth would they let taste of all things stop them from selling something, if someone is buying?Isn't the valve controversy more about offensive games like "Active Shooter"? I know they need to be tighter about quality control but they still have policies against asset flips that they sometimes still act on and nobody is really opposed to.They pulled it (http://fortune.com/2018/05/31/active-shooter-video-game-may-still-be-released/), unfortunately they seem to have the Reddit/Facebook school of moderation. EG they'll remove something if it becomes a PR shitstorm. Quality and/or good taste don't seem to be the primary drivers here.
A bit of stupidity from the New York City DSA:
https://twitter.com/nycDSA/status/1012808259818926080 (https://twitter.com/nycDSA/status/1012808259818926080)
These people are supposed to be democratic socialists, right? Because this sounds like something anarcho-communists would advocate.
Well for profit prisons (and all private prisons) should be abolished.
A bit of stupidity from the New York City DSA:
https://twitter.com/nycDSA/status/1012808259818926080 (https://twitter.com/nycDSA/status/1012808259818926080)
These people are supposed to be democratic socialists, right? Because this sounds like something anarcho-communists would advocate.
There's social democrats and democratic socialists--the main difference being that the latter are post-capitalist and the former are not--and unfortunately the two terms are becoming conflated in the US. (It didn't help that Sanders called himself a democratic socialist when his policies are clearly social democratic.) Whoever posted that is on the post-capitalist side, at least.
Abolishing for-profit prisons and bail is perfectly sensible. Abolishing prisons and borders themselves is fucking stupid.
Like prisons. And education. And healthcare. And the basic fundamentals of modern human living.
But you don't lose any money with the bail if you show up in court. Allowing only rich people to pay bail would mean that any poor suspect would be stuck in jail while the rich will offer a sum of money as collateral and then get out. And the only purpose for the bail is to make it expensive for them to run away and hide from the court which is a thing that rich people can do easier anyway.
AFAIK bail bonds aren't really a thing in Finland. Either the court decides that the person is a flight risk or threat and must be detained until court or they don't. No payment necessary.
Honestly, I don't see how abolishing prisons is keeping with the principles of either social democrats or democratic socialists, or socialists, or democrats of any stripe. It's just nuts.
That would more be an argument against how prisons are run than an argument against prisons per se.
Of course for the last century at least any attempt to reintergrate prisoners so they become less of a danger to society and less terminally violent, drug-addled fuckups runs into the same old predictable 'ur being soft on crims' narrative.
And so prisons are left to be violent, rapey, murderous torture-holes and crime schools until the inmates get let out at some point and do something worse than they did before they were chucked in.
Ah, fuck. This shit gives me a headache.
what do you call an african racial male going up steps
YOUR GOING DOWN forever :)
i like women i like ftm and mtf shemales i like all sorts of people.
I JUST HATE AFRICAN RACIAL MALES and i don't see the need for their survival.
i love disabled people and i love women I JUST HATE AFRICAN RACIAL MALES .
It reads almost exactly like a really weird guy I talked to once. It sounds almost exactly like him but I can't be sure because I tried looking for where it would be posted but couldn't find it.
If it isn't him it's probably some random on reddit.
My daughter has now been taught that the two parties in American politics are "the one that thinks it's okay to kill babies" and the "the one that wants to lock some babies in cages."
Yes, yes, "reality has a liberal bias," they said defensively, even as they pretended that human fetuses aren't human beings while protesting GMO foods.
Let there be no confusion regarding the board of governors' resolution; our mission remains the same. We will remain a Biblically-based, mission-focused, academically excellent university, fully committed to our foundational evangelical Christian principles.
Delusions are false beliefs based on incorrect inference about external reality that persist despite the evidence to the contrary; these beliefs are not ordinarily accepted by other members of the person's culture or subculture.
It appears you missed the thrust of my rejoinder. Consider, then, the following-
(1) If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties don't exist.
(2) If evil exists, objective moral values and duties exist.
(3) Evil exists.
(4) Therefore, objective moral values and duties do exist.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
(6) Therefore, God is the locus of all objective moral values and duties.
(7) Atheists insist God does not nor cannot exist.
(8) Therefore Atheists are amoral.
(https://a.disquscdn.com/get?url=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F-q0gJBBeYcQw%2FVMjncQW2iII%2FAAAAAAAAEmg%2FqkCkRWzGj6Y%2Fs1600%2FDahmer%252BQuote.jpg&key=GVV8j2TuAFyZ8BiliVIzkg&w=600&h=257)
A better question is, why do atheists murder while Christians don't?
Really? Can you take a moment and prove how these are compatible with murder? 1 Peter 3:11, Colossians 3:8,9, 12-14, Matthew 6:34, Matthew 5:43-46, Proverbs 20:11
"Biblically-based" and "academically excellent" are mutually fucking exclusive.
Religious "schools" should go the exact same way as for-profit schools. Straight into the flaming, gaping maw of Hell.
“Just take a look at that for a minute. What we’re seeing here a masonic apron here, an all-seeing eye, we’re seeing an anunnaki type of reptilian creature here with some sort of halo or crown,” he says to the crowd's horror.
“This is straight up Luciferian, guys, and they put it right in front of our face, you just need to know where to look for it. This is what we’re up against.”
Enough of the "Whale Fucking is non-consensual" bullshit. A Humpback Whale weighs 70,000 pounds, is fifty feet long, can dive more than a quarter mile and can crush ships with a single swipe of its tail. If a human manages to fuck one, you damn well better believe it's consensual
...that person was joking, right?
...that person was joking, right?
Well I have no idea, but I looked the guy up and he is suspected of murdering his neighbor and ran for the presidential nomination for the libertarian party on a pro-bitcoin platform.
...that person was joking, right?
Well I have no idea, but I looked the guy up and he is suspected of murdering his neighbor and ran for the presidential nomination for the libertarian party on a pro-bitcoin platform.
It doesn't matter where they were born, a shitskin is a shitskin. A rat born in a stable is not a horse.
Sad how people think war is something to be proud of, and call fallen "heroes" to random men that just believed in (((their))) propaganda, when will you learn that we dont win anything, but we do lose our lives fighting for (((them))).Id rather put a bullet in my skull than kill people for (((them))), peace.
They aren't necessarily wrong. War is nothing to be proud of; at best, it is an occasionally necessary evil.
They aren't necessarily wrong. War is nothing to be proud of; at best, it is an occasionally necessary evil.
Fair 'nuff.
Support our veterans, depose our warmongers.
Support our veterans, depose our warmongers.
Exactly.
I know humour can be hard for a gestalt entity but seriously if you see the words 'devil's doorbell', 'sin cave' or 'self-rape' it's satire.
I've heard devil's doorbell before I think. However I would like to note that usually its male/penis masturbation that fundies freak out over, they enjoy pretending women and girls or general vagina-bearers don't do that kind of thing, which is of course completely wrong.
But it was an obvious satire the moment I saw sin cave.
S I N
C A V E
Give me a sin cave daddy.
HOW DARE this Nazi compare good people to THE INHUMANS.
On top of being a racist, he has dolled out the darkest, most horrifying insult - comparing ANYONE, ANYWHERE, to The Inhumans.
Literally the only good thing in that show is the dog.
It is also a rejection of dogmatic sexual taboos imposed on people by Christianity and the patriarchy, an embracing of free love, an embracing of the idea that all love is love, a rejection of feeling shame about sexual desires, a rejection of straight sexuality, and a public embracing of pride in a sexual identity that the old morality prohibits.
Thank you for understanding what I was saying.
I was saying this boy’s abuse is born out of and a continuation of the “sexual revolution” and, more specifically, its child the “homosexual rights” movement. This child’s abuse is achieving all of the political and social aims of those movement and will be defended along the same lines as those other movements.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/gabs-racists-terrible-cooking_n_5c51aecbe4b0d9f9be6b5012People who hate multiculturalism make shitty food???
People on GAB are creating food monstrosities. Seriously look at the pics in this article these things are criminal.
And both the neighbor AND the petunias were Jewish.
Kruschev's de-Stalinization is the most harmful shit to do. Fuck, I hate him for that.
Luckily China didn't do that kind of shit to Mao, so Chinese still have positive view on Mao and everyone claiming to be "true follower of Mao". That alone kinda keep communist ideology alive in current neo-liberal oriented world.
“ADHD” grew in proportion to mass immigration.
Hyper-creative white boys got crazy bored with dumbed-down value-less “education.”
ADHD symptoms tend to disappear when the boy is in the company of his father.
It’s unnatural for women to raise boys alone
ADHD: Absent Dad Hyperactivity Disorder
On a clip for The Handmaid's Tale tv show I'm seeing some weird people defending Gilead and saying June doesn't have things that bad, all she has to do get fuck once a month.
I had to stop reading at some point...
I mean, if these white supremacists really believe in breeding a "master race" and fear the "dilution of blood" and whatever then from that point of view this argument starts to make sense. They are just using the same pseudoscience and claiming that it is the Jewish people who are trying to do eugenics.
...Except that if they are claiming that there's some sort of ancient Jewish cabal AND that they are doing eugenics then doesn't that lead to the conclusion that they would have been doing it for ages already and that Jews would BE the master race that these wannabe-Nazis want to believe to be?
It's the whole "the enemy of Fascism must be incredibly powerful and incredibly weak at the same time" paradox all over again. Are the Jews masterful manipulators who rule the world and have bred themselves to be superiour in all ways or are they "subhumans" that deserve to be destroyed? Because to me it sounds like the Nazi boogeymen are better than the Nazis in all ways that Nazis want to excel...
Also libertarians.
(https://external-preview.redd.it/5aTkZu2CbZ7gMu4L43QlbTC9kS9CX0RtRofgp1uE3XA.png?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=915950f867ef61f21106bd085b4d0946c3540a58)
Classic.
(https://i.imgur.com/567hRw8.jpg)
(https://i.redd.it/cr1wcz5nysw21.png)Yeah, pretty much anyone (https://rationalwiki.org/w/images/6/67/Antisemitic_slur_sarkeesian.png) who uses the "le happy merchant" meme is a shithead.
Really? You're the one calling other people "disgusting", you anti-Semite POS?
Numbers of jews gassed by national socialists since the alleged holocaust: 0. Zero.
Numbers of penises mutilated by jews since national socialist Germany: millions
Numbers of animals slaughtered with inhumane kosher slaughter practices since NatSoc Germany: probably billions.
Boycotts against domestic gentile trade with the kosher label and prerequisite for jewish patronage: countless.
Instances of masquerading as whites of European descent by ashkenazim for the purpose of race baiting and other sabotage: countless.
Resources drained from gentile nations and people, including the alleged saviors of the jews, the Americans: many, many billions worth.
Numbers of chickens waved around in the ritual of kapparot that transfers sins from the jew onto the chicken: probably billions.
Numbers of oaths and promises voided which whites take seriously and at face value via the ritual of kol nidre: countless since it happens every year at yom kippur.
Amount of antiwhite propaganda produced and aimed at even their alleged saviors: countless.
Amount of atrocities committed against gentiles: countless.
Amount of usurious FIAT currency created, peddled and cultivated by jews: a figure that doesn't fit inside this comment due to the sheer number of zeroes.
Amount of meddling in foreign affairs despite usually being only 1-5% of the population: nigh infinite
Amount of marxism, bolshevism, globalism etc: infinite
Amount of kvetching in general: infinite.
And many, many, many other things that happened after the alleged holocaust, including the lie itself and all the atrocities against whites derived from that.
Now to the important tally:
Number of worries about jews voiced by gentiles based on actual things happening like genital mutilation et cetera legitimized by jews and golems: 0
Number of worries about nazis actively hunting, killing, persecuting, gassing jews despite none of that happenin legitimized by jews and golems: as many as there are claims made.
tl; dr:
jewish fear of persecution, which they deserve due to their heinous acts and despicable nature but is, sadly, not happening is routinely legitimized.
Gentile fear of the degrading, parasitical, atrocious effect of the jewish race in the light of their many, many actions which they commit daily is stamped away as irrational.
Chutzpah is a mental illness, though, and whitey has long grown tired of this stupid game.
Wait......"golems"??? Huh?
Classic.
(https://i.imgur.com/567hRw8.jpg)
The NPC concept was made up by right-wingers in USA and they are the ones who were spamming it on repeat until they got bored and picked up the next meme from the list given to them.
no, see, I use the right-wing meme when I could say what I'm saying in literally any other way, but I don't align with the right in any way, no sir
the alt-right actually are the real NPCs if you think about it though.
It's just projection, like pedophile thing, and the "white genocide" thing. All of it.
Red for their prolapsed anuses ("rosebuds").
Orange for their weeping HIV sores.
Yellow for the piss they drink.
Green for the infected pus they ooze.
Blue for their unceasing depression.
Purple for their corpses after they hang themselves.
That's the pride flag.
Meanwhile, a rainbow is a brilliant display of light that shows beauty and radiance.
Just in case people think that homosexuals actually have a rainbow for their flag. They don't. They merely have some colored stripes in according to their deficiencies.
It's quite logical, too.
The human sex drive is incredibly strong, that's why celibacy and asceticism is such a thing one has to keep quite a bit of effort into.
Now, you have a homosexual man, and he's tired of being celibate, or jerking it and he really wants to get off.
Women? Not doing it for him.
Girls? Not doing it for him.
Grown men? Homosexuals are actually quite rare, and most straight men see through the mist and recognize the grim reaper smiling from that direction, eliciting disgust.
In other words, he might get into a fight if he macks up a grown straight man.
Old men? Some homos are into that, but even then, rarely into the really feeble and harmless geezers.
Now, the urge to get off is incredibly strong, and, again, the homosexual is thorougly sick of celibacy and jerking it.
Which target remains? Which target is most vulnerable, most promising to get him off without repercussions.
Boys. They are dependents, they can be blackmailed easily, they can't really fight back. It's a lot easier to excert power and authority over a young boy than a grown man, even if one is effete and weak.
The past of least resistance to satisfy ones deviant urges: Young Boys.
They're male, often have a little bit of rounded features, weak, impressable.
An unfortunately alluring target for the ill.
(https://i.imgur.com/cxBki3f.jpg)
He's not wrong however.
Ironbite-cause that's what Projared did and well...look at what happened to him.
Grapes didn't exist in France I guess. Nor olives in Italy and Greece. Or, hell, tomatoes.
Well they have only had tomatoes in Italy since the 16th century as they are native to south america, the same with potatoes in Ireland and chillies in asia.
Grapes were introduced to France(Gaul) by the greeks and the romans in the first two centuries BC.
Well they have only had tomatoes in Italy since the 16th century as they are native to south america, the same with potatoes in Ireland and chillies in asia.
Grapes were introduced to France(Gaul) by the greeks and the romans in the first two centuries BC.
Very fair in regards to tomatoes. I stand by my grapes and olives statement.
Political class should be expended with and replaced with fanatical SR practicers
A huge reason western world is subverted is a certain class of people have blackmail on nearly everyone in political power and it probably extends to much of corporate business world and other shadier ventures. The Epstein revelations, what we found out, show this. A lot of politicos have perversions that are taken advantage of, videos are made, they are then threatened to toe the line of their handlers or their info is leaked and lives ruined.
If a politician renounced their old material world and pursued unwavering virtue without being paid or blackmailed for their appetites because they would be non existent, they would be unstoppable.
It is a necessary step to unwavering virtue How can a degenerate alcohol drinking compulsive masturbator or sex feind be a good leader?
I am ready to pledge alleigance to a fanatical militaristic eco fascist autocracy with clear distinctions between lifestyle of ruling class vs masses if the masses refuse to change Last night i went for a walk with my mother and the local park was filled with refuse and alcohol cans discarded and fast food wrappers and visiting recreational sports team swearing crapping up the place Moral superirority is quite simple to achieve over these peoples
I would like to see the genetic background of ppl saying i have no right to aspire for virtue on a wide scale, my guess is you are heavily mixed types but barring that, deeply indoctrinated to defend materialist consumer world. Freedom of choice to destroy yourself is not a freedom worth having imo. I cannot see anyone with noble thoughts or genetic lineage having such poor opinions on struggle for virtue and goodness. We should be exploring the stars, not letting plebs tie us down with muh freedom of choice. Freedom of choice has led us to allow young boys to chop their cocks off and take woman hormones. Get lost. The world is ours to be won.
he's had to go to knockoff conservative outlets like Telegram.
But the charge of cuckery, leveled against Christians like French, has to do with the perceived untenableness today of staking out a middle position between the Benedict Option of evacuating from fronts collapsing in the culture war and the yet-to-be-named option of reasserting powerful constitutional authority for localities to resist and reject colonization by the revolutionary vanguard of institutionalized wokeness.
The metaphor of cuckoldry is selected to the exclusion of all others because nothing else quite as effectively sharpens the charge that your obsession with the details of honor and principle has in fact become fatally abstract: you are being kicked out of your own house by a rival power actively working to take away everything that is yours, your children included. You are becoming the end of your line, forever, in every respect. Yet you won’t even evacuate from your breached defenses before it’s too late. Only the heights of spiritual snobbery can explain such a choice.http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2019/09/15/right-wing-think-tanker-takes-1600-words-to-call-david-french-a-cuck/#more-38337
They hate that. Absolutely hate it. That's because the heterosexual family unit - especially the white version - was and still is the gold standard when it comes to relationships. They know this. They can't stand it.
The successful heterosexual family unit is a constant reminder of their personal failures or the reminder that they are in many cases simply not built to achieve it.
Anyone who pushes the 'love wins' message seethes with hate.
Send the word out. The fascistic left needs to be stopped. They're dangerous Collectivists who censured all other alternatives. Pull your money out of the banks in protest. The majority wants freedom of speech and voted against Trudeau. Words no longer work. We have our rights taken away. Pull your money out of the banks. Spread the word.
A supporter of the People's Party of Canada (which got 1.5% of the vote) has a brilliant plan for how to respond to their alt-right party getting it's ass kicked.QuoteSend the word out. The fascistic left needs to be stopped. They're dangerous Collectivists who censured all other alternatives. Pull your money out of the banks in protest. The majority wants freedom of speech and voted against Trudeau. Words no longer work. We have our rights taken away. Pull your money out of the banks. Spread the word.
I first had doubts about the moon landing around 2015, but didn’t come to a definitive conclusion. As the years went on, I was sympathetic to moon deniers because it was clear that those in power are lying about everything. If you catch someone in one lie, such as your wife, it’s natural to evaluate other things they’ve stated to you as fact. I started to believe that it was more likely we didn’t land on the moon than not.
I’m ready now to come out as a moon landing denier.
This is called ‘secular humanism’, and is what has allowed us to inherit the world we have today. In other words, “human ingenuity” leads to gay pride, feminism, transgender children, deplatforming, fake news, etc. etc.
Notice that ALL of the hemisphere photography we think we’ve seen has turned out to be nonexistent. It’s becoming clear that from the evolution fairy tale to the Blue Marble fraud to the dinosaur fraud and the satellite myth, the world is very, very different than we have been told it is. What is the point? To deceive you into serving Satan rather than God.
The satellite balloon technology also explains how the US can keep putting up satellites despite not having any rockets capable of sending up astronauts. I particularly enjoyed the video of the NASA satellite released by the Space Shuttle that was dangling from a wire.
I don't care for Asian heritage of culture, I only take interest in Asian fighting culture because it's similar to my own Irish culture, when I was young I learned a lot about boxing from watching Yuh Myung-woo. I also don't care for race mixing, have babies with whoever but just to be aware and informed on the Kalgeri Zionist agenda considering your children will be aware of it. Yeah the samurai were strong, they fought til the very end of their time and never dishonored the samurai code, they charged with swords and arrows on horses into battle against guns and cannons how can you not respect that ?
found on reddit's gendercynical sub: "The Duality of TERFs"
https://imgur.com/He2BUBB
Where did you find that lunatic, Vanto?
No Marxist should shy away from defending the Right of Socialist Countries to exist.
No matter how hard the Corporate Media and Western Governments try to undermine the DPRK, the fact remains that this little Socialist Nation has managed to defend itself against US invasion, exclusion from Global Trade, Sanctions and Military provocations, and yet is still there, building Socialism independently.
Traditional Korean culture is obviously very different from anything we might easily understand in the West. And certainly Socialism in the DPRK has taken its own peculiar path and form.
But if we are to ever have a successful International Socialist Movement, and have Unity, part of that has to be a nuanced view of the DPRK, along with support for their Right to Exist and their Right to develop Socialism in their own way as determined by the Korean people.
That doesn’t mean never allowing the DPRK to be critiqued, we all must be willing to accept criticism and give criticism in good faith. But denying the contributions to Socialism by the DPRK only plays into the hands of the Imperialists and justifies their Military aggression towards the DPRK, their unprovoked Sanctions going back decades before their development of a Nuclear weapons capability, and it ignores the entire history of non-stop interference and aggression towards the affairs of the DRPK and the Korean people.
Colonialism is alive and well. One only needs look at the History of the Korean peninsula to begin to understand why the DPRK has taken the route it has, and many other peculiarities are simply cultural differences that do not excuse people for supporting Imperialist aggression against their Right to Exist and build Socialism based on the Juche idea.
Solidarity to the DPRK and the peoples of the Korean Peninsula
I can't read the small text, what happened?
(https://i.imgur.com/YLcMxvS.png)
"This could literally save the world, but it doesn't help me push my politics, so I don't want it used!"
And how is the climate crisis not just about the environment? Your claim that it isn't feels like you admitting you're just using environmentalism as a means to promote the causes you really care about.
(https://i.imgur.com/YLcMxvS.png)
"This could literally save the world, but it doesn't help me push my politics, so I don't want it used!"
And how is the climate crisis not just about the environment? Your claim that it isn't feels like you admitting you're just using environmentalism as a means to promote the causes you really care about.
This totally doesn't show out of context but he was actually not making an argument against nuclear power. (see e.g. this tweet (https://twitter.com/zackkanter/status/1201597462483480576) in reply. He is trying to showcase what he thinks is the pattern of thinking that ends up in lots of anti-climate-change people still opposing nuclear power.
(not a defence or whatever. I don't think he's engaging in good faith with the argument, it's just annoying seeing it getting misread out of context)
Looking at the case of Madeleine Martin, the 39-year-old RE teacher and mother of two, jailed for 32 months and placed on the sex offenders' register for sleeping with a 15-year-old male pupil, do we seriously think that a female teacher sleeping with a male pupil is on a par with a male teacher sleeping with a girl pupil? I don't. And neither, I'd wager, would most 15-year-old boys.
The issue shouldn't be taken lightly. All teachers, male and female, are in a position of trust and should not abuse it, though reading of Martin and the boy having sex in car parks, of her buying him mobile phones and tattoos with her name on "so he wouldn't forget her", of her failing marriage and terminally ill sister, Martin seems more pathetic than predatory.
Certainly, she has been severely punished for her nine-day tryst with the teenager, who, his mother says, has been mocked by peers. If anything, one would have thought they might be jealous. The internet is awash with sites dealing with "older woman teacher-pupil" fantasies.
And there lies the rub – should the law be treating male and female pupil victims equally when male and female teenagers are so different?
Whether we like it or not, secondary schools are hubs of teenage sexuality. However, while girl and boy teenagers deserve the same protection, crucially what they want seems very different.
There are always exceptions, but surely one of the essential differences between the teenage sexes lies in the onset and manifestation of sexuality. Which is a posh way of saying that teenage boys mainly want sex, while teenage girls mainly want attention. Likewise, while teenage boys are usually sexually driven, teenage girls tend to be validation-driven.
This seemed to be the case when I was supping my can of Vimto in the fifth form common room trying (and failing) to look alluring and still rings true today.
When I interviewed young people on this topic, it was clear: girls (still) only invited censure by being sexually active, while for boys it was (still) win-win: excitement, experience ("practice," one called it), bragging rights, kudos.]When I interviewed young people on this topic, it was clear: girls (still) only invited censure by being sexually active, while for boys it was (still) win-win: excitement, experience ("practice," one called it), bragging rights, kudos.
From here, it is not too much of a leap to surmise that sexual contact with a teacher would have entirely different effects on the teenage sexes. For most boys, it would be the score of all scores, for girls, the ultimate exploitation of their genetic vulnerability.
While a large proportion of teenage boys may not have the sense to make the best choices, they are "up for it," none the less. This is why, in my view, a male teacher sleeping with a girl pupil amounts to statutory rape, whereas a female teacher sleeping with a 15-year-old male is a far greyer moral area.
Even from the perpetrator's side there seems to be a gender difference. Most would agree that a male with a 15-year-old girl would be all about sex. With Martin, (the mobiles, the tattoo "so he wouldn't forget her"), it seems painfully apparent that in her own damaged, wrong-headed way, she was attempting to mimic a proper relationship.
Maybe it is time for society to address this issue honestly. Why do we blithely accept that "men and women are different", but refuse to acknowledge that the teenage sexes are also different? Does anyone believe that males and females suddenly become different, at, say, 21?
Once we accept this difference, the justification for the equality of punishment starts blurring. In Martin's case, with her hefty prison sentence, and placement on the sex offenders' register, she has effectively been punished exactly the same as a man. What we have to ask ourselves now, is, knowing what we do about teenage boys, do women like her always commit exactly the same crime?
I just found this google photo collection and I'm amazed at the content of it all. It's all kinds of bigotry and other awful social media trends. Racism, classism, sexism, ageism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, anti-semitism, xenophobia, conspiracy theory, unrepentant harassment, wishing death, even to the point of threatening it, body shaming of various flavors, fervently cult-like deification of anyone but Bernie or Warren, who are both demonized throughout. You name it and there's probably a screencap for that!
All motivated by hating Bernie Sanders and progressives, believing in the lie that Sanders is a "russian plant" or "ruined the 2016 election" among other things, and taking it out on his prominent black associates, especially women like Nina Turner & Brie Joy.
https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipOieaGhgmp-BFkEGXBTz8SaigFHjpCczlM2_UEP7nz0dDt6_lfZ6NWBlEBhThp79g?key=YTdLbmpoa00wcExHZFI2OElKMENWTWg4ZTJMX1ZB
This shit is so toxic and somehow most of the discourse on checkmark twitter is about how bad rabid Bernie supporters are, how the left is basically the MAGA twitter people, and I truly believe that feeds into people's negative assumptions and lets them morally justify behaving this horrendously.
Today I am one of the most loathed figures on the internet. My speaking events have been cancelled. I have been sued. The police have visited my home and former friends have turned their backs on me.
Yet I’m the man who wrote the much-loved Father Ted! Why is it that I’ve become so suddenly unpopular?
The thought crime for which I have been tried and found guilty is that I believe biological reality exists.
I believe women are females. I believe everyone should be able to present themselves as they wish but that women’s hard-won rights must not be compromised for the benefit of men suffering body dysphoria – which is to say men who feel they are stuck in the wrong body.
I make my arguments forcefully because I’m concerned, sometimes with humour because I’m a comedy writer and often while cursing, because I’m Irish. It’s the humour they hate most. It’s kryptonite to these activists.
I’m 51 and I’ve never seen anything like the authoritarianism on display, the desperate desire to shut down the conversation. No genuine civil-rights movement advances in secret but this one has as one of its mantras ‘NO DEBATE’.
So, while we are in a world where male sexual offenders in bad wigs assault female prisoners,
where rape crisis centres are defunded because they won’t admit men
and where a bloke in a full beard tells schoolchildren that he’s a lesbian, we’re informed with venomous aggression that we may not talk about any of it.
No debate? Oh, there’s going to be a debate all right.
The popular opinion among my detractors is that I’m cherry-picking negative stories to mask a hatred of trans people. In fact, I first came to this debate because I saw women being bullied, losing their jobs and suffering the most intense online harassment I’d ever seen, and I wanted to stand beside them.
Also, as a writer, I couldn’t watch as one of the most important words in the English language, the word ‘woman’, was being changed against the will of those whom it defined.
Suddenly, everywhere you looked, women were being erased, insulted or endangered. Amnesty referring to pregnant women as ‘pregnant people’. Productions of The Vagina Monologues closing because they excluded ‘women who don’t have vaginas’. Women’s toilets disappearing from public life – even though they were introduced to ensure that women could have a public life.
Worst of all, I saw the lack of compassion or empathy for the vulnerable women who are often at the sharp end of the new Gender Theocracy.
The four women attacked in prison by a male sex offender in 2018 (who everyone had to call ‘Karen’ or they were committing a hate crime) are four women too many.
Women in prison often have a history of abuse at the hands of men. Whatever they’ve done, they are entitled to safety from the type of men who helped put them there.
Rational people – and that includes rational trans people – are dismayed by those who have now taken over trans activism.
Body dysphoria is no longer seen as central or even necessary for those who decide to adopt a so-called trans identity.
To see just how elastic and meaningless the word ‘trans’ has become, one only has to look at the definition adopted by the Stonewall lobby group: ‘Trans people may describe themselves using one or more of a wide variety of terms, including (but not limited to) transgender, transsexual, gender-queer (GQ), gender-fluid, non-binary, gender-variant, crossdresser, genderless, agender, nongender, third gender, bi-gender, trans man, trans woman, trans masculine, trans feminine and neutrois.’
Neutrois, I discovered, literally just means ‘androgynous’. So androgynous people are trans. That’ll be news to Bake Off presenter Noel Fielding.
Under Stonewall’s definition, everyone is trans, and no one is. A cross-dresser such as banker Philip Bunce, who adopts the female persona ‘Pippa’ for only a few days every week, nevertheless receives the honour of being named by the Financial Times as one of its top 100 women in business.
This was seen as progress, a step forward for women. In fact, it is an insult to women and to those suffering from body dysphoria.
In order to maintain the fantasy that our sex is unconnected to our bodies, the truth must be bent and beaten in the fire of academic language. That is why trans activists talk about sex being ‘assigned at birth’ – an abuse of language, if ever I heard one.
Is the sex of a newborn ‘assigned’ by a capricious midwife? Of course not. Rather it is observed and recorded as a matter of fact.
‘Assigned’ is one of the more successful hijackings of English achieved by gender ideologues, yet you will hear it parroted across many organisations from the NHS to the BBC – the sort of institution where you really would expect people to know better.
Before I knew how toxic trans rights activism was, I wrote an episode of my Channel 4 sitcom The IT Crowd with a trans character. The response was more venomous than I was used to, but as bad as it was, at least I was allowed to write it. That was in 2013.
In 2020, such an episode would never air. And that is because the first generation who didn’t go out to play have grown up to become clones of Mary Whitehouse. The new puritans.
I am not new to outrage. There was fury on the part of some when we first released Father Ted but the executives we had were made of strong stuff and ignored the attacks. The same goes for The IT Crowd, Brass Eye, Black Books, and I guess a few comedies I haven’t worked on.
I’m worried we’re entering an era of pre-chewed, prissy art that offends no one.
But it’s not comedy writers who are the victims of all this: it is women who are the real casualties.
Gender ideology is a disaster for women. They are expected to make room for men in their changing rooms and their safe spaces.
They are being robbed of the language to describe their reality by unintelligible academic ‘gender experts’, by teenagers encouraging each other online, by parents who are profoundly mistaken, and by well-meaning people who, confused by the ever-changing terminology, still believe they are defending what used to be called transsexuals.
All these forces working together are, whether they know it or not, providing a smokescreen for fetishists, conmen and misogynists to pursue their own agenda.
In years to come, we will look back at this scandal, at the ruined bodies, the confused crime statistics, the weakening of safeguarding and the rollback of women’s rights and wonder how it was left to go on for so long.
It's so trendy to be "scared of clowns."
But if there are no female scary clowns in media, than we cant rule out that this may be creating anti-male fear.
If a woman dressed as a clown and sat at a playground, people would bring their kids up to her. But imagine a huge dude clown just sitting at a playground...
Tell me a huge part of scary clowns is not their maleness.
There's a lot of concerns with the economy here, because people are scared to go out, but I will just say, one of the things you can do, if you're healthy, you and your family, it's a great time to just go out, go to a local restaurant, likely you can get in easily. You know, let's not hurt the working people in this country that are relying on wages and tips to keep their small business going. Just don't run to the grocery store and buy four thousand dollars of food. Go to your local pub.
That would be Roosh.
Anglin is the one trying his very darnedest to be The Joker. Anglin I think has exactly one long lasting love, and sex is not required at all for that - he's in love with destruction itself.
This is a report from Israel, that the synagogues are the top spreaders of the coronavirus in Israel. That's not an anti-Israel report, that's in the Times of Israel. They're admitting, they are admitting that the virus clusters are in the synagogues. If you go, in fact, I'll show you the next one from UPI, chief rabbis urge Israelis to stay away from synagogues. Well I would too! Stay out of those things! There's a plague in them! God's dealing with false religions. God's dealing with people who oppose his son Jesus Christ. He's dealing with the forces of Antichrist. And there's a plague moving upon the Earth right now. And the people that are going into the synagogues are coming out of the synagogues with the virus. Well, it's spreading in Israel, through the synagogues. Who is Israel gonna blame that on? There are no anti-Semitic people going there with the virus, spreading it.
Now let me tell you, Mr. Netanyahu, let me tell you, ADL, God, God is spreading it in your synagogues! You're under judgement because you oppose his son, the Lord Jesus Christ. That is why you have a plague in your synagogues. Repent. Repent and believe on the name of Jesus Christ, and the plague will stop.
I bet a total Karen came up with that.As many in the tweet thread point out. There is also a person in the thread claiming to be the tweeter's lawyer and threatening to sue people for harassment and slurs. Amusingly, when people point out that when you can say one word (Karen) but censor the other (n-word) it tells you they are not the same, the account starts to use the term "K-word".
They’re not facemasks.
They’re communist burkas.
(https://i.imgur.com/96d8rAs.jpg)
Jonathan Shuttlesworth, a televangelist who co-founded Revival Today TV, called out European churches that are taking measures to prevent the spread of coronavirus.https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2020/03/pastor-says-sissies-pansies-wash-hands-prevent-coronavirus/
“Shame on every European full gospel church, bunch of sissies, that shut down during this thing,” he said. Italy is the country with the second-most confirmed cases of coronavirus in the world, after China, and churches there have taken steps to prevent the spread of the virus, like removing holy water and canceling large events.
“Catholic Church not having holy water in the lobby — how holy is the water then?” he said in his rant. “That should be a sign to you that your whole religion’s a fraud. Any faith that doesn’t work in real life is a fake faith. Totally fake.”
“If you’re putting out pamphlets and telling everybody to use Purell before they come into the sanctuary and don’t greet anyone, you should just turn in your ministry credentials and burn your church down — turn it into a casino or something,” he said. “You’re a loser. Bunch of pansies. No balls. Got neutered somewhere along the line and don’t even realize it.”
“Let me tell you if the devil doesn’t want there to be mass gatherings — it’s time to hold mass gatherings. If I lived in Italy I would call an open-air crusade to pray for the sick. If you have to go to jail, go to jail.”
“They can say whatever they want, he honored Israel. Obama honored the enemies of Israel; Trump honors Israel, and it’s a massive difference. And because of that, I predict America will be minimally affected by coronavirus,” Shuttlesworth said.
He said that “Pacific Northwest, California, and New York” are “four places” that will not be protected by Trump’s views on Israel because they gave “God the middle finger in the shape of an Empire State Building lit up in pink to celebrate the passage of the [legislation] that you can kill a baby.”
QuoteQuoteQuote(https://66.media.tumblr.com/d285f8c820ab66a84138277dffa868a2/tumblr_pfnrjl9RSv1t4pbkb_500.png)
males is the same
How has their movement been taken so seriously for so long?
This is SUCH a typical male response.
Rape. She wants to rape them.
People make a big deal of Harry Potter turning on her, but every single character in that series came from HER head. She IS Harry. She's not just Harry, she's Hermione and Ralph, and Dumbledore, and everyone else. If you're on her side, you're doing all right. #IStandWithJKR
https://twitter.com/ContraPoints/status/1270885329151701000/photo/1QuotePeople make a big deal of Harry Potter turning on her, but every single character in that series came from HER head. She IS Harry. She's not just Harry, she's Hermione and Ralph, and Dumbledore, and everyone else. If you're on her side, you're doing all right. #IStandWithJKR
Plus A) by his logic, doesn't that mean JKR is also Voldemort, Lucius Malfoy, Umbridge etc? And B)… "Hermione and Ralph" how does anybody get that wrong?
Plus A) by his logic, doesn't that mean JKR is also Voldemort, Lucius Malfoy, Umbridge etc? And B)… "Hermione and Ralph" how does anybody get that wrong?
I mean, Ron Weasley is kind of a Ralph Wiggum. Just a more functional variety.
Plus A) by his logic, doesn't that mean JKR is also Voldemort, Lucius Malfoy, Umbridge etc? And B)… "Hermione and Ralph" how does anybody get that wrong?
I mean, Ron Weasley is kind of a Ralph Wiggum. Just a more functional variety.
*Ron voice*: haha, I'm in danger.
I am not here for romance. I am not here for sex. I am here to organize on a purely Maoist basis. I will never interact with anyone outside of a Maoist realm.
Engaging in Maoism to pick up women is predatory and deceitful. Sex, romance, lust; these acts of evil detract from the revolution. We should be purely for Protracted Peoples War! I have never been in any romantic relationship! I will never! I am fully geared for revolution!
In a society dominated by the patriarchy, sexual intercourse is unscientific and useless.
I don't think people realize that porn, sex, any sexual promiscuity, etc will be outlawed under communism. All idealist horse shit.
Maocels are a thing nowQuoteI am not here for romance. I am not here for sex. I am here to organize on a purely Maoist basis. I will never interact with anyone outside of a Maoist realm.QuoteEngaging in Maoism to pick up women is predatory and deceitful. Sex, romance, lust; these acts of evil detract from the revolution. We should be purely for Protracted Peoples War! I have never been in any romantic relationship! I will never! I am fully geared for revolution!QuoteIn a society dominated by the patriarchy, sexual intercourse is unscientific and useless.QuoteI don't think people realize that porn, sex, any sexual promiscuity, etc will be outlawed under communism. All idealist horse shit.
wtf did i just read
a) Someone is angry that a celebrity has opinions about Trump.
b) What is it with these right-wingers in USA and ranting at a camera in their car?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFSZdlVsPVo
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ehw9C2vXkAImHHo?format=jpg&name=900x900)
I saw this elsewhere and I remember thinking that "lesbianics" sounds like some sort of martial art or possibly a superpower.
Like the Biotics of Mass Effect.