Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
!!! The opposition to Social Justice thread !!! The opposition to Social Justice thread

02-14-2017 , 03:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
Do you advocate punching them or stopping them talking?
If someone went up to Zimmerman or Spencer and broke their nose, its obviously a wrong thing to do legally.

But you have to understand why nobody sane will gave a damn.
02-14-2017 , 09:07 PM
@LordJvK:

This morning we were chatting about the different sets of peeps that OSJers label PC Police y/o SJWers. We haven't got to the PC Police part yet. We were still working our way through the SJWer part. But... as often happens random 'poo flinging', and other such, took over the thread. If we could, I'd like to get things back on topic. We left off here...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shame Trolly !!!1!
So, for an OSJer to label a peep a SJWer, the peep needs to (a) meet at least one criteria on your list -and- (b) the peep must have previously labelled an OSJer in certain particular ways. Those ways include white supremacist, and "butt hurt white guy".

Do I have this correct ??
Quote:
Originally Posted by dereds
... So we have a necessary condition. Being mean to people that disagree with us. + one or more of the list above?...
Please prof, continue...
02-14-2017 , 09:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tien
If someone went up to Zimmerman or Spencer and broke their nose, its obviously a wrong thing to do legally.

But you have to understand why nobody sane will gave a damn.
They don't seem to understand this, despite it being so simple.
02-14-2017 , 09:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tien
I believe that silencing people like Richard Spencer, or even punching him in the face, is no harm done.

If someone wants to talk all day along about the benefits of communism, so be it, let him have the platform and engage their positions on its merits. At least I know its rooted in discussions about inequality, and not about the merits of massacring intellectuals.

But there is no engaging the merits of the positions of Richard Spencers. There is no merit behind Nazism. No economic merit, no social merit, no human benefit, nothing. Its simply reveling in the fact that some dude erased half the Jewish population from planet Earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tien
If someone went up to Zimmerman or Spencer and broke their nose, its obviously a wrong thing to do legally.

But you have to understand why nobody sane will gave a damn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
They don't seem to understand this, despite it being so simple.
The Westboro Baptist church must be raking in the dough from pigeons who think like this. Especially over the past few years.

http://www.kanewj.com/wbc/
02-14-2017 , 10:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mori****a System
The Westboro Baptist church must be raking in the dough from pigeons who think like this. Especially over the past few years.

http://www.kanewj.com/wbc/
Probably not.
02-14-2017 , 10:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tien
If someone went up to Zimmerman or Spencer and broke their nose, its obviously a wrong thing to do legally.

But you have to understand why nobody sane will gave a damn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
They don't seem to understand this, despite it being so simple.
I don't understand how you two can defend this position. While I agree the position of being a Nazi or a racist is deplorable the road this type of thinking leads to is cops being murdered or abortion clinics getting blown up because people may think they deserve it.

You are literally saying it is acceptable for people to suffer violence because you dislike what they may believe.
02-14-2017 , 10:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Position
This. Phelp's estranged son talked about how the church was just a way for him to vent his rage and that he was an abusive father and husband.

Also, getting punched seems like a bad way to go about suing people. You have to think that most people aren't going to be able to pay for a big judgement.
02-14-2017 , 10:44 PM
Ah, yes, here's the good stuff I was waiting for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
I wouldn't like to say 100% the other way around, no.

I have long-standing objections to the notion of structural privilege as a concept because it functions like original sin.

Straight white men de facto in the wrong because they've even said a word and -- MOST importantly -- regardless of whether they have, in actuality, been the beneficiaries of "privilege". The average Donald Trump voter clearly didn't think so.

The biggest problem with all of it is that in the majority of cases, the identifier is actually a cipher for class and income.

A black guy who has been to Harvard, earns big money, and acts like a guy who has been to Harvard and earns big money will not be perceived in the same way as a black guy who acts like a gangster rapper.

Why would people have preconceptions based on that?

It just comes down to class, income, and growing up in a poor area associated with crime.

The black guy from the good in the USA and the white "chav" from the local council estate in the UK probably have a lot in common, AND they probably face the same amount of prejudice and assumptions about them based on their appearance (drawn from stereotyping).

Identity politics really *does not* get to the heart of this matter. It actually serves to reinforce the issue and insists on race and other markers as being demographic categories with meaning.

There is no wonder at all that working class white communities rejected this ideology thoroughly because no aspect of their lives bore out the claims being made about privilege.

---------

Now, you and I can have a sensible discussion around this. You might disagree and hold that there's still some value in the concept for reasons X, Y and Z.

I likely would not call you an SJW for this.

If, however, your response was built around accusing me of being a white supremacist or a "butt hurt white guy" or whatever, then I likely would call you an SJW.

Hope you can see this.
02-14-2017 , 10:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ogallalabob
The liberals really need to work on their marketing.

The poor/middle class people should not be considered privileged. They understand they are not privileged. The fact they had to send a resume in at all and not have a rich mom/dad having the contacts to set up a interview is a sign of the lack of privilege.

Privileged is someone like Chelsea Clinton, with almost 0 charisma or on air time experience gets a $600,0000.00 gig with NBC.
We're all gonna die in a nuclear war because a bunch of middle class crackers hadn't gotten a raise in awhile. If that's not privileged I don't know what is.
02-14-2017 , 11:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Original Position
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
This. Phelp's estranged son talked about how the church was just a way for him to vent his rage and that he was an abusive father and husband.
I would agree that Westboro actually believes what their preaching, but as for not making money off of it, the Southern Poverty Law Center, which actually fights the Westboro Baptist Church in court and witnesses what happens, begs to disagree.

His estranged son also mentioned how Fred Phelps made a lot of money suing by using the civil rights statutes. What they do would be an extension of that.

Quote:
Also, getting punched seems like a bad way to go about suing people. You have to think that most people aren't going to be able to pay for a big judgement.
That's why they don't just sue the person who threw the punch, although they could sue and settle for cheap like $50k paid over years or something. They also secure permits for protest and sue the city and the state for failing to secure their right of assembly when such incidents occur, and settle for less than the cost of the city's defense since many people in the church are civil rights lawyers and can do it for free. That, plus abusing the tax free nature of establishing a church makes it all worthwhile.

Big scores are not necessary when you protest as often as Westboro.
02-15-2017 , 02:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shame Trolly !!!1!
@LordJvK:

This morning we were chatting about the different sets of peeps that OSJers label PC Police y/o SJWers. We haven't got to the PC Police part yet. We were still working our way through the SJWer part. But... as often happens random 'poo flinging', and other such, took over the thread. If we could, I'd like to get things back on topic. We left off here...

Please prof, continue...
LordJvK I'm going to leave this as some stuff's come up and I did say I'd get back to you on those posts, so I will but in a while so if you can clear the difference up between SJW and PC Police I'll get back to you.
02-15-2017 , 10:58 AM
Yeah, lets...

Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
... Stick to the topic at hand.
02-15-2017 , 12:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
I happen to think "cuck" is a pretty apt and accurate insult though since it describes exactly the behaviour of those who constantly and persistently put the needs of other countries and peoples ahead of their own country and people
Apt? How does a husband who is cheated on by his wife relate to a person who puts the needs of other countries first? A "cuckold" is a fool--but he's an innocent fool. The metaphor doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

But it is juvenile and deals with sex and demeans the people you are describing. I suspect that's why you like it so much.
02-15-2017 , 01:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
I don't understand how you two can defend this position. While I agree the position of being a Nazi or a racist is deplorable the road this type of thinking leads to is cops being murdered or abortion clinics getting blown up because people may think they deserve it.

You are literally saying it is acceptable for people to suffer violence because you dislike what they may believe.
What I am saying is that if you break his nose, then if the police catch you, you will be charged and I support that. You can't have a society where its okay to just violently assault people.

Just don't expect anyone to shed any tears over the dude that had his nose broken and him getting his nose punched isn't news worthy.

I don't see how my stance is controversial.
02-15-2017 , 01:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
Apt? How does a husband who is cheated on by his wife relate to a person who puts the needs of other countries first? A "cuckold" is a fool--but he's an innocent fool. The metaphor doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

But it is juvenile and deals with sex and demeans the people you are describing. I suspect that's why you like it so much.
Cuckoldry is also a fetish whereby the husband actively encourages his wife to sleep with other men while she taunts him by saying things like "I need a real man".

This perfectly describes some of the arguments we see from leftists on a whole range of issues. It's a brilliant analogy.

Some people think it carries connotations of racism because some people with the cuckold fetish have a preference for the lover of the wife to be black. This is a narrower sense again, a subset in the fetish, if you will.

Some others think it carries connotations of racism because it has been co-opted by the alt right.

For these reasons, I am somewhat sparing with my use of the analogy.
02-15-2017 , 03:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tien
What I am saying is that if you break his nose, then if the police catch you, you will be charged and I support that. You can't have a society where its okay to just violently assault people.

Just don't expect anyone to shed any tears over the dude that had his nose broken and him getting his nose punched isn't news worthy.

I don't see how my stance is controversial.
What if the guy who gets punched pulls out a gun and shoots the puncher.

Is that justified or acceptable? Would you shed any tears then?
02-15-2017 , 04:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
Cuckoldry is also a fetish whereby the husband actively encourages his wife to sleep with other men while she taunts him by saying things like "I need a real man".
But isn't that a win-win-win situation? Aren't literally everyone's desires being met?

The only way this comparison is apt is you if you think immigration increases net happiness--because that's what happens in the fetish situation.

Maybe I'm missing something. Maybe the husband regrets it later or something? But it seems like I have to know an awful lot about this fetish to understand the term.
02-15-2017 , 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
But isn't that a win-win-win situation? Aren't literally everyone's desires being met?

The only way this comparison is apt is you if you think immigration increases net happiness--because that's what happens in the fetish situation.

Maybe I'm missing something. Maybe the husband regrets it later or something? But it seems like I have to know an awful lot about this fetish to understand the term.
This isn't the first time I've seen someone leap to the defence of cuckolds in this manner almost immediately.

Master was the other one.

Defenders of cuckoldry. I think that's fair, yes?
02-15-2017 , 05:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
This isn't the first time I've seen someone leap to the defence of cuckolds in this manner almost immediately.
I personally think it's gut wrenching to think about someone else having sex with my wife, but as someone that believes in the freedom to do whatever you want as long as it's not harming others, I don't have a problem with (the few?) people that practice this. I did always find it humorous to see the meme photos and the rage that comes about when the topic comes up. It reflects much more about the person slinging the insult than it does about the people on the receiving end, and it's almost always 100% racially charged.

Maybe it's time to find a new analogy if you don't want to be associated with that.
02-15-2017 , 05:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
But isn't that a win-win-win situation? Aren't literally everyone's desires being met?

The only way this comparison is apt is you if you think immigration increases net happiness--because that's what happens in the fetish situation.

Maybe I'm missing something. Maybe the husband regrets it later or something? But it seems like I have to know an awful lot about this fetish to understand the term.
A variation of spouse-swapping. From what one can see on amateur porn sites, it is enjoyed enough by some involved to film and post it for anyone to watch.

The point of such a term as an insult is to provoke insecurity from people who aren't comfortable with the notion. It's also a superiority posture, implying that no superior alpha-nazi would have a spouse who needs to **** other people nor would enjoy watching such a hot, wet, loud display.

Just another nazi scheme.
02-15-2017 , 06:00 PM
Thank you for wording it better than I did.
02-15-2017 , 06:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK

This perfectly describes some of the arguments we see from leftists on a whole range of issues. It's a brilliant analogy.
Specify one.
02-15-2017 , 06:54 PM
Quote:
Things actually said by LordJvK.

I aspire to have an open, rational, intellectually honest debate, where no one shouts anyone down, and there is no coercion placed on any speaker in regards to their views, my one true aim is honest, open, rational, enlightened discourse.

I would like to kick things off by suggesting that the intellectual positions you hold are analogous of letting someone **** your wife whilst you watch cheering possibly fapping in a corner.
The above really happened.
02-15-2017 , 06:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
This isn't the first time I've seen someone leap to the defence of cuckolds in this manner almost immediately.

Master was the other one.

Defenders of cuckoldry. I think that's fair, yes?
Some ****heads on utoobzzzz and Twitch start using the word cuck and cuckold to be edgy and cool. It spreads until we get to read this **** on a political forum.

Dude, this is why I make fun of you and your ilk. You're like teenagers.

Also, you're a complete carelord if other peoples fetishes/sexual preferences are a concern to you. I think the troll site ED back in the day would call you guys the anti-LULZ.
02-15-2017 , 06:59 PM
Defenders of cuckoldry united here.

      
m