Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. Gameplay
      2. Missions
      3. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Arena War
      2. After Hours
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA Next

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Otter

Anarchy, Socialism, Communism, and community gardens

Recommended Posts

Twang.

 

Feminists who claim that men are 'entitled' are just fundamentally evil and hateful human beings.

Yet, if you ask an MRA, they have this mid-century middle class fetish mixed in with some pseudo-primitivist broscience bullsh*t. They believe they're entitled to a gorgeous wife, entitled to a clean house, entitled to a hot meal every night, entitled to telling said wife how to behave and look at all times, and to top it all off, entitled to f*ck five other women on the side. Too many men have had this entitlement throughout history, and now they throw fits and attack any woman who strays from that ideal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Otter

ITT: the reason feminist bbqs are never any fun.

 

Melchior, I gotta say - seeing some really faulty logic out of you on this one and I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt because we usually see eye to eye, but why you're holding up this obvious outlier as some sort of prime example I'll never know. Now, I'm coming in hot and out of context, so forgive me if I'm misreading the situation...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El Dildo

yeah I though this was the Anarchy thread...

where did the f/cking massive dissertation on transgenderism and body dysmorphia disorder come from?? perhaps this could be cleaned up somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango

ITT: the reason feminist bbqs are never any fun.

 

Melchior, I gotta say - seeing some really faulty logic out of you on this one and I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt because we usually see eye to eye, but why you're holding up this obvious outlier as some sort of prime example I'll never know. Now, I'm coming in hot and out of context, so forgive me if I'm misreading the situation...

I'm don't think Muscato is representative of transwomen generally, but it stems from the logic of queer theory: 'woman' is nothing but a feeling one has, and so infrastructure that exists for women should be open to gender conforming men. And questioning this is an act of bigotry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
San_Sicario

 

He can't father baby gorillas.

The problem with this line of reasoning is that the vasic logic simply doesn't hold water. Infertile people can't father baby people, does that make them not-people? A person cannot actually be a gorilla even if they identify as one, but it has nothing to do with their ability to sire baby gorillas.

I'm having a little trouble following as to the why. Why can't he be a gorilla? Different genes? Different physiology? Psychology?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedDagger

Well yes, genes, physiology, general physical stuff of which I'm sure the precise details are for a completely different discussion. You still haven't explained how your gorilla analogy has any relevance to gender though, this whole comparing transgender people to gorilla shtick is rather silly and could easily be seen as pretty insulting.

Edited by RedDagger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
San_Sicario

 

 

He can't father baby gorillas.

The problem with this line of reasoning is that the vasic logic simply doesn't hold water. Infertile people can't father baby people, does that make them not-people? A person cannot actually be a gorilla even if they identify as one, but it has nothing to do with their ability to sire baby gorillas.
I'm having a little trouble following as to the why.

Still the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Otter

Have your trouble elsewhere, please, there's a somewhat intelligible discussion already happening here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

 

I'm having a little trouble following as to the why.

Still the case.Not sure what you even mean here? I'm not trying to make a point, just pick holes in flawed logic for fun.

 

As an aside, I don't normally post at 5:50AM and quoting yourself an hour later to question why this hasn't been answered isn't going to change that, especially when I'm asleep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango

 

Because transwomen are men and are therefore entitled and aggressive.

 

Could you be any more self loathing? Do you honestly believe men are more entitled than women, or do you just think it is virtuous to say such a thing?

I'm not self-flagellating, any reasonable person can see men's attitude toward women. This "kill all terfs" garbage and the MRM are proof of that: two separate political movements that send women death threats on the internet. Both are full of religious level insanity that wouldn't be possible without the mind-numbing effect of male entitlement, the latter even explicitly revolves around blue balls. Not to mention y'know rampant sexual violence.

 

 

 

Women are entitled to the products of male labour and male physical strength. Almost every feminist university class or convention held ever was held in a building built by male labour.

How am I supposed to respond to this? What am I supposed to be accounting for, the fact that women even exist?

 

 

 

Women are entitled to protection by men. Women are entitled to male self sacrifice in state of war or emergency.

They're also f*cking brutalised by men, especially so in armed conflicts so I don't see your point. I don't see how saying "we save the really intense violence for each other" is a response to feminism either.

 

 

 

If you want a good list of female privileges you can find it here

Having mild conveniences built into your position doesn't make you privileged.

 

 

 

it is natural for a significant share of men to be genetically obsolete and for there to be more competition among men. Did you know that you have far more female ancestors than male ones? That is because there is much harsher competition between males, and it sucks more to be an inferior man than to be an inferior woman.

If you mean we have more distinct male ancestors then that is because women get pregnant for months while men can father more children and men have historically been in a position of sexual dominance over women. Why did you think this would be news to anyone, and why did you think it proved the existence of a binary pecking order between men?

 

If I were a beta male, I'd know it. So either this distinction is a fantasy or I'm an alpha male, in which case let me tell you that the trick is to not care.

 

 

 

Feminists who claim that men are 'entitled' are just fundamentally evil and hateful human beings.

"Capitalism is fine but feminism is pure evil"

-Euty, 2017

 

 

 

Also this: http://www.realsexism.com/

Well I'm convinced, Nevermind, women are goldigging whores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro

 

 

it is natural for a significant share of men to be genetically obsolete and for there to be more competition among men. Did you know that you have far more female ancestors than male ones? That is because there is much harsher competition between males, and it sucks more to be an inferior man than to be an inferior woman.

 

If you mean we have more distinct male ancestors

 

No, I'm saying the opposite. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/09/040920063537.htm

 

More men than women get squeezed out of the mating game. As a result, twice as many women as men passed their genes to the next generation.

 

I'm not going to bother responding to the rest, because you have refuted absolutely nothing, and I have better sh*t to do.

Edited by Eutyphro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

I don't know if it's a language comprehension issue but that quote from the above article and the claim you've made that Melc responded to are nothing alike.

 

Nice to see the "I'm not playing anymore" mentality alive and well too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El Dildo

I dunno if we're still talking about chicks with dicks or what, but on the subject of anarchy, this is pretty awesome...

 

 

 

it's very cool to see because this is an idea I've talked about with people for years; the notion that private property ownership is one of the core pillars of Capitalist oppression. the fact that MILLIONS of people can be homeless but ONE douchef/ck can own 10 different mansions (9 of which sit empty for years on end) is absolutely beyond the pale of ludicrous and unacceptable. if it were up to me, we'd start categorically lopping off the heads of the filthy rich, but perhaps breaking into their castle and opening it up to the homeless is a good start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RollsReus1959

I dunno if we're still talking about chicks with dicks or what, but on the subject of anarchy, this is pretty awesome...

 

 

it's very cool to see because this is an idea I've talked about with people for years; the notion that private property ownership is one of the core pillars of Capitalist oppression. the fact that MILLIONS of people can be homeless but ONE douchef/ck can own 10 different mansions (9 of which sit empty for years on end) is absolutely beyond the pale of ludicrous and unacceptable. if it were up to me, we'd start categorically lopping off the heads of the filthy rich, but perhaps breaking into their castle and opening it up to the homeless is a good start.

lol

 

I disagree with anarchism.

Edited by RollsReus1959

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El Dildo

thanks for your valuable input, big guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RollsReus1959

thanks for your valuable input, big guy.

No. Thank you for giving me a good laugh with your imagination.

 

Off with the heads of the rich? Take their homes and open it up to the homeless?

 

Playing Robin Hood was 10 years ago.

 

Lucky for me I can shoot people for trying to break into my house. California may have some tough gun laws but we can still defend ourselves. It would mot be wise to break into any buildings.

Edited by RollsReus1959

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

You really do post some utter drivel.

Please don't bother replying to another D&D thread unless you intend on posting something actually worthy of discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RollsReus1959

You really do post some utter drivel.

Please don't bother replying to another D&D thread unless you intend on posting something actually worthy of discussion.

We don't need elaborate essays when it's not warranted.

 

Have you seen some of the replies here?

 

People are justifying smashing of windows, rioting and violence.

 

If they feel its justifiable then a lengthy response will not change their mind.

 

I will limit my replies too.

Edited by RollsReus1959

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El Dildo
Lucky for me I can shoot people for trying to break into my house.

oh, "trying" is the easy part.

there won't be anyone for you to shoot at. they just wait until you leave.

 

People are justifying smashing of windows, rioting and violence.

yeah I'm pretty sure that you just tried to justify the murder of homeless people so...

 

dfnsoxF.jpg

Edited by El Diablo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

We don't need elaborate essays when it's not warranted.

That's literally the purpose of this subforum. If you aren't going to debate or discuss then there's no point in posting, and that goes for everyone, not just you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango

So some young piece of sh*t dude barged into a woman's library drunk as a skunk screaming "no TERFs" and intimidating women. Then they came back a week later:

 

vandalism-1.jpg

 

 

The reaction online has largely been "how could you deny another woman's grievances" despite the 'woman' being a drunk and angry man who sat on the stoop hectoring passers by while drinking beer! Let's be clear that this is a library that houses books from female authors, it takes no position on transgenderism and prostitution. They house literally any book from a female author but the mere presence of books with 'radical' and 'female' in the title sent the trans cult into a rage. And they specifically asked for books from transwomen, which is more accommodation than they'd ever get from me. Rest assured that when we find out who this sh*tstain is, he's in for the 'deadnaming' of a lifetime!

 

There's no fence sitting anymore lads, you either stand with women or you stand with men in drag. I don't have to think about which side I'm on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
make total destroy

 

There's no fence sitting anymore lads, you either stand with women or you stand with men in drag.

Well that's a false dichotomy if I've ever seen one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro

Though I actually largely agree with Melchiors 'trans cult' rants, it's funny how sometimes he indicates his hate is justified because of them being biologically male.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango

Though I actually largely agree with Melchiors 'trans cult' rants, it's funny how sometimes he indicates his hate is justified because of them being biologically male.

My hate for who? Men who run into women's libraries scaring the sh*t out of the attendees? I don't hate trans women if that's what you're getting at.

 

I feel bad for trans women. They can't express their sensitivity while owning their maleness, like I do.

 

 

 

 

There's no fence sitting anymore lads, you either stand with women or you stand with men in drag.

Well that's a false dichotomy if I've ever seen one.

 

No, at this point you either agree with feminism or with queer theory, the two are opposed to each other. Either gender is a labour hierarchy or gender is a benign form of self expression and it is literal violence to criticise it in any way. Either this dude is a man that has no business screaming at feminists, or he's a woman and feminists have a responsibility to listen to 'her' grievances.

 

There's a line in the sand now. Anyone who is in anyway involved with actual feminism feels massively put upon by the trans movement. Harassment campaigns, no platforming, cyber attacks. The primary opposition to feminism now comes not from MRAs, but from queer theorists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro

 



Jordan Peterson explaining very consisely how it is not up to you to define whether you are male or female. It is up to others to recognize you as such. This is the tough truth that is being avoided in leftist circles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
make total destroy

So it's not possible for me to support trans* women while disagreeing with the actions of an angry drunk? It's not possible for me to stand in solidarity with trans* women while acknowledging that some trans* women are assholes like literally anyone else? Please. It's a false dichotomy and you know it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango

You can have solidarity with trans women but not with random men who claim to be women? He is not a trans woman, he is an ordinary, gender conforming man. If you say this obvious dude is a woman then you are somewhat legitimising him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro

they can't express their sensitivity while owning their maleness, like I do.

I have to point out, this is something that I could say, to which you would respond with something about "pink and blue souls" to ridicule it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango

 

they can't express their sensitivity while owning their maleness, like I do.

I have to point out, this is something that I could say, to which you would respond with something about "pink and blue souls" to ridicule it.

 

By 'maleness' I mean the fact that I have a penis and a hairy chin, which has nothing to do with my personality. I accept that having male biology doesn't preclude you from having personality traits associated with women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eutyphro

I accept that having male biology doesn't preclude you from having personality traits associated with women.

Neither do I. All I argue for is that masculinity is firstly a biological fact, which then expresses itself according to materialist and economic conditions as a role, and then finally gives rise to arbitrary cultural expressions (like blue is for boys). The radfems you support skip the largest part of the explanation, and reduce gender to an arbitrary cultural expression (which is the least substantial part of the explanation). That's litterally what I've been trying to explain to you all along which you can't seem to grasp.

 

I'm not even saying masculinity and femininity are fixed entities, just that they are firmly based in biology and economics (in physical reality). But we seem to disagree on how substantial the evidence I gave you of the influence of pre natal testosterone is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.