Page 20 of 31 FirstFirst ...
10
18
19
20
21
22
30
... LastLast
  1. #381
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Walker View Post
    The default Endus reply: YOU ARE LYING! followed by the insults.
    Maybe your inability to comprehend what people say is the problem.

    I do not deny there are less women in upper echelons than men. I do claim though that because of feminism LAWS where written that required a specific minimum percentage of women to be in boards. That's discriminatory.

    Secondly, it has been proven that to get to these percentages, less capable women have been hired. There is nothing misogynistic in. FACTS.
    The same can be said about percentages of minority groups.
    How would you know? You supposedly just got here.

    Quotas are bad, as is affirmative action. Yes, that includes the Electoral College.
    Quote Originally Posted by Destroyer of Leftism View Post
    While I certainly support more sex for more people and don't think the old norms are viable, it's also become pretty obvious that leftists only support sexual freedom because they think it will spread STDs more, damage the family and damage society. Their intentions are not to spread more freedom, they just want people sick, hopefully dependent on their healthcare too.
    Yes, someone actually said that.

  2. #382
    Bloodsail Admiral ThatsOurEric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Walker View Post
    Just the proof that the "hatred" etc is just coming from those groups
    Quote Originally Posted by Malaky View Post
    And I can only hope those "counter protesters" get arrested and have to pay hefty long-lasting prices for their political violence.

    I had no idea we should treat people who blame anyone not white for all the problems they have and the
    problems with the world, use racist and hateful bigotry, as well as histories of murder and violence towards
    said non-whites with civility & respect.

    Whatever are we thinking. Clearly, by both your views, such people are heroes and should be protected.
    Last edited by ThatsOurEric; 2019-05-01 at 05:13 PM.

  3. #383
    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsOurEric View Post
    I had no idea we should treat people with Nazi views with respect. Whatever are we thinking.
    You don't have to treat them with respect at all. But the hypocrisy is amazing: condemning people for their hatred, while being hateful themselves.

  4. #384
    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsOurEric View Post
    I had no idea we should treat people with Nazi views with respect. Whatever are we thinking.
    "So much for the tolerant left".

  5. #385
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    At this point, you're straight-up lying about facts. Privilege is statistically verifiable. Wage gaps exist. Disparities in representation at upper echelons are statistically proven.

    As for "not looking at ... capability"; if you're arguing women are less capable than men, you're making an argument that is blatantly misogynistic.
    Privilege, in the way feminists say it exists, is bullshit. A white homeless man isn't more privileged than a blue haired female starbucks worker, but feminists will say he is more privileged.

    Wage gap doesn't exist the way feminists claim it exists. It's 2-8% and that's because men are more aggressive with asking for raises.

    No one cares if women are on top or not. But the fact that they DO have representation on top proves there's really no barrier besides themselves. The people making this argument are all jealous. None of them want to do the work to get up there, but they sure as shit want to bring those people down. Because they have this bullshit notion that it's unfair that they have what they have.

    Women are less capable than men in some areas(and vice versa in other areas). Are you going to deny science and argue that women are the same as men? We all know men are more aggressive. This gives men the benefit in our current system. There's a biological reality that you seem to be ignoring.

    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    You said you read it.

    He jumped in here, trying to carry water, and appeal to Antifa. I called him on it, and demonstrated when he did it.
    Appeal to antifa? The best you can say is he employed a whataboutism. He, and others, seem to think you said something different, and you still haven't cleared up what you proved.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrak View Post
    liberalism is a right wing idealogy.

  6. #386
    Immortal Beazy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,537
    Quote Originally Posted by Xath View Post
    Sure you can also sue and win for pretty much anything if you have even a semi decent case which is why it makes sense to wait a few weeks and make an actual case dot the is and cross the ts so to speak.
    Good luck proving that you wernt fired for wearing the wrong shoes. You're going to need it.

  7. #387
    Quote Originally Posted by Girighet View Post
    It's a ridiculous quote.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Nmr has been in my town, why should we have to listen to their genocidal ideas?
    Easy. You don’t. There is no objective definition of extremist, it’s all relative. I know you think you want censorship but you really don’t.

  8. #388
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Walker View Post
    I do not deny there are less women in upper echelons than men.
    Yet women don't ask for representation and equality in all professions and walks of life, just when juicy POWER is involved. Which is fun, and it betrays what this is all about. Power. It's always about power.

  9. #389
    Quote Originally Posted by laplacedemon View Post
    "So much for the tolerant left".
    Should we tolerate people that want to eradicate entire populations of people?

  10. #390
    Quote Originally Posted by CryotriX View Post
    Yet women don't ask for representation and equality in all professions and walks of life, just when juicy POWER is involved. Which is fun, and it betrays what this is all about. Power. It's always about power.
    I bet you say you're not a misogynist too. Yikes.

  11. #391
    Quote Originally Posted by Hilhen7 View Post
    Should we tolerate people that want to eradicate entire populations of people?
    The left used to fight for the free speech of disgusting people. It's so strange how it's shifted to the right leaning people defending free speech.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrak View Post
    liberalism is a right wing idealogy.

  12. #392
    Sure would be a shame if somebody plowed a car through white supremacists.

    Give them a taste of their own medicine.
    See me for the stick up your arse, when applying for moderator. The stick is gratis.

  13. #393
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurasu View Post
    I bet you say you're not a misogynist too. Yikes.
    I'm not, because I like women that understand men and women are not the same, equal under the law, but with clear biological differences. The only women I dislike are the new wave of intersectional feminists. A very small minority. And I've had pretty successful and long lasting relationships even with intersectional feminists, 2-5 years, and we've each time parted as friends. We just don't get along a very specific ideological line.

    let me know when you want representation in laying bricks, cutting trees, laying asphalt, taking the garbage, and cleaning the sewers, and willing to fight for that as hard as you'd fight for the cushy, well-paid jobs or positions of political power.

  14. #394
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurasu View Post
    I bet you say you're not a misogynist too. Yikes.
    What's misogynist about what he said?
    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrak View Post
    liberalism is a right wing idealogy.

  15. #395
    Quote Originally Posted by roboscorcher View Post
    What do you think about the Paradox of Tolerance?

    "Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant." - Karl Popper
    I think what I just said above: we take action when they turn into actual harm, actual violence, and not just speech we dislike.
    Why not before?
    Because then someone has to decide when mere speech "needs be censored for the greater good", which will undoubtedly become the first seat of power the worst kind of people will aim for.

    The best solution is to never institute that seat.

    Free speech is about tolerating all viewpoints. Neo-nazi's preach intolerance toward certain groups. Do you not see the disconnect here? To keep these censor-loving people from power, we have to censor their awful ideas.
    Same problem as above: who decides when ideas are "awful" and need be censored?
    Exactly the kind of people you want to stop.

    The internet has proven itself incapable of policing the marketplace of ideas. For the most part, its communities evolved them into echo chambers.
    The internet hasn't proven itself anything yet, it's an absolutely new medium the world is still discovering and adapting to.
    Massive public agoras like Twitter or Facebook are not even 20 years old yet, it's far too soon to decide they have been around long enough to make any sort of judgement, even less so try "policing the marketplace", which once you start will never stop, or claim "echo chambers", which is EXACTLY what that kind of policing creates.

    Echo chambers are created exactly when you "police" excluding stuff you dislike or disagree with, which ends up leaving only a subset of thoughts and ideas that then loops upon itself and turns cancerous.

    You just need to look at american universities and colleges to see what "policing the marketplace" does.
    As soon as conservative and right-wing thinking started to disappear those places turned faster and faster into nonsense.

    We already take steps to ban middle-eastern terror groups online after ISIS took off. Why the double standard for white groups that want to do similar things? Or should we let ISIS spread hate online, in the name of free speech? Where is the line for you?
    It depends on the level of the threat, obviously.
    Isis is bite, white nationalists are just bark. And barking is acceptable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    Yes, I think a company should be legally allowed to refuse to serve black people.

  16. #396
    Quote Originally Posted by prwraith View Post
    Sure would be a shame if somebody plowed a car through white supremacists.

    Give them a taste of their own medicine.
    Sure, kill people you disagree with. Gee, where have we seen this behaviour before?

    White supremasists are morons that need to be eradicated with the correct means: education. Violence will merely create more.
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    Once again, are you still mad that I ran circles around you in the other thread? This is a new thread, don't take it so hard.
    You mean the posts where you attempt to justify the ridiculous amount of time you spend on these forums because your imaginary IT company is ‘very successful’? I’m off to play some Octopath Traveler with my kids, did you know that’s a study too? Haha
    Last edited by nocturnus; 2019-05-01 at 05:37 PM.
    "Just flow with the go..." - Rickson Gracie

  17. #397
    Quote Originally Posted by CryotriX View Post
    I'm not, because I like women that understand men and women are not the same, equal under the law, but with clear biological differences. The only women I dislike are the new wave of intersectional feminists. A very small minority. And I've had pretty successful and long lasting relationships even with intrersectional feminists, 2-5 years, and we've each time parted as friends. We just don't get along a very specific ideological line.

    let me know when you want representation in laying bricks, cutting trees, laying asphalt, taking the garbage, and cleaning the sewers, and willing to fight for that as hard as you'd fight for the cushy, well-paid jobs or positions of political power.
    Men are typically compensated very well for the jobs you mentioned, compared to other low skill, labor heavy jobs. I'm just curious why you think women shouldn't be focused on the areas that allow them to gain more political and economic power when historically they have had very little of both. Obviously that is a goal.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by urasim View Post
    What's misogynist about what he said?
    "Women are greedy and only want power for no hard work" is basically how it translated for me.

  18. #398
    Quote Originally Posted by nocturnus View Post
    Sure, kill people you disagree with. Gee, where have we seen this behaviour before?

    White supremasists are morons that need to be eradicated with the correct means: education. Violence will merely create more.
    I don't advocate for violence against white supremacists, but I'm not going to weep for them when it inevitably happens. Less than human.
    See me for the stick up your arse, when applying for moderator. The stick is gratis.

  19. #399
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurasu View Post
    Men are typically compensated very well for the jobs you mentioned, compared to other low skill, labor heavy jobs. I'm just curious why you think women shouldn't be focused on the areas that allow them to gain more political and economic power when historically they have had very little of both. Obviously that is a goal.
    Focus all you want on it, but be honest about what you pursue. Which is NOT representation and fairness, but power. I'm fine with that take, because when you acknowledge you struggle for power, that opens up the possibility of other groups to struggle to KEEP power, or get more power. A struggle for power is nothing new to humankind. But we have to know first that we're in one.

    And we clearly are.

    PS: "women" aren't "greedy". Humans are. Women are human, so greed is an inherent flaw and to be expected.

    Hard work is a legitimate way towards achieving more power, as well. Nobody should sabotage women (or men) from achieving that through hard work. What is questionable is the ideological side. Work alone is OK. Ideological pressure... questionable.
    Last edited by CryotriX; 2019-05-01 at 05:36 PM.

  20. #400
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurasu View Post
    "Women are greedy and only want power for no hard work" is basically how it translated for me.
    Because of your bias maybe? Men also want power and are also greedy. I doubt he'd argue against that. You're just not being charitable, jumping to conclusions, and creating strawmen.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrak View Post
    liberalism is a right wing idealogy.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •