Anything of substance proving that Foldndark and Barack Obama are not two of a kind? Surprised the burden of proof isn't the other way around. They're both American. And the commonalities dry up after that. They both like to participate in safe space threads online?

It's like Foldn glamoured you by saying "Obama" in most of his posts.

I've never heard Obama say he was concerned with the apparent recent outbreak of "lots of students becoming overly sensitive to downright silly things" and "even sometimes pushing to have these silly things censored from (official?) safe spaces", but apparently he was experiencing this concern on at least two separate occasions:

A probability "what is the scale of this issue" type argument tho is fundamentally correct. Like if you guys just want to laugh at this one particular way among many that college students can be silly in pursuit of a laudable goal like fighting racism then well i guess go ahead and laugh if you want, but we can't pretend this is a bigger "issue" than it is.

Maybe I'm just over sensitive here cause I have a few legit MRA "friends" whose social media raison d'etre is entirely based on sharing any and every example of something stupid a college kid has ever said - as long as it is about racism or sexism (and not libertarianism or communism or israel/palestine or any of the thousands of other stupid issues college kids talk about). So it fits a pattern. And maybe not everybody masterbating to this particular brand of stupid college kids is an MRA but really I don't ****ing care.

Right. And that's why we are laughing at them. Like sure we can get all hot headed that someone somewhere on campus once said that "america is the land of opportunity" (a pretty stupid platitude) is a microaggression. But if you are going to it being this great societal harm then you really need some recalibration.

Instead of just posting something like that to feel included and a little special(?) cant you just tell us your thoughts on this issue. Telling others that they are wrong without ever sharing ones own opinions isnt very constructive...

Come now, some 2+2 members use a snarky tone, which is more or less the same thing amirite

The claim here is that there is some sort of authoritarian thought police going on where we are not able to engage meaningfully when exposed with valid ideas that contract our worldviews. Right? Like that is the alleged problem, that we're group thinking and identity politicking our way into moderate conformity? But in IP thread we are talking about people having some fun trolling a ridiculous poster. It was hilarious. Or not. But either way it wasn't the same as the alleged problem.

Thing is the Swedish government asked the OECD to investigate declining standards in Swedish schools, there actually is some evidence that boys are doing worse in schools relative to girls but both sexes are actually doing worse than they were in 1992-2000. One of the reasons put forward by the left is that this corresponds to changes in Swedish education that allowed privately funded schools through a voucher system that was introduced.

However the numbers do not suggest that the numbers of boys graduating with insufficient grades to continue in education are plummeting. There isn't a decline in those numbers nor does the report refer to any of the quite ludicrous reasons for the decline in results that sputty suggests, girls standards are declining as well though at a slower rate.

And who the **** announces they are writing a "scientific paper" on the above rather than the discipline that the paper is written for.

What's kind of ironic is that if sputty held back and was on his anti-immigrant tip rather than his anti-woman tip at the time he may have some wiggle room.

From the actual OECD Report

Exactly. You can't come up with anything much Foldn is demanding or mentioning that you think differs from Obama on this topic. It's just an attack that seems more on a strawman than on anything else.

As you said, you're just here for the gangbang. That's a large part of the answer to uke's question as to why it gets so much focus.

You could've just stopped there, since no one was able to make much sense out of his manic, sleep-deprived ramblings.

I can't help but point out the President has to deal with weekly shooting rampages and Mississippi and Syria and other highfalutin issues along with the problem of college kids and their safe spaces. Obama has more on his plate to worry about than Foldn's creative writing.

I don't think that is the claim, at least not from Foldn or Obama. All this is being talked about is a concern about an attitude that may lead in that direction. I don't share this concern but unlike some others I have no concern about the concern being considered and discussed - it's rather a good thing in politics forum imo.

Yes if you're saying it was just for kicks. Yous aid the aim was to get him banned so it's still generally of the form: Group disapproves of someone so tries to get rid of them. A more tolerant group would tend more to ignoring them.

This might be the most LOLtastical thing ITT. BTW: this is exactly what happens every time we do the R-word thingee too. The dudes who are complaining about being "shouted down" and all the "yelling and screaming"... are the same exact dudes who are spamming the thread to death.

Quit silencing us, say the top two posters in the thread by volume

A little quizz for the one on the high horse. Person A posts something and 5 people respond to that claiming that he answer all of their different queries and insults. How many posts does person A have compared to the others?

I expect it's just me, professor, but it bugs me that you persistently misspell 'masturbating' as 'masterbating.' It just does. Specially since you choose to use the word such a lot, for some reason.

Glad you got that off your chest.

I think you quoted the part that really bugs you.

I'm confused, are we calling person A "silenced" here?

Uh, I don't want to ban posters who disagree?

If by "disagree" he means "post reams of unresponsive gibberish and refuse to back up wild claims," then yeah, that's accurate.

It's one the quaintest thing about the group dynamic here. Most of it is responding to posts directed at us and most of the rest is discussing the substance. They do love to complain about that for some reason.

Though I'm a bit concerned that foldn put in this effort just to troll me. I'm eagerly awaiting someone's comparative analysis of the post/sleep stats

I didn't see any conservative demanding a "safe space" anymore than one based the argument on 'professors being fired.' Those are straw men put up to make it easy to berate the right wing simulacrum without owning up that universities are havens for left wingers.

Sputnik is specifically asking for "safe space" here on the politics forum. I mean, dude can't even post without people disagreeing with his drivel. We must end this censorship.

Dominant groups gonna dominate. That's more of an inherent structural nature of groups than the widespread conspiracy that some like to make it out to be. Of course, non-dominant groups are prone to casting themselves as martyrs to maintain group loyalty through a shared persecution complex, so they should want to portray themselves as oppressed. Those who want to argue against a super-majority should study the tactics of asymmetrical warfare.

I notice you are not asking how to respond to five people jumping on you. My unsolicted advice is to pick one of the five and reply to just that person, ignoring everyone else. Pick the most civil person, if that is your wish. And perhaps point out that you are doing exactly that. Someone like chezlaw would be better served by roleplaying and demonstrating how a person should argue with someone like you, whether he is sincerely opposed or playing devil's advocate, rather than clucking in disapproval.

Well, they don't ask directly. It's always by some lame-ass proxy. Like Person B above.

They complain that unidentified posters are "driven away" by all the "yelling and screaming" and "censorship". But when asked to, like uh, maybe give a citation... well, it's always no-can-do. Obviously they weren't driven away themselves, seeing that their right here spamming the thread. So it would be absurd for them to ask for a "safe space" personally... as they're already in "safe space" for them: A space where they're safe to spam.