Or how i learned how to be racist while being an "antiracist activist". This probably should go in the jokes section now that i think about it.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5HK1hFUD_d4&feature=youtu.be
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ErhbJgEL5jQ
Actual intergroup competition and aggression is a real thing, not just rhetoric. This won't go away just because we say "Can't we all just get along?" to autohypnotize our inner bigot.
Aww...white male victimhood. In a country a creature like Trump has a solid chance to win. Where the nonexistent left is regressive. Heartbreaking. :pai:
I wonder who is pulling their strings.
Someone is manipulating these people.
White people screaming about white people. Crazy.
http://youtu.be/jVMAkPnS5jI
Quote from: pr126 on March 20, 2016, 06:58:03 AM
White people screaming about white people. Crazy.
You couldn't have expressed your position better than that^. According to that position as a white turkish female:
-I shouldn't vote for Kurdish party and hate Kurdish people with a vengeance for the bombings going off all around the country, cheer for their civillians deaths
-I should hate men and shouldn't care about their issues, because you know world is shaped up to their standards, fuck them, right?
-I should hate Westerners; esp Americans over all...insert the last 70 year of Western policies
-I should hate muslims of course above all religious people as an atheist and spew genocidal shit all over in anger
Right.
Remind me again what do you carry in that skull?
Former friend: "You're cis and white; you can't express your opinion on this issue."
Me: "But YOU are cis and white too."
Former friend: "Shut up shut up gahhh shut up!"
Not different than MRA bullshit thrown around or the basic rhetoric imposed by the boys in this forum. It's just one is the sub reactive of another reactive.
Match made in heaven. There should be mass orgies between SJW and MRA groups. They'll hopefully calm down if they fight and fuck each other afterwards and American society will be saved from a TONS of virginal bitterness and sexual frustration.
Something like this:
NSFW
[spoiler](http://www.sbs.com.au/comedy/sites/sbs.com.au.comedy/files/styles/body_image/public/orgy.jpg?itok=VaplyiPS&mtime=1425531360)
[/spoiler]
Quote from: drunkenshoe on March 20, 2016, 05:57:52 AM
Aww...white male victimhood. In a country a creature like Trump has a solid chance to win. Where the nonexistent left is regressive. Heartbreaking. :pai:
In the US, anything to the Left of Hitler is Left ... and there are hardly any of those left. One of the ugly truths about the US is that we are the 4th Reich, far more than the USSA. Same for GB. Winston Churchill defined himself as anti-Soviet ... and only took on the Third Reich as an appetizer before the main course. I think it is hard for us now to imagine what a horrible shock the Russian Revolution was to people then, or what a horrible shock the French Revolution was over 100 years earlier. Particularly if you were a running dog of autocratic monarchists.
My only concern right now is how will the American people react to Trump if he wins, Baruch. There is no scenario that this would turn out to be good for any of us. That man has a real and solid potential to divide an already angry and armed American population to a pointof social explotion. Has something like that ever happened there?
If something like what we had here in 2013 happens there, it won't be something like what we had here. It would be a bloodshed. USA is neither Middle East, nor Europe.
I fear for my sister, my American relatives, people in the US and the ME because we will all be affected badly in every available scenario. Drumpf is Erdogan. Period. Something tells me they would get along great despite the common belief, esp. behind the curtains. Can you imagine that? The damage those two creatures potentially able to do?
On the other hand, if Drumpf wins but nothing changes in the US, then Americans should really have a good look at the USA rather than what they enjoy calling 'America'.
Atheon, I understand your annoyance because I feel the same. And I am certainly not lumping you with any group.
It would be hard for me as an American, to seriously understand Turkish politics. It must be the same for people outside of America, who follow American politics. I read an essay just yesterday, about an American having to explain the US to his Japanese guests. But then, Japanese political behavior is strange to Americans. They are so polite, just before they cut your head off ;-p
First rule ... I don't know what will happen in the future, no matter who gets elected in the end
Second rule ... one can run around like a chicken with your head cut off, but then you are more likely to end up for supper
How will Americans react to a Trump victory? Hard to tell, since I don't think anyone knows how he will govern. I disregard all political advertisements. And America is on the verge of civil war over Obama ... he is no hero over here, even if initially he was lionized outside the US as some magic liberal. He in fact is more conservative than Shrub (the MIC rules here, as it used to in Turkey) and never had a good card trick up his sleeve.
As I have posted elsewhere today, to Mauricio, the US political scene is more bizarre than ever ... too much smoke and mirrors. Just looking at the top 4 candidates (assuming a dark horse doesn't come out of either convention). This is not unlike France, 1786. A great revolution may come from this, and that will be bad for everyone. I may have to polish up my French. But then, to be fair, the American revolution wasn't a good thing either, it was a tragedy. The second American revolution wasn't a good thing, even though the slaves were superficially freed, it was a tragedy. So right now you have tragedy in Turkey ... I am so sorry for you and your fellow people (Turks and non-Turks). If tragedy comes to the US, and it has several times in my lifetime ... than I am so sorry for me and my fellow people (R, D or I). History is a harsh mistress, and she may be warming up her bull whip. May be Chancellor Merkel can come and lead us, after she is kicked out of Germany. I hear that German ladies make the most demanding dominatrices.
Unfortunately, Turkish and American politics have more common traits than you think.
For starters, seculars have to vote for the lesser evill here too. But we have 4 major and over all 29 political parties to choose and vote for when you have only 2 major and I dunno how many in total. But we also have 10 % barrage for any party to get in the parliement and also independent candidates to vote for. It's a mess.
Oh I like Merkel. Contrary to the common belief, Germans know what they are doing. The British led American-Britain media campaign against refugees crisis turned into made up 'rape crisis' is a priceless comedy. Esp. literally a priceless 'cheque'. The part that the citizens of the Empire crying in panic for something that doesn't even exist. :lol: It will MAKE THE BRITS A LOT OF MONEY.
You have to give it to the Brits though. It's PERFECT politics, Baruch. Perfect BLUFF. AND It WORKS EVERY TIME. *Shakes head They will vote for EU or out; of course they won't really get out, but get a good time and space for politics to bargain for profit and refugees and in the end they will get the best profit and benefit as the result of their unabashed bullshit without doing a bit of their share AT ALL. :clap:
We have a saying. Word for word: "British could fuck an ant wthout harming its waist". Well this 'refugee crisis' campaign is NOT subtle, but who cares after 9/11 and full American support. They both speak English. (Sort of) I still rather prefer uncle Sam though. At least you can see the bastard coming at most times. :lol:
With many small parties, Turkey is more like Italy ... only your Vatican is in Mecca. We don't allow parliamentary government or small parties in the US.
The Brits are perfidious ... and Americans eventually became their hired toughs. The Brits wanted our services for free, but we took them to the cleaners in WW I and WW II. The British Empire was broke in 1946, and only made a partial comeback due to the Marshall Plan and NATO. Now they couldn't defeat Argentina ... since they no longer have what they had in 1982 ... instead they have Saudi princes fighting over over-priced real estate in London.
Small parties are not really important. The 4 major ones are, because they symbolise different 'sides'. Also I think the current religious political group at the top see themselves at somewhere higher than mecca. They see themselves as the otttoman sultans. See, all this bloodshed and fight is a result of Erdogan desiring to build the American political system of presidency over here. He wants to be a 'president'.
Did you know that the Turkish name for White House is White 'Palace' (Beyaz Saray)? :lol:
Pfffft, cultural Marxism.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on March 20, 2016, 12:55:35 PM
Small parties are not really important. The 4 major ones are, because they symbolise different 'sides'. Also I think the current religious political group at the top see themselves at somewhere higher than mecca. They see themselves as the otttoman sultans. See, all this bloodshed and fight is a result of Erdogan desiring to build the American political system of presidency over here. He wants to be a 'president'.
Did you know that the Turkish name for White House is White 'Palace' (Beyaz Saray)? :lol:
No, I didn't know the Turkish translation for White House ... but I did know that Saray means palace, since that is used for Turkish palaces.
Perhaps you are right ... Erdogan wants to be a President Cheney/Sultan. It is possible that Turkey needs a new constitution. France had to experiment with several before they achieved stability is ... 1968 ;-) Pre-Young-Turk leadership was inclusive, if authoritarian. They were pro-technology eventually, and pro-Jewish. History is like billiards ... once the rack is broken by the first shot of the queue ball, they can't be restored, just shot into a pocket. Turkey can no more escape their history than the US can. However I have gotten past any shame. It was what is was, and we can move on (from that point).
IMHO, going back 100 years ago ... it might have been better to have a strong Armenia and strong Kurdistan on the eastern border, that was friendly to Turkey and hostile to Iran (y'all have fought many wars) ... buffer states can be useful, like Belgium is for France. I realize that Russian Imperial subversion and Iranian subversion played a role in fomenting trouble. But the bloodletting has taken that off the table. Turks being in Anatolia for 1000 years ... your presence is more legitimate than mine in the US ;-)
Sucking up to Saudi Arabia, if Saudi Arabia proves unstable ... will backfire on Turkey. Now Chancellor Merkel is prepared to pay multiple billion Euro bribes to Erdogan to try to stabilize a broken border that can't be fixed. The horse has left that barn. Perhaps it would have been wiser to simply do a quid pro quo 10 years ago, let Turkey into the EU ... at the price that they expel all imams back to Riyadh. Double down on Ataturk's experiment. A road not taken.
Quote from: Baruch on March 20, 2016, 01:16:52 PM
No, I didn't know the Turkish translation for White House ... but I did know that Saray means palace, since that is used for Turkish palaces.
Perhaps you are right ... Erdogan wants to be a President Cheney/Sultan. It is possible that Turkey needs a new constitution. France had to experiment with several before they achieved stability is ... 1968 ;-) Pre-Young-Turk leadership was inclusive, if authoritarian. They were pro-technology eventually, and pro-Jewish. History is like billiards ... once the rack is broken by the first shot of the queue ball, they can't be restored, just shot into a pocket. Turkey can no more escape their history than the US can. However I have gotten past any shame. It was what is was, and we can move on (from that point).
IMHO, going back 100 years ago ... it might have been better to have a strong Armenia and strong Kurdistan on the eastern border, that was friendly to Turkey and hostile to Iran (y'all have fought many wars) ... buffer states can be useful, like Belgium is for France. I realize that Russian Imperial subversion and Iranian subversion played a role in fomenting trouble. But the bloodletting has taken that off the table. Turks being in Anatolia for 1000 years ... your presence is more legitimate than mine in the US ;-)
Sucking up to Saudi Arabia, if Saudi Arabia proves unstable ... will backfire on Turkey. Now Chancellor Merkel is prepared to pay multiple billion Euro bribes to Erdogan to try to stabilize a broken border that can't be fixed. The horse has left that barn. Perhaps it would have been wiser to simply do a quid pro quo 10 years ago, let Turkey into the EU ... at the price that they expel all imams back to Riyadh. Double down on Ataturk's experiment. A road not taken.
The Ottoman Empire was collapsed by Turks, Baruch. For your scenario it would be required that Kurds or Armenians fight against the Empire. They FOUGHT FOR the Ottoman Empire along with the British, NOT against it. :lol: These are the sides in the Turkish War of Independence:
Quote-Grand National Assembly; Turks VS
-Greece
Armenia
France (until 1921)
France French West Africa
Armenia Armenian Legion
United Kingdom (until 1922)
India
Ottoman Empire
Kuva-yi Inzibatiye
Italy (1919-1921)
United States (naval support)
Kurdish rebels[3]
Çerkes Ethem's rebels (defected to Greeks)[4]
Georgia (border)
Merkel paying money to Turkey for reefuges in bargain for some rights is all hoax; the usual sham fight... don't even pay attention. Bullshit. Saudi Arabia comes with US package anyway. Nobody in the ME likes Erdogan. He is a politician not a religious leader.
Turks are muslims. Doesn't really matter how old they are in Anatolia, there is a ready marketed perception built. They are not even middle eastern, but you know, they are.
Quote from: pr126 on March 20, 2016, 06:58:03 AM
I wonder who is pulling their strings.
Someone is manipulating these people.
White people screaming about white people. Crazy.
http://youtu.be/jVMAkPnS5jI
It's called ideology and not being very smart.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on March 20, 2016, 08:02:14 AM
Not different than MRA bullshit thrown around or the basic rhetoric imposed by the boys in this forum. It's just one is the sub reactive of another reactive.
Yes, yes the boys on this forums definitly dismiss people based on their sex and race. Is like it has happen too often it wouldn't Be difficult to actually quote someone doing that. Oh wait... Its mainly you who does that. Do you ever get tired of talking out of your ass? And btw a great number of MRA reject identity politics arguments and other flaws they see in the mainstream understanding of gender which is mainly dominated by feminist and traditionalist perspectives, so you won't find that many of them acting like in those videos. Meanwhile the SJW ideology is pretty much entirely based on extreme identity politics where priviliged middle class cunts from the first world tell anyone who disagrees to check their privilige and that they cannot understand their shitty arguments about completely mundane shit cause muh dicks and muh skin color
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MNK-e6nnFGY
MRA is not the equivalent of SJW. They are the equivalent of feminists with their own subset of gender warriors that are the equivalent of SJW.
Funny how you keep being hypocritical in your characterisation of MRA's by their worst examples in the same way you falsely accused me of doing with feminists.
(http://sweatpantsandcoffee.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Dean-Winchester-holding-baby.gif)
Quote from: drunkenshoe on March 20, 2016, 03:02:37 PM
(http://sweatpantsandcoffee.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Dean-Winchester-holding-baby.gif)
Such wit. I have been destroyed by your inability to actually defend your BS with anything intelligeble. I bow before thy.
Women usually think men are big babies.
Quote from: mauricio on March 20, 2016, 02:53:00 PM
MRA is not the equivalent of SJW. They are the equivalent of feminists with their own subset of gender warriors that are the equivalent of SJW.
Funny how you keep being hypocritical in your characterisation of MRA's by their worst examples in the same way you falsely accused me of doing with feminists.
MRA are a counter reaction at best to the SJW branch of feminists and not feminism itself, at their worst they are just assholes who need something to cry about. Sorry, that's just how it is.
There is a good example of a MRA? That's news to me. MRA's are just men too short-sighted to see they are fighting for the exact same things feminists are but want to pretend they are "persecuted" and create boogiemen out to get them.
I go to a relatively progressive college in a relatively liberal town. I have never met a SJW or an MRA, and I am on campus often times from 6 in the morning till 9 at night, an interacting with people the whole time. I also hang out at "liberal" coffee bars. Me thinks you spend too much time looking for the people you disagree with, because in the real world, out from behind the youtube camera, they don't seem to exist with any sort of voice.
According to SJWs I'm an MRA, and according to MRAs I'm a "cuck." Which goes to show that neither is really interested in anything they pay lip service to.
Fair and balanced (like Fox News).
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on March 20, 2016, 06:40:52 PM
According to SJWs I'm an MRA, and according to MRAs I'm a "cuck." Which goes to show that neither is really interested in anything they pay lip service to.
Fair and balanced (like Fox News).
Someone who thinks 'bitch' is like an n word for women cannot get along with any MRAs.
What's a cuck?
Also can we remove that BETA smilie please. I keep forgeting to post.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on March 20, 2016, 06:43:23 PM
Someone who thinks 'bitch' is like an n word for women cannot get along with any MRAs.
What's a cuck?
Short for cuckhold, and no, I don't know why that's their go-to insult.
Fair and balanced (like Fox News).
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on March 20, 2016, 06:45:58 PM
Short for cuckhold, and no, I don't know why that's their go-to insult.
Because it means the husband of a woman who cheats on him due to his sexual inadequacy. And I think she doesn't fuck him at all, too. Sounds to me that there is no greater insult. If the gender roles were reversed, it has a completely different connotation.
Quotecuckold
1.
the husband of an adulteress, often regarded as an object of derision.
verb
1.
(of a man) make (another man) a cuckold by having a sexual relationship with his wife.
Yeah sounds like MRA. It's a disgusting insult. I wouldn't know which part of the sticky mysogyny or misandry to start.
Quote from: Mermaid on March 20, 2016, 06:51:00 PM
Because it means the husband of a woman who cheats on him due to his sexual inadequacy. And I think she doesn't fuck him at all, too. Sounds to me that there is no greater insult. If the gender roles were reversed, it has a completely different connotation.
Ah, of course, I should have known. You can't be the alpha male of the household if you aren't the only one fucking your bitch. /s
If I wasn't at work right now, I'd crack open my scotch...
Fair and balanced (like Fox News).
Hate to break it to you but that situation is also a sexual fetish. Men get their wives to sleep with another man, and the sexual charge comes from the fact that she returns to him anyway. Its like the guy is showing other men exactly what he has at his command, and what they will only get once. The woman gets to fuck as many dudes as she likes, and the man gets hard on the knowledge that even with an unlimited buffet of men, he is still the one she always comes back to.
so cuckold woman is like a porn star right?
Quote from: Shiranu on March 20, 2016, 06:28:31 PM
MRA are a counter reaction at best to the SJW branch of feminists and not feminism itself, at their worst they are just assholes who need something to cry about. Sorry, that's just how it is.
There is a good example of a MRA? That's news to me. MRA's are just men too short-sighted to see they are fighting for the exact same things feminists are but want to pretend they are "persecuted" and create boogiemen out to get them.
As you yourself admit with your question you lack the knownledge to say what are MRAs are at best, so no it is not "just how it is" Yes there are good MRA. More importantly there are points raised by MRA's which are valid and not mainly a simple takedown of obviously challenged SJW's. Not even feminists fight for the same thing. They can all talk about gender equality that does not mean they agree in what that entails or means, hence why feminism is a fractured movement and ideology. You say you have not seen them. Well what I'm supposed to respond to that? Their information and plataforms are out there they are much less visible than feminists and even SJW. I have been engaging SJWs for years before i even knew MRAs existed. As soon as i started reading i thought they were basically the other side of the coin of the gender war. And there are indeed many MRAs who are basically that. Thought they are much more present in the PUA community from personal experince. But as with feminism there's reasonable points and speakers. And they have MUCH less visibility than feminist points. I had literally never heard about many of their issues but their arguments convinced me. Mainly paternal surrender, male fertility control and a balanced approach to domestic abuse. This points because of dominance of the feminist rhetoric and traditionalist rhetoric on the gender discussions are sometimes articulated in opposition of feminist and of traditionalist ideas that are not already addressed by feminism. The duluth model for domestic abuse is one of their main points of contention with mainstream feminism policy making. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duluth_model) There's also criticism of the collectivist and marxist side of feminism spoused by main figures of the movement like simone de beauvoir. I have already expressed some of those points in this forums and i got them from reading MRA's and skeptically looking into their claims. MRAs i have agreed with on multiple points: Fancis Roy, Karen straughan( her scripted content and writing is much better than her rants), TL;DR (not sure if he uses the label though) Stardusk/thinking ape (he's more of MGTOW have barely looked at his stuff).
This was my introduction to interesting MRAs:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lI7jIvncjnU
Quote from: Mermaid on March 20, 2016, 06:51:00 PM
Because it means the husband of a woman who cheats on him due to his sexual inadequacy. And I think she doesn't fuck him at all, too. Sounds to me that there is no greater insult. If the gender roles were reversed, it has a completely different connotation.
The reverse insult of cuck is whore or bitch or something like that. They are both insults to prey on your insecurities for failing at the sexual competition and meeting the expectations of your gender role. People do not seem to understand that the differences between the male and female gender and sex is crucial when it comes to understanding the nature of this insults. The expectation of males is to protect their partner and to keep her invested in you so they tell you they will fuck your wife to insult you. A women gets called a whore because she is expected to select a proper mating partner, not just anyone who asks.
Quote from: Nonsensei on March 20, 2016, 08:56:54 PM
Hate to break it to you but that situation is also a sexual fetish. Men get their wives to sleep with another man, and the sexual charge comes from the fact that she returns to him anyway. Its like the guy is showing other men exactly what he has at his command, and what they will only get once. The woman gets to fuck as many dudes as she likes, and the man gets hard on the knowledge that even with an unlimited buffet of men, he is still the one she always comes back to.
That's the definition I was thinking of, hence my initial confusion over it being an insult.
Fair and balanced (like Fox News).
Quote from: drunkenshoe on March 20, 2016, 06:51:49 PM
Yeah sounds like MRA. It's a disgusting insult. I wouldn't know which part of the sticky mysogyny or misandry to start.
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/cuck
Cuck is more of /pol/ insult that has gone viral. Its pretty much the new faggot/autist/fedora. A meme that is used to insult people but quickly gets dilluted and its meaning changes gaining new meanings depending on context and user.
You have way too much internet time on your hands...
Quote from: Shiranu on March 20, 2016, 09:51:34 PM
You have way too much internet time on your hands...
It's more that i like to look into fringe maligned groups before i go tell people "that's just how it is".
Quote from: mauricio on March 20, 2016, 09:52:49 PM
It's more that i like to look into fringe maligned groups before i go tell people "that's just how it is".
"fringe maligned groups" ----> Only visible members are, "LOL feminists r bitches, u agree with them? Lol you a cunt bitch!" ----> complains about feminists by judging their worst behaviour, then complains when MRA's are judged on their worst behaviour.
This is why it's hard to take seriously. You say take MRAs seriously and don't stereotype them based on the bad seeds, then dismiss feminists and stereotype them in the same paragraph for the bad seeds.
And here's the other thing... I take actual MRAs seriously. I do. They are called "feminists".
Also... posted a 2 hour video... as I said, you have way too much time on your hands.
Quote from: Shiranu on March 20, 2016, 10:16:53 PM
"fringe maligned groups" ----> Only visible members are, "LOL feminists r bitches, u agree with them? Lol you a cunt bitch!" ----> complains about feminists by judging their worst behaviour, then complains when MRA's are judged on their worst behaviour.
This is why it's hard to take seriously. You say take MRAs seriously and don't stereotype them based on the bad seeds, then dismiss feminists and stereotype them in the same paragraph for the bad seeds.
The fact that i have explained many times and specifically to you. How exactly i DO NOT dismiss all of the feminist ideas or generalize all feminists (which would not even be possible if you actually understood my stance on feminism, because feminism holds contradictory positions and i support some feminists in their criticism of their colleagues) just because of SJW's it's why its hard for me to take you seriously.
Quote from: Shiranu on March 20, 2016, 10:16:53 PM
Also... posted a 2 hour video... as I said, you have way too much time on your hands.
Well it's your choice to keep talking out of your ass or get informed. Or you could have started by not trying to tell people " how it is" when you do not even knew and did not even care enough to research it.
You could have been less arrogant in your wirting and just say you are reporting your experience, not trying to claim that at their BEST MRAs are like that phrased as if your assesment from very little exposure is somehow a matter of fact.
QuoteYou could have been less arrogant in your wirting and just say you are reporting your experience, not trying to claim that at their BEST MRAs are like that phrased as if your assesment from very little exposure is somehow a matter of fact.
Again... MRA's do not appear to exist in the real world for all practical purposes, nor SJWs. I could spend 2 hours "informing" myself about what one branch believes, but frankly I don't have any desire to anymore than I have any desire to learn about a branch of the Wiccans that actually believe non-silly things. Sure, it might change my opinion on Wiccans but... who cares? How many have I met in my life? Two. How many more do I expect to meet? Not many. It is useless information.
The only MRA's I have met have been on the internet, and they have been without fail arrogant assholes who use the redundant "movement" as an excuse to be misogynistic jerk offs with the mentality of a 14 year old. If that is arrogant to hear, then that sounds like a personal issue. They are the equivalent of the person on facebook who cries, "ALL LIVES MATTER!!! WHY DON'T YOU CARE ABOUT WHITE PEOPLE!". Boring.
Quote from: Shiranu on March 20, 2016, 11:47:42 PM
Again... MRA's do not appear to exist in the real world for all practical purposes, nor SJWs. I could spend 2 hours "informing" myself about what one branch believes, but frankly I don't have any desire to anymore than I have any desire to learn about a branch of the Wiccans that actually believe non-silly things. Sure, it might change my opinion on Wiccans but... who cares? How many have I met in my life? Two. How many more do I expect to meet? Not many. It is useless information.
The only MRA's I have met have been on the internet, and they have been without fail arrogant assholes who use the redundant "movement" as an excuse to be misogynistic jerk offs with the mentality of a 14 year old. If that is arrogant to hear, then that sounds like a personal issue. They are the equivalent of the person on facebook who cries, "ALL LIVES MATTER!!! WHY DON'T YOU CARE ABOUT WHITE PEOPLE!". Boring.
Frankly this post is pathetic. You realize you are wrong in the way you phrased your points previously in an absolute sense claiming you know what MRAs are at their best and worst and that's just how it is when by your own admission you hardly knew much about them. By phrasing the statement as "At their best and at their worst" and saying "that's how it is" you are claiming to know their full range of quality and implying i should just accept your statements because that's just how it is. That's where you fucked up. That's your arrogance and even though you will now proceed to report your experiences in a much more accurate and humble way you still felt the need to add a bunch of bullshit. Now you try to excuse your ignorance by saying "it's not like i cared anyway! It's no big deal!" You sound like a rejected tsundere there tbqh fam. What's so hard to just say "well i was just reporting my actually rather limited personal experience and probably did not phrase that precisely. If you have a differing point of view i will be happy to take it into account if you can back it up" But now you just have a virtual passive aggresive tantrum by suggesting "who cares i made ambitious claims i could not actually back up, this topic does not even matter! Why do you even know so much about this useless information, you have too much free time to waste!" You did not even address the fact that you outright lied about me generalising all feminists on the basis of SJW stupidity.
You are an intellectual child.
Btw all lives matter and white people suffer from irrational believes about their identity too. Try not to get triggered too hard by that fact.
Quote from: mauricio on March 21, 2016, 12:23:16 AM
Btw all lives matter.
#wormlivesmatter
Fair and balanced (like Fox News).
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on March 21, 2016, 12:26:14 AM
#wormlivesmatter
Fair and balanced (like Fox News).
(https://paperbackwriter28.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/spice1.jpg)
This one is more appropriate for the situation at hand though.
Why does your support of ALM ( enough acronyms ffs... Oh god damn it...) not surprise me. It's as redundant and reactionary as MRA just taken to the next level.
If you think ALM holds any validity then it's clear that trying to explain the nuances of why MRAs are reactionary, redundant air heads is definitely pointless.
Btw, I'm not backing on anything; at their best MRA are reactionary try hards who create a conflict where there is none. They are what you claim SJW to be, just waiving a banner you like better. And like them you spend way too much time actively seeking people you don't like out to complain about and make them far more of a deal then they really are.
Aight, night now.
Quote from: Shiranu on March 21, 2016, 01:26:22 AM
Why does your support of ALM ( enough acronyms ffs... Oh god damn it...) not surprise me. It's as redundant and reactionary as MRA just taken to the next level.
If you think ALM holds any validity then it's clear that trying to explain the nuances of why MRAs are reactionary, redundant air heads is definitely pointless.
Btw, I'm not backing on anything; at their best MRA are reactionary try hards who create a conflict where there is none. They are what you claim SJW to be, just waiving a banner you like better. And like them you spend way too much time actively seeking people you don't like out to complain about and make them far more of a deal then they really are.
Aight, night now.
Ah yes those MRAs blowing shit out of proportion is not like i just linked you the article on the duluth model that states:
As of 2006, the Duluth Model is the most common batterer intervention program used in the United States.[2] It is based in feminist theory positing that "domestic violence is the result of patriarchal ideology in which men are encouraged and expected to control their partners".
A U.S. study published in 2002 sponsored by the federal government found that batterers who complete programs based on the Duluth model are less likely to repeat acts of domestic violence than those who do not complete any batterers intervention program."[9]
A 2003 study conducted by the U.S. National Institute of Justice found the Duluth Model to have "little or no effect."[10]
A 2005 study led by Larry Bennett, a professor of social work at the University of Illinois at Chicago and an expert on batterer intervention programs, found that of the 30 batterer intervention programs in Cook County, Illinois, 15 percent of batterers who completed the programs were rearrested for domestic violence, compared with 37 percent of those who dropped out of the programs.[9] However, Bennett said the studies are largely meaningless because they lacked a proper control group.[9] He added that participants who complete domestic violence programs are likely to be more motivated than others to improve behavior and would be less inclined to offend again.[9]
A 2011 review of the effectiveness of batterers intervention programs (BIP) (primarily Duluth Model) found that "there is no solid empirical evidence for either the effectiveness or relative superiority of any of the current group interventions," and that "the more rigorous the methodology of evaluation studies, the less encouraging their findings."[11] That is, as BIPs in general, and Duluth Model programs in particular are subject to increasingly rigorous review, their success rate approaches zero.
Criticism Edit
Criticism of the Duluth Model has centered on the program's insistence that men are perpetrators who are violent because they have been socialized in a patriarchy that condones male violence, and that women are victims who are violent only in self-defense.[12] Some critics argue that "programs based on the Duluth Model may ignore research linking domestic violence to substance abuse and psychological problems, such as attachment disorders, traced to childhood abuse or neglect, or the absence of a history of adequate socialization and training."[9][13] Others criticize the Duluth model as being overly confrontational rather than therapeutic, focusing solely on changing the abuser's actions and attitudes rather than dealing with underlying emotional and psychological issues.[13] Donald Dutton, a psychology professor at the University of British Columbia who has studied abusive personalities, states: "The Duluth Model was developed by people who didn't understand anything about therapy,"[9] and also points out that "lesbian battering is more frequent than heterosexual battering." [14]
Its proponents counter that the Duluth model is effective and makes best use of scarce resources.[15] However, Ellen Pence herself has written,
"By determining that the need or desire for power was the motivating force behind battering, we created a conceptual framework that, in fact, did not fit the lived experience of many of the men and women we were working with. The DAIP staff [...] remained undaunted by the difference in our theory and the actual experiences of those we were working with [...] It was the cases themselves that created the chink in each of our theoretical suits of armor. Speaking for myself, I found that many of the men I interviewed did not seem to articulate a desire for power over their partner. Although I relentlessly took every opportunity to point out to men in the groups that they were so motivated and merely in denial, the fact that few men ever articulated such a desire went unnoticed by me and many of my coworkers. Eventually, we realized that we were finding what we had already predetermined to find."[16]
The Duluth Model is featured in the documentary Power and Control: Domestic Violence in America with commentary from its authors as well as its main critics, such as Dutton.[17]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes criticizing such a shitty and widespread policy and their proponents/apologists is surely going out of your way to find disagreement. Individuals do not matter ultimately, it's the words that come out of their mouths, for example i do not care about you as a person but i respond to you because you are spreading bullshit. Also finding people who disagree on paternal surrender is fucking easy, just mention it to a couple of people. It's a very complex and controversial topic. Of course there are MRA gender warriors but those are definitly not MRAs at their best.
Yes marucio, domestic violence and gender relation is invented and theorised by feminists. And Americans one to be exact. The issue is 10 years old! When they created the Duluth Model they were actually conspiring against American males. In fact the whole Justice Department is against American males. Oh and they all support the idea that males cannot be abused by females and all men are rapists. They are males after all, fuck them, who cares. Feminists are after the world domination and all men will be enslaved in the end. It's too late, they are everywhere. Resistence is futile. Say uncle!
Quote from: drunkenshoe on March 21, 2016, 06:37:04 AM
Yes marucio, domestic violence and gender relation is invented and theorised by feminists. And Americans one to be exact. The issue is 10 years old! When they created the Duluth Model they were actually conspiring against American males. In fact the whole Justice Department is against American males. Oh and they all support the idea that males cannot be abused by females and all men are rapists. They are males after all, fuck them, who cares. Feminists are after the world domination and all men will be enslaved in the end. It's too late, they are everywhere. Resistence is futile. Say uncle!
Say aunt, you MRA ;-)
In my marriage, I tried the passive-passive model over the passive-aggressive model ... and it still failed. Neither of us were aggressive to the other, we simply followed the lead of the other, if that other one felt like leading (sometimes more strongly than other times). I have known couples that were aggressive-aggressive (verbally) ... that definitely seems to be a bad choice. Relationships have stresses, sometimes long term. You can bend with it, or get upset over it.
Never got married. Because decided that having kids is not something for me. And honestly, around 27-28 I saw that most people usually got married and had kids because they thought that is the next thing in life to do. You know, you graduate and get a job, you get around a little and then you find a mate and procreate. Like a project. Not for me. I believe, it is probably the best decision I made.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on March 21, 2016, 06:37:04 AM
Yes marucio, domestic violence and gender relation is invented and theorised by feminists. And Americans one to be exact. The issue is 10 years old! When they created the Duluth Model they were actually conspiring against American males. In fact the whole Justice Department is against American males. Oh and they all support the idea that males cannot be abused by females and all men are rapists. They are males after all, fuck them, who cares. Feminists are after the world domination and all men will be enslaved in the end. It's too late, they are everywhere. Resistence is futile. Say uncle!
Did you just have a brain aneurysm or something? You seem to be rambling incoherent shit.