There's a special place in hell for people who vote Democrat

[master_shake_]

I wouldn't know. I will agree that it's annoying (uncivil, immature, and intellectually dishonest) when you keep mis-characterizing my posts even after having corrected you politely.

I won't debate you anymore than I would a 4-year-old. You both lack the very basic skills of proper and improper conduct for debate.

i can't defend my point so i won't talk to you.

LOL

 

[chipwitch]

i can't defend my point so i won't talk to you.

LOL

Oh, I'll talk to anyone here. I have no problem with that 🙂

I just won't engage in a debate with anyone incapable of it.

 

[realibrad]

Oh, I'll talk to anyone here. I have no problem with that 🙂

I just won't engage in a debate with anyone incapable of it.

Seems like a perfect way to protect your ideals. I think I see why you are taking the position you are taking here.

 

[Genx87]

Seems like a perfect way to protect your ideals. I think I see why you are taking the position you are taking here.

Sounds like chip needs a safe zone, an echo chamber as many call it.

 

[master_shake_]

Sounds like chip needs a safe zone, an echo chamber as many call it.

maybe chip needs some muscle.

 

[PokerGuy]

Sounds like chip needs a safe zone, an echo chamber as many call it.

Yep, chip has been thoroughly owned in this thread, perhaps a safe zone might be in order :biggrin:

 

[realibrad]

I wouldn't know. I will agree that it's annoying (uncivil, immature, and intellectually dishonest) when you keep mis-characterizing my posts even after having corrected you politely.

I won't debate you anymore than I would a 4-year-old. You both lack the very basic skills of proper and improper conduct for debate.

So fine, focus on the other points I made, and stop focusing on the one you think I mis-characterized you.

I made plenty of other points, and you choose to ignore all of those.

Also, saying comments are "pointless senseless piffle" is not politely. At least have the decency to be honest. You think modern feminism is about equality, and you are simply misinformed or willfully ignorant.

 

[chipwitch]

There is a certain decorum that is expected in debate. I didn't make the rules. The preceding half dozen or so remarks are evidence that many here don't understand that. That's okay. Ignorance is easily remedied if one desires it.

Debating with someone who is ignorant of debate decorum is like playing football with someone who brings a baseball bat to the game. Getting bashed in the knees with a ball bat doesn't make you a bad football player.

 

[fskimospy]

So fine, focus on the other points I made, and stop focusing on the one you think I mis-characterized you.

I made plenty of other points, and you choose to ignore all of those.

Also, saying comments are "pointless senseless piffle" is not politely. At least have the decency to be honest. You think modern feminism is about equality, and you are simply misinformed or willfully ignorant.

I think I'm pretty well informed and I also think modern feminism is about equality.

 

[chipwitch]

So fine, focus on the other points I made, and stop focusing on the one you think I mis-characterized you.

I made plenty of other points, and you choose to ignore all of those.

Also, saying comments are "pointless senseless piffle" is not politely. At least have the decency to be honest. You think modern feminism is about equality, and you are simply misinformed or willfully ignorant.

Realibrad... or is it really, Brad?

You did the same in the last thread. It isn't just one point where you mis-characterize. You repeatedly dissemble, deflect and make straw men. You lack any decorum when it comes to debate. It's not meant to be disparaging.

 

[realibrad]

I think I'm pretty well informed and I also think modern feminism is about equality.

Can you give me an example of someone who you think is a modern feminist and fights for equality?

I bet the names you come up with are going to be older women who have been fighting for equality and feminist issues long before the modern wave ideas started.

 

[Captain Picard]

It's probably because I am an Alpha male that I so often wish I could protect all the beta posters here from all the bad things they see

You're a dhimmi, Earl.

By definition, you are not an Alpha male. When you say "protecting all the beta posters from the bad things they see", you really mean entering every conversation as a muslim apologist and promoting false equivalence, distortion, and deflection.

Feminists who support islam simply see it as a sledgehammer to use against everything they hate in Western civilization. What they fail, or are simply to arrogant to see is that islam is not a liberating force. Islam will just as soon decapitate or subjugate them as it would an unapologetic Christian, Jew, Buddhist, Hindu, or any person who refuses to submit. An islam supporting feminist is either grossly ignorant, or a hypocrite. A mind fogged with disdain for Western culture, and a naive or nihilistic outlook that lends far too much credence to the phrase "The enemy of my enemy is my friend".

 

[chipwitch]

I think I'm pretty well informed and I also think modern feminism is about equality.

That doesn't fit their narrative.

Are there lunatics who are feminists. Sure. Being a feminist doesn't make one a saint. There is no clear code in any loosely organized group. Sure, feminists fight about various points.

It's very much like Christians, just as an example. There are just a FEW things they agree on, like jesus is the son of god. Beyond that, some believe in hell, some don't. Some believe they should honor the old testament, some look at it as an old law and it has little significance. Pointing at one christian who believes in polygamy and applying it to all christians would be an incorrect statement. This is what some people insist on here with feminists.

The FEW things all feminists agree on is that they are for equality. Period. That's it. No conspiracy.

 

[thraashman]

LOL, Democrats.




Yeah, I know I said that I was going to try to refrain, but trashman is SUCH a worthless piece of shit that he deserves nothing more.

One of my favorite things about you is that no matter how badly my life goes, no matter to what worthless, vile depths of foul refuse situations might bring me to and what horrible sack of festering shit I might become as a result, thanks to your existence I know there'll always be one person I'm better than.

 

[zinfamous]

Modern feminists are consequence free victim mongers. It's part of the evolution of not being held responsible for their own actions. Society has accepted and encouraged it and have thrown down anybody who judges it negatively.

It is kinda funny to see them eating their own.

If nothing else, I see that you have somehow managed to modify your persistent charges. It seems that you have removed some fraction of your blinders, and perhaps now recognize various differences, gradations within a concept, by qualifying this term with "modern."

Previously, it was always "Feminists are teh debil!" In total--as if the history of feminist thought is the same continuum with no allowance for fringe influence polluting the consensus. Now you seem to understand that not all self-described feminists really are feminists--just crazy nutters akin to evangelical tea-bagging wackadoos?

That's progress. :thumbsup:

 

[fskimospy]

Can you give me an example of someone who you think is a modern feminist and fights for equality?

I bet the names you come up with are going to be older women who have been fighting for equality and feminist issues long before the modern wave ideas started.

Lots of people I know personally are modern feminists and fight for equality. The idea that modern feminism isn't about equality is just absurd to me on its face from huge amounts of experience I have daily with modern feminists age 40 and younger.

Where did you get the idea that modern feminism wasn't about equality?

 

[realibrad]

If nothing else, I see that you have somehow managed to modify your persistent charges. It seems that you have removed some fraction of your blinders, and perhaps now recognize various differences, gradations within a concept, by qualifying this term with "modern."

Previously, it was always "Feminists are teh debil!" In total--as if the history of feminist thought is the same continuum with no allowance for fringe influence polluting the consensus. Now you seem to understand that not all self-described feminists really are feminists--just crazy nutters akin to evangelical tea-bagging wackadoos?

That's progress. :thumbsup:

How many people must have bad ideas that are only connected to a movement before you can criticize the movement for those ideas.

Here is an example. The vast majority of Catholics do not believe in raping children. Is it unfair to say the Catholic church has a problem with child molestation?

 

[fskimospy]

That doesn't fit their narrative.

Are there lunatics who are feminists. Sure. Being a feminist doesn't make one a saint. There is no clear code in any loosely organized group. Sure, feminists fight about various points.

It's very much like Christians, just as an example. There are just a FEW things they agree on, like jesus is the son of god. Beyond that, some believe in hell, some don't. Some believe they should honor the old testament, some look at it as an old law and it has little significance. Pointing at one christian who believes in polygamy and applying it to all christians would be an incorrect statement. This is what some people insist on here with feminists.

The FEW things all feminists agree on is that they are for equality. Period. That's it. No conspiracy.

Absolutely. Any movement has it's morons and its extremists. I've encountered feminists here who were total man haters and their ideas were stupid. People who oppose movements usually try to tar them with the ideas and actions of their most extreme members, however.

I personally know tons of modern feminists, as that's very much a thing in NYC. The vast majority of them are principally concerned with equality, not this weird idea of bringing men down.

 

[chipwitch]

How many people must have bad ideas that are only connected to a movement before you can criticize the movement for those ideas.

Here is an example. The vast majority of Catholics do not believe in raping children. Is it unfair to say the Catholic church has a problem with child molestation?

The catholic church is arguably one of THE SINGLE MOST ORGANIZED groups to have ever existed. They have a hierarchy that pyramids all the way up to the pope.

Who would you say is the pope of the feminist movement?

 

[zinfamous]

How many people must have bad ideas that are only connected to a movement before you can criticize the movement for those ideas.

Here is an example. The vast majority of Catholics do not believe in raping children. Is it unfair to say the Catholic church has a problem with child molestation?

No it isn't unfair, but The Church /= the People. How easy is it to make this distinction? Well, look at the precipitous decline in attendance for Mass over the last 1-2 decades; particularly in Europe and then the US. And yet, you poll these Catholics and they still consider themselves strongly Catholic. Basically: the People don't seem to consider the Church and its weekly rituals a grand necessity for their faith.

But of course you know that.

The only place where the Church still holds sway and is actually growing is in South America. I recall such cases certainly occurred there, but maybe not to the degree--the publicity, at least--as in Europe and NA.


How about this: All Conservatives are Teabag nutters and deserve no respect from any thinking adult.

 

[realibrad]

Lots of people I know personally are modern feminists and fight for equality. The idea that modern feminism isn't about equality is just absurd to me on its face from huge amounts of experience I have daily with modern feminists age 40 and younger.

Where did you get the idea that modern feminism wasn't about equality?

If anyone were to use "I know X" as to support their argument, you would laugh at them. I have seen you do it, and I doubt very much you feel like that is much of an example.

Look up Chanty Binx. I think she represents the type of feminism that people like me have a problem with.

Freedom of speech, innocent until proven guilty, freedom of expression are all things that modern feminism seems to have a problem with. How many have called for the expulsion of students for simply being accused of rape? How many have tried to limit speech they dislike?

Those are the issues. Old school feminism was not about that. You had outliers sure, but those outliers are far closer to the center today.

 

[realibrad]

No it isn't unfair, but The Church /= the People. How easy is it to make this distinction? Well, look at the precipitous decline in attendance for Mass over the last 1-2 decades; particularly in Europe and then the US. And yet, you poll these Catholics and they still consider themselves strongly Catholic. Basically: the People don't seem to consider the Church and its weekly rituals a grand necessity for their faith.

But of course you know that.

The only place where the Church still holds sway and is actually growing is in South America. I recall such cases certainly occurred there, but maybe not to the degree--the publicity, at least--as in Europe and NA.


How about this: All Conservatives are Teabag nutters and deserve no respect from any thinking adult.

Close about Conservatives, but no. If your argument is that Conservative ideas breed specific issues, then 100% yes totally on board. Conservatives by definition try to keep things the way they are. It then makes it hard for a society to progress on social issues like gay marriage. Those who opposed gay marriage on the right were in far larger numbers than those on the left. Bigotry toward homosexuals is a much bigger problem than those on the left, so it would be in my opinion totally fair to say that Conservatives have an anti gay problem.

Now, the issue there is that from what I know, the majority of Conservatives do not like gay marriage. Its not really an outlier problem there, but I think it helps illustrate my point.

When enough feminist have a view, even if that view is not part of the original core ideas, it becomes part of feminism. In the same way that child molestation is not part of the Catholic teachings, but damn well believe that the Catholic church should be connected to child molestation.

 

[chipwitch]

If anyone were to use "I know X" as to support their argument, you would laugh at them. I have seen you do it, and I doubt very much you feel like that is much of an example.

Look up Chanty Binx. I think she represents the type of feminism that people like me have a problem with.

Freedom of speech, innocent until proven guilty, freedom of expression are all things that modern feminism seems to have a problem with. How many have called for the expulsion of students for simply being accused of rape? How many have tried to limit speech they dislike?

Those are the issues. Old school feminism was not about that. You had outliers sure, but those outliers are far closer to the center today.

You know, brad, I was really excited to finally see a name! Thanks for that. So, I googled her since I've never heard of her before. She isn't on wikipedia and a quick perusal of a google search didn't reveal any unbiased sources (christian, right wing etc.) I did see her facebook page. I'm not a facebook person so, maybe you can help me this... If I go to her page, do I have to friend her or something to see her positions? Seriously. I don't see much there. If you can help with that, I'd appreciate it.

I did notice she had 196 likes. Is that a lot? Do you consider that to be part of the core feminist movement? Seems low to me. More like a fringe.

If you can point me to an article about her on a respectable news source, I'd greatly appreciate it. I even searched for the name on foxnews.com and came up with zilch. I can't help wondering if this is just some kind of fabrication the right has cooked up to support their agenda (like the planned parenthood videos). Do you see why the extreme right has credibility issues? I'm open to your claims. Just substantiate them.

 

[realibrad]

You know, brad, I was really excited to finally see a name! Thanks for that. So, I googled her since I've never heard of her before. She isn't on wikipedia and a quick perusal of a google search didn't reveal any unbiased sources (christian, right wing etc.) I did see her facebook page. I'm not a facebook person so, maybe you can help me this... If I go to her page, do I have to friend her or something to see her positions? Seriously. I don't see much there. If you can help with that, I'd appreciate it.

I did notice she had 196 likes. Is that a lot? Do you consider that to be part of the core feminist movement? Seems low to me. More like a fringe.

If you can point me to an article about her on a respectable news source, I'd greatly appreciate it. I even searched for the name on foxnews.com and came up with zilch. I can't help wondering if this is just some kind of fabrication the right has cooked up to support their agenda (like the planned parenthood videos). Do you see why the extreme right has credibility issues? I'm open to your claims. Just substantiate them.

I think you can figure out how to use the internet.

There used to be a wiki article, but it was removed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chanty_Binx

I think you can easily find videos of her. I dont really want this to center just around one person though. She was meant as an example of the type of feminism I have a problem with.

Here is an example of her reacting to someone who points out that men have vastly higher rates of suicide.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvByTdMXlPM

She mocks the issue and says she needs a cup for his man cries.

Again, the point was not to focus on her, but the type of modern feminism that is not about equality.

 

[Spungo]

Can you give me an example of someone who you think is a modern feminist and fights for equality? .

I can probably find 20 feminists who actively fight against equality 😀
Instead of naming names, it's easier to just name concepts and campaigns. Each campaign definitely has a minimum of 20 feminists supporting it.


Ban Bossy campaign - calling little girls out on their bullshit is sexist. Only boys should be called out when they act bossy. The goal of this campaign, and ones like it, is to create a society where women grow up with a god-like sense of entitlement; a society where it is sexist to question anything a girl says. You can see the result of this type of feminist nonsense in the interview Suey Park did about her Cancel Colbert crusade. When the interviewer called her stupid, it was like that was the first time she was ever called out, and she even used the line that the interviewer's opinion didn't matter because he's white and has a penis. wtf?? We saw a similar thing with that white girl who was pretending to be not-white, Bahar Mustafa, making very racist comments then claiming she can't be racist because vagina. She was obviously never told that she's being a bossy wise and beautiful woman. Putting her in her place would be sexist. Ban bossy!
(yes, she did claim that the people calling her a terrible person were just sexist)
I get to deal with the consequences of this bullshit when my brother ends up dating one of these entitled princesses. I can't even get mad at those women. They grew up exactly as designed - believing women are always right, men are always wrong, and that any criticism is based on hatred of some kind. Society sure has changed over the years. Instead of brothers making sure their sister's boyfriend is not a piece of shit, we have the sister (me) making sure her brother's girlfriend is not a piece of shit.


Yes Means Yes campaign - making 99% of men rapists. If a person makes a move without asking and getting verbal confirmation, it's rape. By this dumb standard, I'm guilty of raping several men. If I'm taking his shirt off and he does nothing to stop me, I'm getting implied sexual consent. Under yes means yes laws, I'm technically raping him. Of course, the law is not intended to defend men, so it will only apply when men are accused of rape. I get to be the victim of this nonsense because it makes men afraid to do anything or make a move. Modern men are even scared to buy alcoholic drinks for women because that could be interpreted as drugging a girl then raping her. Drunk sex is simply not legal anymore.


Ex Post Facto campaign - the ability to withdraw consent after the fact. I think this is a key point marking the downfall of western civilization. One of the great triumphs of civilization was the abandonment of ex post facto ("after the fact") laws. For example, we can't ban alcohol today then throw you in jail because you drank alcohol yesterday. That would be ex post facto. You can't be thrown in jail for doing something that was legal when you did it. Until now. Now, it's possible to withdraw sexual consent after the fact. It was consensual sex yesterday, but consent can be withdrawn, so now the guy is guilty of rape. As always, this law only applies to men. Again, it's part of a campaign to criminalize maleness.


Hiring Quotas - this one definitely affects me because I work in a male-dominated field. When quotas are in place, people doubt my technical abilities. Do I have this job because I know what the hell I'm doing, or did I get hired just to satisfy some dumb feminist group? Even as a woman, I question the qualifications of other women. I've encountered a lot of unqualified quota hirees, and they're useless. Due to feminists, I get grouped with those useless women. People assume I'm one of them. Thanks, feminism.


Only women can be victims campaigning. I've posted about this several times before, describing the problems my brother had with evicting an abusive girlfriend. Simply put, never let any woman move into your house. As a guy, you can move into her house because you can leave at any time, but letting her into your house is a disaster because there's no legal way to get rid of her. If you call the police to have that woman arrested for trespassing (refusing to move out), they claim to be abused, and the police arrest the guy who owns the house. That's actually written in the laws; if two people are arguing, the man is automatically arrested. The whole legal system is designed to be abused by women who have borderline personality disorder. I keep posting this, but Dave Foley's experience with his piece of shit abuse-the-law wife is similar to what my brother had to deal with. Thank god my brother was never married to her and never had kids with her, but he had the same bullshit of being accused of being abusive, being arrested, taken to court, etc. As a man, you simply do not have rights.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaC-2lj6HNg