6,867 Forum Posts by "SadisticMonkey"
At 11/19/14 10:20 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: If the policy that comes across his desk are things that are blatantly against his principles
Poorly worded, I meant policy written by Obama; Obama's policies.
Clever Obama, guaranteeing Democrat rule of America forever.
At 11/20/14 07:31 PM, AxTekk wrote: No, social injustice makes people more polarised. Most Muslim terrorists are middle class, it's that real social injustice causes an increase in perceived injustice, and perceived injustice leads to anger.
Social injustice being that the world doesn't practise shariah law.
And before you make that overused straw-man, none of this is supposed to excuse terrorists or apologise for terrorism. It's just about smart, realistic policy and finding the best way to find peace & better foreign relations.
What should be done:
a) European countries should abandon their culture and bend over backwards to appease a bunch of hostile, backward ungrateful invaders so they don't become terrorists (even though they will still probably become terrorists anyway)
OR
b) prevent these people from ever entering the western world in the first place
Remember, terrorism is caused by poverty! or something...
At 11/13/14 10:41 PM, Warforger wrote: I have a question; who gives a shit? Why does that matter?
"The next week, Warren acknowledged listing herself as a minority in a directory of law professors. The directory included her on a list of minority professors from 1985 to 1996, the Boston Globe reported. Warren said she listed herself as a minority because she wanted to connect with “people for whom native American is part of their heritage and part of their hearts.” Brown, meanwhile, went on offense, calling for more scrutiny.
In late May, the Globe reported that Warren acknowledged that at some point after she was hired by Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania, she informed the schools of her Native American heritage. The revelation spurred a new round of questions, since Warren never brought up the fact a month earlier, instead saying she didn’t know why Harvard listed her as Native American. Earlier in the May, a report pointed out that she listed herself as “white” at the University of Texas Law School, prompting questions about consistency.
Throughout it all, Warren struggled to get past the story. Her responses to questions about why she identified as Native American were convoluted (and included a discussion of “high cheekbones” at one point).
And Brown’s campaign piled on, seeking to raise more questions about whether Warren used her claim to Native American heritage to her professional advantage. They continue to do so, citing the fact that Warren stopped listing herself as a minority in the faculty directory in 1995 -- the year she received tenure at Harvard -- in a recent press release."
At 11/20/14 09:49 AM, Camarohusky wrote: No, but the base standard still stands. The line between fiery rhetoric and inciting criminal action is determined by intent to make other follow through, not by the objective nature of the words spoken (or written).
No, it makes it entirely different.
It is a group, and it is a hate group. It is largely dominated by white males, as why I made that distinction.
It's a group? Then who is their leader? Where is there website? How does one become an official member?
Feminism is dominated by white females and feminists are hateful, therefore by your logic feminism is a white hate group.
You aren't exactly the best person to be making these claims, being a rampant racist and sexist yourself. Anyway, the basis of feminism is a different topic (there are a few on the BBS already).
I oppose feminism so therefore I'm not the best person to talk about feminism, but your hatred of gamergate strangely does not similarly disqualify you from pathologizing them.
Whatever feminism may be does not change the fact that Gamergate has let itself become a hate group. Sure, maybe most of the members have not actively attcked women,
I'm not sure any of them have actually attacked anyone.
but their complacency (and the wekness of their original message) has been at the very least willful blindness.
Funyn hwo you don't say this about muslims, whose extremists actually kill people.
Also, if you look at the groups accomplishments, and attemoted acts it's like 100-1 in favor of hate to ethics. That's definitely hate group material.
WRONG
"A hate group is an organized group or movement that advocates and practices hatred, hostility, or violence towards members of a race, ethnicity, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation or any other designated sector of society."
If gamergate is a hate group though, even though ITS NOT A GROUP, then so is feminism.
You did. It's a form of a bounty. It may not offer money, but it gives addresses of people for the implied (key word: implied) purpose that someone will use the information to harass the person who was doxxed.
They are two entirely different things, and in any case, show me a legal decision that ruled that threat of doxxing for money is permissible.
At 11/19/14 10:00 PM, Camarohusky wrote: The case on point here was made by the KKK and called for violence against the government. They were deemed to be well within their protected rights.
Did they target an individual?
It's not motivated by racial hatred. It's motivated by sexual frustration and anger against women. You can cry all you want about a legit purpose, but the KKK claims a legit purpose too and that don't change the fact that the vast majority of its actions and the loudest of its member do little but promote hate.
No you fucking idiot, you said it is a "white hate group' when its not a white hate group and its not a group at all. Learn to read.
"It's motivated by sexual frustration and anger against women."
right, and feminism is motivated by feeling ugly and hatred for men.
No they're not. Doxxers can be doxxed just as well by the police.
Who said anything about doxxing?
If you had complete control over immigration policy in the US, what would you do? Open borders? Closed borders? More immigration or less immigration? More immigration but longer path to citizenship?
With Republican control over congress, we can expect only more blockage of policy by our brilliant leader Obama. Given the unprecedented challenges faced by our nation and the harm that the GOP have the potential to unleash upon it, do you believe, in principle and regardless of how feasible it would be, that Obama should be granted full control over the country in order to spare it from further damage from GOP and enable America to take real action on immigration, taxes, climate etc.?
At 11/19/14 07:38 PM, Camarohusky wrote: The KKK
If the KKK made a publicized bounty against a well-known figure, such as one involved in a major criminal investigation, the justice department would be on their asses before you could say 'ray-cyst'.
and Gamergate, both white hate groups are able to do it too.
Christ you're an idiot.
Gamergate is in no way a white hate group. It's not all white (good job erasing the existence of people of color you racist), it's not motivated by racial hatred considering virtually all the people they're opposed to are white too, and they're not a group at all any more than 'feminism' is a group.
A few individuals made threats against certain people which were investigated by the authorities. It's not as if the police are saying 'oh it's fine for them to say whatever they want'. These people are mostly anonymous and since they're not an actual group there's no one for the police to shut down.
At 11/19/14 05:00 AM, TheGamechanger wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasbro
Out of all the characters that Hasbro owns, which ones are your favorites and why?
Star Wars
remember folks a scientist's fucking t-shirt is the real feminist issue of the year
At 11/15/14 08:29 AM, killer32 wrote: Women are still being underpaid. Researches have shown that In 2013, among full-time, year-round workers, women were paid 78 percent of what men were paid. Furthermore, women over 35 and women of color are paid even less. Hispanic women’s salaries show the largest gap, at 54 percent of white men’s earnings and women over 35 are paid 80-75 percent of what a man earns. So if you are a Hispanic women over 35 you are making some where between 34-29 percent.
The wage gap has been debunked so many times that it is just plain saddening that people could still cling to the myth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58arQIr882w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwogDPh-Sow
Second, women are still being harassed in the workplace. The office isn't a bar where you can get drunk and hit on chicks, women still experience derogatory terms howled at them, get the their ass grabbed and in some rare cases even rape.
You're gonna need, you know, at least a single jot of evidence for this.
Third, In a lot of the places in the world women undergo genital mutilation. According to the UNICEF, More than 133 million girls and women have experienced some form of female genital mutilation (FGM) in the 29 countries in Africa and the Middle East where the harmful practice is most common. Beyond extreme physical and psychological pain, girls who undergo FGM are at risk of prolonged bleeding, infection (including HIV), infertility, complications during pregnancy and death.
1. Nobody in the western world except for african/arab immigrants would ever defend FGM, so it's pointless bringing this up.
2. Western feminists spend almost no time talking about FGM compared to trivial crap like catcalling, women in videogames and the T-shirts worn by fucking scientists. In fact, anti-feminist men routinely bring up issues like FGM to demonstrate how insignificant the crap that western feminists complain about compared to real issues facing women in the world.
3. Men in much of the western world under genital mutilation without their consent. Of course, this is not as bad as FGM but feminists almost never talk about it, and when they do they usually say they support it. And it's not as if they're too busy talking about FGM to care about male circumcision, they literally don't care about it at all and will consider any "issue', no matter how trivial, facing women in the western world more important. And then feminists wonder why everyone scoffs at them being for 'equality".
In-conclusion, There are still a lot of feminists issues around and ignoring them won't fix anything. Also, I am aware that there are men rights issues as well but the goal of feminism isn't to make women superior, it is to achieve equality.
If they actually cared about equality it wouldn't be called feminism and feminists wouldn't talk exclusively about women's issues.
It truly is a shame that Switzerland is not a progressive wonderland like norway or england.
I bet these backward rural swiss hillbillies are just racist. They wouldn't complaining if it were white people raping their women and children.
"Ya I am sure ... "The Pope" would like to have all his riches rendered moot. That POS should be hung ... IN PUBLIC !"
At 11/16/14 05:51 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: That POS should be hung ... IN PUBLIC !
And why is that?
What Pisses Me Off About Kim Kardashian
At 11/15/14 09:01 PM, DeadBeyondKoncern wrote: When Lil Wayne was born.
I probably wouldn't kill him though, maybe scare him from rapping (for life). Tell him if he ever raps one line his mother would get slaughtered by an elephant army.
Do you think you could persuade him though that you in fact have command of such an elephantine infantry?
At 11/15/14 10:38 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:At 11/15/14 09:14 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote:It's no more fallacious than the post of yours which i was replying to.See the problem here is that what I am stating is based in quantified scientific fact and your just a fucking troll.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear
you've got to be kidding me
I don't know how anyone can have "favorite bands" when >99% of them have a few good songs at most.
At 11/15/14 08:50 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:At 11/15/14 08:43 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote:Nice argumentative Fallacy LOL.At 11/14/14 05:21 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: It's natural to be afraid of change and of the unknown.I guess that's the reason why you don't want Nazis to take over America then, hmm?
It's no more fallacious than the post of yours which i was replying to.
At 11/15/14 08:54 PM, Knights wrote: You do realize Bill Gates also funds a ton of vaccination and medical research companies and is quite possibly a major contribution to eradicating disease throughout Africa?
Oh yes just what the world needs, more africans.
..and kill one person in history, who would it be?
I choose Bill Gates, before he started microsoft.
That way, the absolutely fucking useless pile of stinking horseshit known as windows 8.1 would never have existed, and someone else who wasn't a completely incompetent retard would have pioneered operating systems and they would be remotely usable today.
You guys?
At 11/15/14 04:13 PM, kanef wrote: lefties have a lot to look up to for east germany anyways
yes communism did wonders for east germany
At 11/14/14 05:21 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: It's natural to be afraid of change and of the unknown.
I guess that's the reason why you don't want Nazis to take over America then, hmm?
At 11/15/14 06:12 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: Bigotry is a strong word, probably too strong me thinks. Intolerance? Sure. Poor taste? Sure. Disrespect to the Church (which by the way is the head of a sovereign state)? Sure. Bigotry? Eh.
Funny how this 'bigotry skepticism' never seems to pop-up when conservatives are called it at the drop of a hat by progressives every single day.
I think because you seem to think it's "bigotry" to protest religion, and/or ask religion to get out of the governmental sphere.
It's bigotry to oppose Islamic influence over Europe but, but not if you oppose Catholic influence. Hilarious!
Also, theism vs. atheism is millions vs. thousands, yet the millions (who by the way have a LONG record of oppression, prejudice, and other nasty)
yes, mostly because they were the only one in a position to act like this. The non-religious couldn't do these things for most of history of a large scale, not because they were too compassionate to. You only need to look at the soviet union to see what happens when they did have power.
These filthy whores should try pulling one of their edgy little stunts in saudi arabia and see how far that gets them.
Of course, that would be "racist" according to western progressives and they would deserve the harsh penalties that followed.
(yes I know I misspelled propaganda).
So this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yvq6pH5Rheg) is being promoted on the youtube front page (http://i.imgur.com/hkobChD.png).
The video has over ten million views and supposedly shows how random men on the street, unaware that they're being filmed, try to take advantage of a woman who is (acting) drunk and was made to demonstrate the "rape culture" (or whatever the fuck) that is ubiquitous in America.
The only problem is, the video is FAKE, and not only do neither the video nor it's youtube description make any indication of this whatsoever, comments have also been disabled on the youtube video so that no one is able to inform others that the video is a hoax.
So what do you guys think? Do you agree that's it's okay to deliberately deceive people by falsely representing men in negative light to advance the feminist agenda?
At 11/14/14 04:33 PM, Feoric wrote: I'm not familiar with Liechtenstein (honestly who is?) but Switzerland is absolutely not some sort of liberal utopia a lot of Americans seem to think it is, I have no idea how that misnomer came to be. Switzerland isn't really 'progressive', if anything it's staunchly peasant-conservative. Anywhere where the rural classes had the power tended to be very conservative, and Switzerland was basically a confederation of rural councils. Mix a Cantonal system with direct democracy + a really conservative culture and you get some pretty shit decisions.
"Some pretty shit decisions" have prevented it from being invaded by rapacious muslim hoards like most other western European countries, though I'm sure you consider that an unfortunate thing. Think of all the cultural enrichment the pre-teen swiss girls have missed out on!
I think this basically says everything that needs to be said about the disastrous consequences from allowing women to vote.
