SJW Snowflakes

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3894]

34 minutes ago, Renton said:

I can't watch that at work, but from the title it appears to directly contradict a program I watched on BBC, aired just last night. Truth is, we will never know what, if any, differences in ability or aptitude there are between the sexes because behavioural factors are so ingrained from birth. I can't see a feasible or ethical way of even testing the hypothesis either to any degree of satisfaction.

 

Anyway. This reminds me of leazesmag, who when on here used to constantly whinge about how downtrodden he was as a white, middle aged man. I can't summon the words to say how fucking pathetic that attitude is. Also irony etc.

 

Look at the demographics of Trump's cabinet ffs. What I really don't understand though is how any woman or member of any minority can conscionably vote for the orange cunt. 

 

Stockholm syndrome

[Dr Gloom 21923]

colbert on good form

 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2017/08/16/stephen_colbert_takes_on_trump_s_terrible_press_conference.html

[Meenzer 15526]

42 minutes ago, Renton said:

Look at the demographics of Trump's cabinet ffs. What I really don't understand though is how any woman or member of any minority can conscionably vote for the orange cunt. 

 

Because they hate their own identity so much they're that desperate to reject identity politics.

[Dr Gloom 21923]

[S Norman 4]

21 minutes ago, Renton said:

I can't watch that at work, but from the title it appears to directly contradict a program I watched on BBC, aired just last night. Truth is, we will never know what, if any, differences in ability or aptitude there are between the sexes because behavioural factors are so ingrained from birth. I can't see a feasible or ethical way of even testing the hypothesis either to any degree of satisfaction.

 

Anyway. This reminds me of leazesmag, who when on here used to constantly whinge about how downtrodden he was as a white, middle aged man. I can't summon the words to say how fucking pathetic that attitude is. Also irony etc.

 

Look at the demographics of Trump's cabinet ffs. What I really don't understand though is how any woman or member of any minority can conscionably vote for the orange cunt. 

 

These are scientific researches conducted by people working for some of the best universities in the world. I accept if someone picks their argument to pieces and proves why they are wrong. Swiping them off the table and simply saying that this is "wrong science" and those who worked on them are alt-right misogynist is very weak however. It does not make progressives any better than flat-earthers, anti-vaccine people or creationists.

 

Do you remember the title of the BBC program? 

[Rayvin 5223]

54 minutes ago, Renton said:

I can't watch that at work, but from the title it appears to directly contradict a program I watched on BBC, aired just last night. Truth is, we will never know what, if any, differences in ability or aptitude there are between the sexes because behavioural factors are so ingrained from birth. I can't see a feasible or ethical way of even testing the hypothesis either to any degree of satisfaction.

 

Anyway. This reminds me of leazesmag, who when on here used to constantly whinge about how downtrodden he was as a white, middle aged man. I can't summon the words to say how fucking pathetic that attitude is. Also irony etc.

 

Look at the demographics of Trump's cabinet ffs. What I really don't understand though is how any woman or member of any minority can conscionably vote for the orange cunt. 

 

The Alt Right seem to be very clear on the fact that the surge to make everything about identity has bolstered their numbers considerably. They are highly approving of the notion of keeping the conversation about identity going.

 

Which is why it remains destructive, and a key reason for why Trump is where he is. You can despair at and castigate the people who feel insecure about their identity as white men all you want by rationalising the whole set up and how it favours such people, but the reality is that such despair and castigation is more likely to entrench their beliefs. When I say that we need open and compassionate dialogue with such people, I not saying that we agree with what they're saying. But we should at least understand why they feel so insecure. They'll tell you it's because the left blames them for everything, amongst other things like economic pressures and an inability to process emotional turmoil, etc. So, given that the need to blame people isn't hugely constructive anyway, could we perhaps find a way forward that doesn't involve blame, but still works to make things better for women and minorities? And indeed white working class men at the same time. I would argue that would be the most positive thing to do.

 

I don't quite understand why there are so many people prepared to just yell at those who have world views borne out of insecurity (unless they're insecure themselves, in which case we're all trapped in this cycle of depressing mutually affirming insecurity).

[Meenzer 15526]

It's human nature to an extent - we're all inherently me-focused, it's part and parcel of the survival instinct. So even at a more advanced societal level where we don't have to worry about killing to feed ourselves because we have Tesco Express, it'd be all too easy for me to (e.g.) respond to being abused or attacked for being gay by saying, well, why should I feel sympathy for a straight person who doesn't have to go through that? When obviously I have plenty of other advantages in life - in terms of my background, work, the educational opportunities I've had, etc. - that a working-class white man, say, might not. I really hate to use the phrase "check your privilege" because it feels about as devalued as social justice/doing good etc., but obviously there's something in it. Hard to suspend your visceral response mechanism when you feel you're being wronged though.

[Rayvin 5223]

2 minutes ago, Meenzer said:

It's human nature to an extent - we're all inherently me-focused, it's part and parcel of the survival instinct. So even at a more advanced societal level where we don't have to worry about killing to feed ourselves because we have Tesco Express, it'd be all too easy for me to (e.g.) respond to being abused or attacked for being gay by saying, well, why should I feel sympathy for a straight person who doesn't have to go through that? When obviously I have plenty of other advantages in life - in terms of my background, work, the educational opportunities I've had, etc. - that a working-class white man, say, might not. I really hate to use the phrase "check your privilege" because it feels about as devalued as social justice/doing good etc., but obviously there's something in it. Hard to suspend your visceral response mechanism when you feel you're being wronged though.

 

It will indeed be human nature. We need to rise above it if we ever want to actually solve these problems though. Until we do, they're just going to continue. To me, it seems perfectly logical in the current framework for humanity, that if you get one group blaming all their problems on another group, the latter will become defensive and potentially aggressive. That some of us are able to press down this defensive response is encouraging, but some of those same people then let themselves down by turning on those who can't. It becomes a 'holier than thou' style of rhetoric, and further alienation occurs.

 

I think privilege checking should be done on an individual basis. I think it's absolutely fair to ask an individual person to acknowledge specific advantages they've had. I'm not so sure it's fair to do so to a group. Who on earth knows what kind of experiences individuals in a group may or may not have had that should be considered when determining how 'privileged' a specific person is. Moreover, if you consider privilege in a group level, and thus determine that white men are highly privileged - white men at the bottom of society are naturally going to resist that. Irrespective of how true it is. Because you're effectively telling them that they had all of these life advantages innately present, and despite these, despite being white, straight men, they're still at the bottom of the fucking pile. That's a lot to expect someone to swallow. Given how readily humankind is prepared to self delude, I don't think it surprising at all that there is so much push back against these notions.

 

Calling people racists and misogynists is cathartic but not even close to being remotely helpful in actually dealing with any of these problems. It's nothing more than an attempt to shame people into silence - and what we're seeing now, horrifyingly, is people owning these labels so that they can continue to speak about how they feel. They don't care anymore. Say what you want, they don't care. And it's because we're not listening to them.

 

I was a trustee in a counselling charity for some time, and I remember the (female) CEO of the charity telling me that she'd been to a panel amidst domestic violence charities and shelters. Many of the informed people made the case that the best way to protect women would actually be to counsel the abusers. To look at why they're doing what they are, and work them through it and out the other end. Yes, you take the women out of danger and you lock up the abuser, but you don't just abandon him. You try to turn him around. You listen. And they had demonstrable proof that this strategy significantly reduced repeat offending. The problem is, politically, no one is going to want to spend money on these people. Even though it's for the benefit of their future partners. Even though it would help fight the problem. It all sounds very familiar.

[Meenzer 15526]

I think the scale is part of what makes it so daunting for people. The idea of seeking to reach out to, change and rectify individual offenders like you describe is something that's obviously quite easy to support at that level. Then you realise nearly 63 million people voted for Trump and the battle for hearts and minds doesn't seem so straightforward.

[Rayvin 5223]

1 minute ago, Meenzer said:

I think the scale is part of what makes it so daunting for people. The idea of seeking to reach out to, change and rectify individual offenders like you describe is something that's obviously quite easy to support at that level. Then you realise nearly 63 million people voted for Trump and the battle for hearts and minds doesn't seem so straightforward.

 

Right but not everyone who voted for Trump did so for these reasons. Some people really fucking didn't like Clinton. I get the point though, identity groupings exist because it's far easier to tackle things if you consider groups of people as one uniform bloc.

 

But the answer to the bigger problem is for the left to reach out to the white working class and to stop alienating them. I've said this about Corbyn as well - in fact, it's the key reason I wanted him in. I know many people (Sargon) don't think he has a message for the white working class, but that's only because he's not actively talking about them as a demographic. And that's fucking good. He's talking about the working class, working people, policies to support families in poverty, etc - and that really is the answer. That's really all it fucking takes. We don't need to turn around and say 'white people are hard done by'. We just need to stop talking about race/gender and work towards getting everyone onto a level footing as best we can. Sure, we help women from working class backgrounds up more than men from the same background. Fine. But we don't assume that women from middle class backgrounds need a leg up as much as working class men - because they probably don't. Surely we're capable of coming up with metrics to assess people's needs, without resorting to racial groupings? How about level of schooling? How about family wealth growing up?

 

If we do that, we can eliminate structural problems that disadvantage people of certain ethnicities (things like family wealth or level of schooling), and not at the same time create a growing nazi backlash.

[NJS 4385]

It can be a bit simplistic to say that "most" of the people who voted for Trump are the neglected white males alluded to here - just like those blaming brexit on neglected northerners/Welsh etc, etc. 

 

There were plenty of votes - see those Americans chez mentioned and see how many voters in the SE who voted for brexit - who voted just because they are selfish cunts. 

[Meenzer 15526]

Sargon

 

(sorry, your points are absolutely good, but I was distracted by the mention of Sargon)

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Sargon )

[Dr Gloom 21923]

If there's one thing that fascists advocate more than anything, it's open and compassionate dialogue.

 

lets hit them hard with a major - and I mean major - leafleting campaign etc 

[Dr Gloom 21923]

13 minutes ago, Meenzer said:

Sargon

 

(sorry, your points are absolutely good, but I was distracted by the mention of Sargon)

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Sargon )

 

... of his comic book collection 

[The Fish 10857]

10 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

 

... of his comic book collection 

You're on thin ice already sunshine. Keep graphic novels out of this.

[Rayvin 5223]

13 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

If there's one thing that fascists advocate more than anything, it's open and compassionate dialogue.

 

lets hit them hard with a major - and I mean major - leafleting campaign etc 

 

Not sure this scans... I don't think the fascists want open and compassionate dialogue  They have outright said they're delighted with how 'the left' is currently handling everything. Largely because it's driving people over to the nazi side.

 

I'm saying that as liberals, we should want open and compassionate dialogue with the people that the left is pushing away.

[Rayvin 5223]

31 minutes ago, Meenzer said:

Sargon

 

(sorry, your points are absolutely good, but I was distracted by the mention of Sargon)

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Sargon )

 

I referenced him purely to use the opportunity to make myself distinct from him

[Dr Gloom 21923]

i think you have to make a distinction between the torch wielding, blood and soil kkk mob and the majority of disenchanted blue collar voters who voted for trump. 

[adios 717]

6 hours ago, Renton said:

the orange cunt. 

 

Reported.

[Anorthernsoul 1221]

5 hours ago, Meenzer said:

It's human nature to an extent - we're all inherently me-focused, it's part and parcel of the survival instinct. So even at a more advanced societal level where we don't have to worry about killing to feed ourselves because we have Tesco Express, it'd be all too easy for me to (e.g.) respond to being abused or attacked for being gay by saying, well, why should I feel sympathy for a straight person who doesn't have to go through that? When obviously I have plenty of other advantages in life - in terms of my background, work, the educational opportunities I've had, etc. - that a working-class white man, say, might not. I really hate to use the phrase "check your privilege" because it feels about as devalued as social justice/doing good etc., but obviously there's something in it. Hard to suspend your visceral response mechanism when you feel you're being wronged though.

 

I never knew you were gay.

[Meenzer 15526]

7 minutes ago, Anorthernsoul said:

 

I never knew you were gay.

 

What can I say, I'm just very good at virtue signalling.

[Meenzer 15526]

Or possibly very bad...

[Meenzer 15526]

Speaking of the gays, as I so rarely do:

 

 

Does this mean we get to electro-shock and chemically castrate the little snowflake?

[Rayvin 5223]

They've digitally castrated his career if that counts?

 

Although i daresay he'll land on his feet as a critic of the SJWs and will end up earning more than he did at Google, given the perverse way these things work.

[The Fish 10857]

13 hours ago, Anorthernsoul said:

 

I never knew you were gay.

 

Well into Eurovision, is forever posting Europop videos from (what looks like) the 80s (the most gay-friendly decade in music), can cook, takes really good care of his body, has a barbed tongue, is often the first to post that picture of Keane and van Nistelrooy...what more clues did you need?