@sun_the_second's banner p

sun_the_second


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2023 October 31 11:26:45 UTC

				

User ID: 2725

sun_the_second


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2023 October 31 11:26:45 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 2725

Calling a specific subsection of women unrapeable is a pretty clear implication that you consider other subsections acceptable to rape. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule#Proving_the_existence_of_the_rule

It's not rocket science. Sure, it would't hold up in a decent court, but "acktchyually I said I wouldn't even rape her, why are you upset" isn't fooling anyone.

  • -11

then why not just admit 'yes actually we want to screw your kids' or at the very least 'if somebody else did we're okay with it'?

Loaded question, they don't.

Anti-progressives keep acting as if "adults having sex with children is okay" must follow from "adults providing children with info about sex is okay" even as all trends point to high-and-increasing discomfort with the former idea among the modal progressive. It's motivated thinking. Meanwhile the most conservative societies on Earth generally appear to be very comfortable with adults fucking minors (child marriage in the open, child prostitution on the down low).

Only if you believe there's a finite supply of "racial purity" (when did it appear, by the way? The Neanderthals?) and brown immigrants permanently dilute it. Otherwise, it's just cultural change. That is no less reversible than communism.

HBD explains this far better than socioeconomic factors.

HBD doesn't, in fact, explain why high IQ black people do worse than high/mid IQ white people. To my knowledge most HBD theory proposes that IQ is fully general, and higher average IQ should correlate with more pro-social, civilized behaviour in general - I've seen no theory for a separate "criminality gene" being fleshed out.

"Identifying with a criminal culture", on the other hand, does explain rather well why high-IQ black people are disproportionately likely to go to prison, for me at least. (I know that criminal culture exists. I know that if you act according to criminal culture, you're more likely to go to prison than if you acted according to prosocial culture, IQ being the same. I do not, however, know if there is a criminality gene orthogonal to IQ.) This is without going into the anti-black racism theory.

Looks like a circular argument to me. If you're hating your own country, of course it's not going to feel like home.

I am in discord servers with exorbitant proportions of trans people and I never hear about drag queen story hour there.

They don’t enforce basic civic norms, like standing for the national anthem.

People who fail the shopping cart test are unfit to live in civilized society; this trait is inherently overrepresented by those in any moral majority.

Since when is a symbolic gesture the same as leaving the world around you as convenient for others as it was for you?

Punching? How uncouth. The proper way is to use a lash no thicker than your thumb on parts of her body that aren't seen in public. Non-consensually, aftercare optional.

What is this persistent fixation on trying to establish a link between progressivism and Christianity? I am progressive precisely because I am not Christian, I don't think there's any "next life" where all virtue and sin is accounted for to compensate for the unjustness of the earthly realm. You and I see sin being rewarded and virtue being punished every day, you may pick any definition of "sin" and "virtue" that aren't the circular "good behaviour is when good outcome" type.

What is the difference that's meaningful to the poster who conflates them?

By that logic the serfs were the most prestigious caste of medieval society, because food, unlike swords and castles, is actually necessary for society.

That was not so and isn't so still. Neither was motherhood.

Ironically, a pro-cop guy sounds like the least threatening one, here. The connotations of a Muslim getting someone's faces on camera for personal retribution... let's just say losing the future job would be the least of your concerns.

I concede that recording your opponents for the purposes of knowing who to launch a harassment campaign against later is a part of harassment, but not recording an assembly in itself.

This is not my observation. My observation is that progressives deny that the decrease in intelligence is intractable, and claim that it can be fixed for the next generation, if not the current, by removing the environmental racism.

In general, most of the people in the progressive bubbles I'm at do not act as if they get regular """NPC updates""", as people love to paint it here.

Would it? Do you think Ukrainian soldiers aren't aware that the women left behind aren't exactly bound to nunneries? It would be propaganda, sure. In fact there is at least one well-directed propaganda video made by Russia where an AFU soldier dies in the field in parallel with a corrupt upper-class Ukrainian fucking some woman. But nuclear would have to be a bit more illuminating than that, I think.

Besides, the Russians that are shelling them are close and real, while some abstract Ukrainian sluts are far away and hypothetical.

No, it's saying "we should not lower the difficulty of getting a doctorate to the level of graduating high school so that everyone can feel the accomplishment of getting a doctorate"

No one is getting "the doctorate" (the hard mode completion) by "graduating high school" (completing easy mode). Besides, of course, blatant game state editing (cheats/hacks/mods).

I'm not. They can go play other, easier, lesser games just fine.

It might as well be a whole other game.

There are no devalue fields being emanated by easy mode players that can somehow affect your experience of beating hard mode against your will.

Besides, most men will have the opportunity to shame, discourage, mock or halt rape. "Teaching men not to rape" also includes "teaching men to teach men not to rape", and I'd wager the impact of that second-order teaching is higher.

Speaking of, what do you think of BG3 female party members' looks? Am I the one who's crazy when I think the "they making em look like men for trans appeasement" crowd need to touch grass?

I guess any sort of diversity and cringe writing just isn't as much in the face of players in gameplay-focused games. Whenever some new character who isn't a male and/or isn't white drops in Apex Legends, the Noticers flare up for a bit but there isn't really much else to talk about, and the gameplay is good (usually).

From what I heard about BAP's persona, he isn't one to bash crassness. Pot, kettle. Besides, the defining trait of upper class, as put forward by the countersignal theory, is that they can afford to look trashy - it's their immediate lowers who have to keep it classy to avoid being mistaken for actually trashy trashy.

This is also why if a regular man's wife dresses like a whore, calling his status into question sounds credible. If the man is high enough, he doesn' t have a status-based reason to care whether his wife dresses like a whore. What are you gonna do, buy a night with her?

If you want to argue that any imaginable president would have handled the situation in exactly the same way, you have to explain why other countries’ COVID responses varied so significantly.

I'm sure you are aware that there are many other people in the government and adjacent to it besides the president. People that don't change much between term changes in USA, but are completely different in other countries. You're also aware that other countries operate under different arrangements of those people and different laws that take various lengths of time to change, when they can be changed at all.

You know all this, so why not skip to the point and explain why you believe the president has more influence on the covid response than all the rest of that?

How about "White people should breed more, for they certainly have the capacity to support more children. If they want. And if they don't care enough to proliferate, how can I?"?

I'm sure she believes she does have reason and is using it to the correct ends that passion gives her insight into. As well as all notable heroes of history who had something they believed in and something they were passionate about that drove them. Meanwhile OP doesn't have any goal besides idly amusing himself with rhetoric and all of his logic will never lead him to the truth, only to "owning the libs".

One can believe that Protection(Senator) < Threat(Senator) && Protection(Random_Citizen) > Threat(Random_Citizen) and not be hypocritical.

Visiting brothels sounds like failing at the social role of a husband to me.

And if it's fine because husbands weren't expected to be as faithful as wives, then this is again evidence of inequality.

I think there's a lot of work you're just leaving on the table on the part of both boys and girls and assuming they won't do it and just be "boys be boys and girls be girls". 16 is old enough for boys to try and put in more effort into connecting with the girl on a personal level (and getting good at sex), and for girls to be a bit more forgiving about initial unimpressiveness (while also learning that the more physically impressive the boy is, the less incentive there is for him to stick with her and learn her preferences).

You've provided examples of destructive rather than constructive "brutal honesty", but it doesn't have to be.