Feminism?

[huskeR32]

It is, it's also a joke. Let's face it though, these ladies seem to have some axe to grind that makes so little sense. They wear shirts for instance with slogans such as "grow your own dope, plant a man" that's ok but it's not ok for me to joke back.

Those two "jokes" aren't even remotely comparable.

--

Sadly it's true. My own opinion is that such movements do nothing to help strike a sensible balance in places of work or study.

That's quite a disheartening read. Constant exposure to opinions that differed from mine was easily the most valuable part of my post-secondary education.

 

[squadops]

Constant exposure to opinions that differed from mine was easily the most valuable part of my post-secondary education.

So what happened, now you simply ram your thoughts without any consideration of other opinions?

 

[huskeR32]

So what happened, now you simply ram your thoughts without any consideration of other opinions?

Because I usually disagree with you, that means that I'm necessarily not considering your viewpoints?

 

[squadops]

Well I've never seen it.

I'll respond to your objection to my joke; you are right as their joke implies that all men are useless whereas my joke simply says a portion of ladies are not sexually attractive. The fact you become so offended is what is making my point.

 

[huskeR32]

Well I've never seen it.

So you've never managed to make a strong enough argument to change my mind about something. I'm still not seeing that as proof that I don't at least consider what you say.

I'll respond to your objection to my joke; you are right as their joke implies that all men are useless whereas my joke simply says a portion of ladies are not sexually attractive.

No, your joke implies that a woman must be attractive enough to cause a man to lose his self control and commit rape before she has a right to comment on the issue of rape.

The fact you become so offended is what is making my point.

How does my finding your comment to be abhorrent equate to me not giving consideration to alternate opinions?

 

[JKgo]

Sadly it's true.

...Trigger warnings? I stopped reading that article once it got to the Asian-American "installation" fiasco lest it pollutes my head.

Edit: never mind, I read it till the end. Now this coddling... thing, whatever the "correct" term is, will haunt me for the rest of my life. I will not forget to tip-toe around any and all recent college/univerisity graduates from US of A...

I don't mind the sensible PC-ing but really?

So the general mood in an average campus is somewhat similar to...

Spoiler

...Just how did we get here?

 

[squadops]

No, your joke implies that a woman must be attractive enough to cause a man to lose his self control and commit rape before she has a right to comment on the issue of rape.

It does? News to me. The point of the joke is actually that they have way too many sour grapes. It doesn't matter either way but it is odd to feel so compelled to protect those who have no desire for that said protection. SJW I guess you call it, they can shut up anytime as far as I'm concerned.

Teach the girls and boys to play nice, that is what I've been saying all along, go back to the homosexual thread if you don't believe me.

Sure they have a right to toot their horns, I also have a right to say just how dumb they look.

 

[huskeR32]

It does? News to me. The point of the joke is actually that they have way too many sour grapes

Okay, they have "too many sour grapes" about what, exactly? Without an answer to that, the joke doesn't make sense.

 

[Dotini]

...Just how did we get here?

The quick and easy answer is that it started with the feminist movement, picked up steam with the institutionally liberalized and beta'd male, then the final blows came from anti-depressants, too many mass shootings on campus, and acceptance of PTSD as a culturally acquired disorder. Nowadays "Vote Trump" graffiti anywhere near campus will cause emotional trauma and psychic angst.

 

[JKgo]

The quick and easy answer is that it started with the feminist movement, picked up steam with the institutionally liberalized and beta'd male, then the final blows came from anti-depressants, too many mass shootings on campus, and acceptance of PTSD as a culturally acquired disorder. Nowadays "Vote Trump" graffiti anywhere near campus will cause emotional trauma and psychic angst.

...Good sir, that sounds more like a quick and dirty answer to me. But psychic angst? That's a new one.

 

[squadops]

Okay, they have "too many sour grapes" about what, exactly? Without an answer to that, the joke doesn't make sense.

Whatever it is that makes them mad at the world, they turn that into an anger towards men.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I wish more people on the left would wake up and realize the conservatives in America aren't the enemy

And I wish more people on the right would wake up and realise that progressives aren't the enemy. We're not looking to change everything you stand for until you're forced to identify with something that no is no longer representative of yourself. We just want to ask "is this the best way of doing thing?" and if the answer is no, ask "how can we do it better?".

 

[Johnnypenso]

And I wish more people on the right would wake up and realise that progressives aren't the enemy. We're not looking to change everything you stand for until you're forced to identify with something that no is no longer representative of yourself. We just want to ask "is this the best way of doing thing?" and if the answer is no, ask "how can we do it better?".

Funny, that's not what comes to mind when I think about so called progressives. What I see is, "we know better, you've been doing it wrong since the dawn of time, here's the right way and if you disagree you're racist/homophobic/Islamophobic/bigoted/sexist/intolerant/xenophobic."

 

[squadops]

Progressives might not be the enemy, however their so called solutions usually center around the removal of freedom.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Progressives might not be the enemy, however their so called solutions usually center around the removal of freedom of poeple they don't like.

Fixed that for you

 

[huskeR32]

Funny, that's not what comes to mind when I think about so called progressives. What I see is, "we know better, you've been doing it wrong since the dawn of time, here's the right way and if you disagree you're racist/homophobic/Islamophobic/bigoted/sexist/intolerant/xenophobic."

Careful, your persecution complex is showing...

 

[Danoff]

@Johnnypenso

Careful, your persecution complex is showing...

Is it?

I mean, that's literally what is happening is it not?

Let's take an example: Women should have the right to vote!

That is literally "you've been doing this wrong since the dawn of time" and "if you disagree you're sexist". Is it not?

Let's take another example. Women should be treated equally! Doesn't that also fit the description? How about "gay marriage is ok" or "we should free the slaves" or "black people should be allowed to own land". Or how about some that aren't defensible like "black people should be given preference in hiring" or "black people should be given preference in school admissions". Are these not all "you've been doing this wrong since the dawn of time" and "if you disagree you're sexist/racist/etc."? He's literally correct.

 

[huskeR32]

I mean, that's literally what is happening is it not?

No. One can advocate for a better way of doing things without believing that we've all had bad intentions the whole time.

 

[Danoff]

No. One can advocate for a better way of doing things without believing that we've all had bad intentions the whole time.

That's not what he said. He said we've been doing it wrong the whole time, and if you don't agree now you're a bigot.

 

[huskeR32]

That's not what he said. He said we've been doing it wrong the whole time, and if you don't agree now you're a bigot.

But that's not what @prisonermonkeys said, now is it? The notion that people are bigots was introduced by Johnnypenso*, and projected onto progressives.

*In the context of this discussion - I realize there are liberal 🤬 out there who toss the bigot label around a little too, erm, liberally.

 

[Johnnypenso]

But that's not what @prisonermonkeys said, now is it? The notion that people are bigots was introduced by Johnnypenso*, and projected onto progressives.

*In the context of this discussion - I realize there are liberal 🤬 out there who toss the bigot label around a little too, erm, liberally.

He also said, "we", twice, as if his views of progressivism are representative of all progressives, which, as I see you agree, are clearly not, so thanks for that. And that's entirely my point. Many so called "progressives" think they need to demonize someone or something to get their point across. And for the record, it happens on all sides of every issue. I'd even go so far to argue that those aren't his own personal views either, as many of his previous posts indicate.

 

[Danoff]

But that's not what @prisonermonkeys said, now is it? The notion that people are bigots was introduced by Johnnypenso*, and projected onto progressives.

*In the context of this discussion - I realize there are liberal 🤬 out there who toss the bigot label around a little too, erm, liberally.

I'm not talking about anything but what I quoted.

Funny, that's not what comes to mind when I think about so called progressives. What I see is, "we know better, you've been doing it wrong since the dawn of time, here's the right way and if you disagree you're racist/homophobic/Islamophobic/bigoted/sexist/intolerant/xenophobic."

Obviously, the man is here and can speak for himself. But what I read there is what someone is seeing when they think about so-called progressives. Not necessarily the views of any other member. I gave some progressive examples that fit that description nicely.

 

[huskeR32]

He also said, "we", twice, as if his views of progressivism are representative of all progressives, which, as I see you agree, are clearly not, so thanks for that. And that's entirely my point.

So you're responding to his generalization by generalizing in the other direction? How does that help?

Many so called "progressives" think they need to demonize someone or something to get their point across.

Which is unfortunate, because it makes it that much harder to actually effect any positive change.

And for the record, it happens on all sides of every issue.

Sadly, it seems it's all to easy to forget that the person opposite you is, well, a person.

--

I'm not talking about anything but what I quoted.

Fair enough.

Obviously, the man is here and can speak for himself. But what I read there is what someone is seeing when they think about so-called progressives. Not necessarily the views of any other member. I gave some progressive examples that fit that description nicely.

prisonermonkeys' original post that started this exchange does not fit that description nicely, though, and I guess I'd prefer to keep the conversation contained to what's actually said here.

 

[Danoff]

prisonermonkeys' original post that started this exchange does not fit that description nicely, though, and I guess I'd prefer to keep the conversation contained to what's actually said here.

That's what I'm saying to you. Ok, whatever. I think we miscommunicated... touche'.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Funny, that's not what comes to mind when I think about so called progressives. What I see is, "we know better, you've been doing it wrong since the dawn of time, here's the right way and if you disagree you're racist/homophobic/Islamophobic/bigoted/sexist/intolerant/xenophobic."

Which really just proves my point - when you see progressives, you see the enemy. You consciously disregard the merits of whatever point is being argued because you're allowing yourself to be blinded by the assumption that progressives are trying to inflict their view of the world on you.

Progressives might not be the enemy, however their so called solutions usually center around the removal of freedom.

Do you have any examples to go with those generalisations?

 

[Kent]

@Johnnypenso



Is it?

I mean, that's literally what is happening is it not?

Let's take an example: Women should have the right to vote!

That is literally "you've been doing this wrong since the dawn of time" and "if you disagree you're sexist". Is it not?

Let's take another example. Women should be treated equally! Doesn't that also fit the description? How about "gay marriage is ok" or "we should free the slaves" or "black people should be allowed to own land". Or how about some that aren't defensible like "black people should be given preference in hiring" or "black people should be given preference in school admissions". Are these not all "you've been doing this wrong since the dawn of time" and "if you disagree you're sexist/racist/etc."? He's literally correct.

That is literally the funniest thing I've seen on the GTP in months... Damn near the funniest thing I've seen on the net in a week.
You sir deserve this.

Wait, you are staff... My bad.

 

[squadops]

Sadly, it seems it's all to easy to forget that the person opposite you is, well, a person.

Something you seem to do on a regular basis

and yes, I'm against this sort of thing, even embarrassed feeling the need to post it.

 

[huskeR32]

Something you seem to do on a regular basis

What's with the ad hominems lately?

When I debate you in these threads, I address what you say, I don't just lob random insults at you. If you can't handle having your views challenged, maybe you should avoid the O&CE forum.

 

[squadops]

Oh I can handle it and I didn't mean it as an ad hominem. Having differing views is what makes for the conversation after all.

 

[LeMansAid]

You sir deserve this.

Hey, @Noob616 is not just some piece of crumb that can be doled out as a prize.

@TenEightyOne - can't believe you snuck in a "seminal theory".