Well, I'm sorry to say that the deal was struck already and it doesn't matter your feelings on the subject. I honestly abhor it as anything else feminist but I can't do anything about it, so you are incorrect in that I agreed to this deal.
Notice I'm only saying how it is, I'm not prescribing or advocating here.
If you don't agree to the deal that is fine and your right, but recognize that it will be difficult if not impossible to void as it was made by society at large and a single individual won't affect it.
Nobody on the right even understands that deal. Agree they are reneging on that. I’m fine with some people being transexual - biologically fuck up.
The deal is not exclusively between progs and republicans, but progs and everyone else including moderate democrats.
Gender is a social construct ? I’ve never had a female buy me dinner because she made more than me. Sounds fun. Doesn’t happen.
So? what is your point there?. I'm just telling you what it has been agreed, if you have a problem with it because females don't pay for your dates take it with them. You can begin by going to the wikipedia page referring with genders (not a perfect source of the definition but it's there at least) and fight it out with the editors there if you want.
no, the bargain struct between progressives and everyone else was that sex was the biological categories of male and female and they were defined by biology; and gender or gender roles was agreed to be the social constructs of woman, man and what have you. Of course, as with anything else the progressives are beginning to renege on the deal (like with the abortion one), and there have been an encroachment of gender on sex, but it still hasn't spread.
Can you answer my question instead of saying meaningless pithy remarks?
I don't think she would summarily ignore them because that person is white. She may choose to prioritize other constituents above them, but that's something all representatives have to decide on how to prioritize.
If the result is the same and the only thing that changes is the justification (Ignored because they are white vs. ignored because a minority takes precedence), I don't see how you can say that they are represented, poorly or otherwise.
Isn't being demonized and being in the bottom of the totem pole mean being unrepresented (and even being openly antagonized)? after all, it's not like there will be a moment in time when there isn't something than a prioritized group will want/need, that she can point to and use as an excuse for why she doesn't attend to the white devils needs?.
Functionally it looks to me as the same as being unrepresented, but with a dangling carrot forever out of reach.
why are you conflating sex with gender (Gender roles)?
While I agree with the rest I find this curious:
blankly asserting that they are all mentally ill
But aren't they sufferers of Body Dysmorphia which was (is?) a mental illness? or why would they want to change their body if it wasn't a mental illness? Are you asserting that being trans is normal?
Doesn't woke signaling indicate that she won't represent the straight and white except her close family and associates?
They promoted gender differences an alt right position.
Do you mean sex differences here? because gender differences or differences in gender roles is a mainly Leftist Idea, so it reads really weird if you mean that.
same for me, and I'm on PC.
I’ve always included the pick up artist community in the alt right for example.
But why?. The mayority may lean right in the politics spectrum, but there must be a sizable left population in that community, right?.
Through vibes obviously...
Or more easily, just maintain the status quo and no "pitstops" when the plane is in the air.
If you think delays and cancellations are anoying, just wait until every airport ever has to plan for an unlimited number of unexpected pitstops from an unlimited number or airplanes in a given day. The Airlines would cease to exist before the end of the week.
In that case I think the correct response would be just to ignore the content and move on.
And I repeat, If you just wanted to defend him, may as well have said so from the beginning instead of acting all coy and "asking questions" and when answered then launch ad hominem attacks. You may want to drop the passive-aggressiveness.
Faucci became overpoliticized, I just have memory longer than a goldfish. If you just wanted to defend him, may as well have said so from the beginning intead of acting all coy and "asking questions".
I think it is named Concern Trolling.
First the Vineyard, then the Capitol!!
I am not sure where this core distaste is coming from but I am sure it exists. My best theory at the moment would be Minotaur's, that they believe they "own" art and cringey libertarians with doofus monkeys and robots can't be allowed to have it.
Probably this. As creative types in entrenched industries lean left it makes the illusion that Art and its expression is left aligned. It's just a temper tantrum and this "controversy" will go the same as Photography. The more concerning development on this space is that they are modifying the algos to introduce Black people and assorted terms to the images when the prompt isn't specific enough.
As for the Vaush issue, I'm sure this issue is better and more honestly expressed elsewhere. I would prefer to give views and hear the arguments of principled individuals trying to define the issue, rather than making the mudrakers's platforms bigger, especially of someone that has expressed a distaste to debate channels smaller than his just because he would be expanding their audiences.
EDIT (Regarding Art & Leftism).- This is probably why there was so much blowback when Terese Nielsen liked tweets that weren't kosher with the party line, despite being a married lesbian living in Utah, and the vitriol when she defended herself comparing that situation to when she was in the closet still. The mob couldn't conceive that they were even superficially similar to those Conservative Bigotstm.
The short and sweet of it is that as any breadtuber out there he uses a bunch of tactics to argue in bad faith in any debate he has with ideological opponents. He constantly tries to dehumanize them when all is said and done and he is "alone" in his stream and his only apparent core principle is winning, expressed in the quote "You call it selling out your principles?, I call it Fucking winning. And that is my principle"
What do you mean by "it" in:
this is the kind of use that makes me highly suspect of the actual utility of it.
He is a grifter without core principles. Whatever he has to say about anything is worthless. He is Unironicaly Evil
yes, I agree. In my head sex is the same as gender, it was how I learned about the world and think gender roles are made up bullshit.
More options
Context Copy link