justawoman
I’m Bernie Sanders’ personal gimp
Once upon a time I was a Republican and then I went to college and turned into the leftist liberal progressive Democrat that hides under your bed and no I am not a man and yes I’m addicted to downvotes, every time I get one it’s like a bump of that sweet smoking gun. Also I do 99% of this on mobile in my bathtub, so if I don’t respond to you it’s because my screen was too tiny to read everything before I got out of the bath.
User ID: 2254
We already did state-run education and it resulted in varying degrees of intelligence across the countries as one state taught that the Earth was 6000 years old and dinosaurs are fake and another taught that vaccines are evil.
Jesus Christ
Hello! How do I go about deleting my account and everything I ever posted? Is that possible? I’m done with the Motte and want to wipe my account.
Edit; after further conversation, I’ve changed my mind and I’m, in fact, not done with the Motte.
Now that Trump has ignored the order of a judge to unfreeze the funds he is withholding comes the first constitutional crisis. This is where checks and balances should kick in. If he brazenly defies the courts then Congress can take action against him by impeachment and removal. Hopefully.
I’m not confused lol, I very much think you are wrong, but in the spirit of debate, I’d like to discuss specifics. Specifically, who is “they” that have dominated “western politics”? Is it the president? The Supreme Court? The circuit courts? The governors? The school boards? The voters? The entire Executive, Judicial and Legislative branches of government?
I’ll illustrate an example; when I say “the people who think our main problems are caused by Oppressors organizing society to keep the oppressed under their heel from a movement that has dominated western politics for a decade”, those people in particular would be Greg Abbott, Ken Paxton, Ron Desantis, Majorie Taylor Greene, Mike Johnson and Donald Trump, to name a few.
"Please Just Fucking Tell Me What Term I Am Allowed to Use for the Sweeping Social and Political Changes You Demand, you don't get to insist that no one talks about your political project and it's weak and pathetic that you think you do"? Or is it "the basic stance of the social justice set, for a long time now, has been that they are 100% exempt from ordinary politics." Who is "they"?
Gag? I'm not going to continue conversation with someone who can't restrain themselves from insulting me.
Progressives are anti-Christian? Every progressive I have met in my life has espoused the tenets of Christianity more than the sum total of Christians I have known in my life.
If anything from my experience, Christians hate Christianity. I can think in my 20+ years of living two Christians that met the minimum definition of a Christian, while I can think of plenty of atheist progressives who have gone beyond the minimum.
Well, I dunno what to tell you other than that’s not my experience. Progressives I’ve known have demonstrated those things; conservatives I’ve known are so entrenched in their mommy and daddy issues the concepts are hard to reach. Tranquility? More like constantly stressed. Forgiveness? More like gossiping for lack of conversation topics. Humbleness? More like cowardice. And charity? More like “I got mine”.
At this point I don’t think anything can. If Trump turns a blind eye and pardons Elon, I believe the base will think it’s correct/legal/not a big deal. I don’t even think murder would do it; I think there would be a spin that Trump had to do it.
Actually, now that I think about it, I think if Trump supported the LGBT population, was pro-sex education, or something else very much so not socially conservative, I believe it’d do it. But then he wouldn’t be Trump, so it’s kinda a moot point.
I agree. I’d say Trump pardoning people who deliberately and illegally entered government property is performative social justice. What economic/political/social opportunity and right is being denied by jailing people who literally broke the law?
Therefore the claim that “wokeness” is on the letdown seems false.
Well, I don’t appreciate being insulted by being called naive. I heard a lot of that growing up in life, and through sheer statistics I’ve must’ve contemplated the declaration too many times to appreciate it anymore.
As an ex-Christian who went from Lutheran to Methodist to Baptist and then just plain Protestant, I don’t really split it into denominations either and consider it antithetical to the whole Christianity kaboodle. If people are ostracizing, cancelling and killing eachother over denominational differences I can’t imagine God would sanction such behavior since I can’t find it in the 10 Commandments. That a lot of Pharisees think they’re Christians, to me, doesn’t change the definition of being Christian. If God is real, I’m certain there is a great deal of people in for a violent awakening dancing to the tune of “Charlie’s Inferno” when they die.
In my opinion, when I look around the Motte, I actually see a majority in people who think women are not people. Thinking a woman is secretly happier being a stay at home mother and TV shows, newscasts, movies and teachers have convinced her to be miserable removes her agency and treats her own choices as math results, or that women are inherently less funny, less intelligent, less emotionally resilient than men because of their genes. The casual language around here about women is so very much not centered on speaking about them as if they are people capable of the same quality of thought as me in my opinion. In the same vein, if a bunch of misandrist and misogynistic people call themselves feminists, they’re wrong and hopefully will cringe at themselves with enough introspection.
I can’t comment much on your opinion on transgenderism since I don’t think it’s an ideology. I certainly wouldn’t call JK Rowling a feminist since she thinks “femaleness resides in the sexed body”. I’m not a woman because I have titties and estrogen, I’m a woman because I identify with the Western cultural construct of a woman, and in elaboration, I don’t wear a skirt because it’s biologically wired in me to do it. Implying anything else removes my agency, which doesn’t treat me as a person, and therefore isn’t feminist.
The rules of this forum are….? Suggestions?
In my perspective there’s a lot of Russian propaganda talking points popping up in the Culture War chat and it’s kinda made the whole thing boring for me now. I’d like to keep my personal syntax on the internet down to sites I actively use.
Well, if you are succumbing to labeling anything you consider bad as woke and everything else as something else...I don't know how to argue on that except...don't?
If the question is "wokeness is receding", and you define wokeness as "all discrepancies of outcome are due to pervasive, systemic biases rooted in unchanging, historically-defined oppressor/oppressed dynamics, and such dynamics outweigh most or all other concerns", I struggle to see where claims that a discrepancy is due to biased dyanmics and not merit are, in general, going down. Mark Zuckerburg just claimed that the bias he struggles with in his business is because of the overabundance of "feminine energy"; I hardly see that as symptoms of a decline.
I thought right-wingers hated cancel culture as it was impressing on the First Amendment? Unless right wingers think this isn’t cancelling?
Are they just gonna be allowed to insult me? I thought that was against the rules?
taps sign
I looked up "soothing, nurturing euphemisms" and got "rest your mind," "take a moment," "breathe easy," "unwind," "decompress," "let go," "find your center," "peaceful pause," "quiet time," "soothe your soul," "gentle transition," "calm your nerves," "ease into relaxation," "soft landing," and "tranquil space." If the claim is that men don't use these phrases, I find that dubious.
Additionally, I don't consider definitions of environments, moves and policies to be a part of defining language.
Is it not evident to me that multiple 400+ word responses carefully misunderstanding my arguments and then voicing mostly disagreement is a sign of respect and more evident that it is the expected form of discourse here if you don't want to get a ban. Talking politely to me while thinking I am not deserving of higher education, management positions and a place in the workforce because my body makes me emotional and immature is hardly what I consider to be the makeup of a person who respects me and my choices. You say, "Leave the fact you are a woman and just dive straight into the actual facts.", but did the many men here who included the fact they are men and have used mostly anecdotal evidence and subjective, absolute statements doing the same? I would say no. I would say not even you, whose only evidence I see for why men are funny is your opinion of standup comedians and your opinion on the women around you.
I decline to try, because, as I said, it is impossible to have a conversation in good faith with someone you believe is biologically inferior to you. His most charitable interpretation of me would be amusement, or benign pity, because even if my argument was sound, it would not be because my character was sound but because a monkey hitting keys on a typewriter for an infinite amount of time with almost surely type any given text, including the complete works of Shakespeare, or, a broken clock is right twice a day.
The benefit of the rules here is that I can have a conversation with people who disrespect me, not that I can have a respectful one. I am quite sure if it was not for the strict efforts of the moderation team, most men here would indeed tell me "gtfo". Instead, they say, as seen above, "you might not be the best source of actionable and effective advice here.", which I find more conductive for a conversation, yes, but not at all indicative of respect for me.
Okay, well, that’s not true, but you do you.
It is a terrible idea to have some states have bad education and other have good. That’s why we had the government setting a universal standard for everyone.
Who are my vanguards who are freaking out at crucifixes and tattoos? Last I checked, being discriminatory towards religion wasn't in the progressive handbook.
Bernie Sanders invited a singer who had vulgar lyrics is...what, exactly?
I’m confused. You said if the President goes against the Constitution, then he should be removed. He has clearly violated the Constitution. Therefore he should be removed.
The presidency works by following the proper channels of checks and balances, not spamming Executive Orders until the courts block it. I have a very hard time believing that if a Democratic president did the same behavior you would have the same reaction.
- Prev
- Next
It is as bad as it sounds, there is no steelman.
More options
Context Copy link