Charlie Kirk shot at (shot?) in Utah

[Emily Lake]

Like I said, you wrongly think I hate women

You wrongly think you know what I think.
THAT seems to be the problem.
I do not think you are in any way ill-intended toward women.
Try to keep that in mind please.

They all say stupid shit, and I'd love it if they would knock it the fuck off. But I'm not interacting with any of them - I'm interacting with you.

Then stop saying stupid shit, like telling people what they think.
Most people KNOW what the fuck they think. Your accusations are only for your own benefit.

You fucking tell me what I think all the goddamned time. How about you take your own advice for a change?

 

[Emily Lake]

That's called intersex, not transgender.

So (A) it's all in their mind.

It would be best not to confuse the two situations,

So keep it simple. (A) or (B), yes or no.
That's the problem.

An 'identity' would be Superman or Clark Kent. But just one physical person.
Your identity is your problem, nobody else gives a shit.
Nobody ever talks about intersex, but that's a physical reality. That, I could have sympathy for.
I have no sympathy for folks who think they are in the wrong body. That is just woo. Don't insist I agree with your beliefs.

Thank you for clearing it up for me.

Believe it or not, the mind is in fact a body part.

Which is why anorexics are actually for realsies fat, and we should all be affirming their identities and pitching in for their weight loss programs.

How does that follow from the mind being a part of the body? Eating disorders are living proof that minds do not exist in isolation, nor only approachable through humanistic mysticism.

Which you'd realize, if you were thinking for half a second instead of just bleating out PragerU aphorisms about attack helicopters, gender fluids, and anorexia. I know you have a brain, use it for once! Letting someone else talk through you is unbecoming of any literate person.

The brain is a part of the body, but the mind is not greater than the body. And brains lie all the time. Like a LOT. But somehow, we're all supposed to surrender our boundaries because some people insist that their minds have a magical essence that makes them the opposite sex so now they can get their dicks out in front of nonconsenting women.

What a person adopts as their psychological identity (as opposed to observable identifiers) doesn't alter reality, and it certainly doesn't supplant the reality that everyone else observes.

Gender identity is unverifiable, subjective, and is almost always based on regressive stereotypes about the opposite sex. I genuinely, sincerely do not care what anyone's gender identity is for them. It's irrelevant to me, and it should be irrelevant to everyone. I do, however, very much care about those few areas of life where sex - actual real objective sex - matters. And I very strongly object to giving males of the species a legal right to violate women's boundaries on the basis of their unverifiable, subjective feelings about what they wish they were but aren't.

Happy to extend the sizing options for clothing and shoes. Not willing to let free-swinging penises in my showers.

 

[Elixir]

You fucking tell me what I think all the goddamned time. How about you take your own advice for a change?

Quote me stating what “you think” or telling you what “you believe” ANYWHERE.
Go ahead, do it. I don’t tell you what you believe, I tell you what outcomes become more likely from choices younevince, presumably based upon what you believe.
You’re confused Emily, and that’s the benign assumption.
I can’t count the times you have conflated observations of results with personal attacks on your intent.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I get Charlie Kirk was a dick, but this derail seems a bit too literal

 

[laughing dog]

The thing is few would actually admit to being a Nazi.

Well, not after they lost the war. If it becomes safe to fly the flag again without losing their job, many will fly it just as proudly as they fly the "Confederate flag" now.

Yeah, they just find a new name with the same core behaviors and slightly different window dressing.

It's also one of the reasons that the easiest way to spot them is to spot the political groups whose names do not actually match their behavior, or which have names associated with nationalism and/or populism, while espousing "smaller*" government.

If you find the people seeking to hit social spending, or advocating to make certain human conditions criminal or regulated, completely agnostic to the behavior of the person with that condition, the those people are likely Nazis too.

As it is, Nazis, when they start to precipitate into power within a society, share a number of bedfellows who I will also call Nazis.

These "Nazi bedfellows" will in any era include a large number of false "free people", who believe they value justice and freedom and independence of thought, but whose values in practice skew towards "trains running on time" and re-instating conservative policies according to biases trained into them by religious and cultural sources.

These are, in fact, the majority of Nazis, like the soil in which the roots of the toxic plant of fascist government grows.

The fact is, of you don't want Nazis in your country, you will not be the fertile soil for this.

If you hate Nazis, really, if you want to be remembered not as an individual but as part of a *sort* of individual, as an instance of something we can count on next time, then today you will show that you can reject the comforts and the utilities of the trains running on time because you are one of those who will ultimately blow up the tracks before they can carry trains of people. Name those Nazis as what they are, and speak the words into history necessary to make the next instance of you who reads the words in the next cycle and understand before things get so out of hand as you let them get here.

MAGA are Nazis.

Those who pretend "MAGA" isn't "Nazis" are cheeky Nazis.

Your entire post boils down to "conservatives are nazis, we should make sure that there are no conservatives"

You strenuously object whenever someone boils down your posts to their view of its essence. In this case, the fuel for your boiling is the erroneous conflation of conservative with MAGA. There are plenty of conservatives who did not and do not support Trump.

I know it's difficult to parse, but perhaps you might try reading all of Jarhyn's post?

I did. Your boiled essence is pure balderdash. There is no mention of conservatives. Maybe you should take your own advice. I repeat - there are plenty of conservatives who are not MAGA.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

The thing is few would actually admit to being a Nazi.

Well, not after they lost the war. If it becomes safe to fly the flag again without losing their job, many will fly it just as proudly as they fly the "Confederate flag" now.

Yeah, they just find a new name with the same core behaviors and slightly different window dressing.

It's also one of the reasons that the easiest way to spot them is to spot the political groups whose names do not actually match their behavior, or which have names associated with nationalism and/or populism, while espousing "smaller*" government.

If you find the people seeking to hit social spending, or advocating to make certain human conditions criminal or regulated, completely agnostic to the behavior of the person with that condition, the those people are likely Nazis too.

As it is, Nazis, when they start to precipitate into power within a society, share a number of bedfellows who I will also call Nazis.

These "Nazi bedfellows" will in any era include a large number of false "free people", who believe they value justice and freedom and independence of thought, but whose values in practice skew towards "trains running on time" and re-instating conservative policies according to biases trained into them by religious and cultural sources.

These are, in fact, the majority of Nazis, like the soil in which the roots of the toxic plant of fascist government grows.

The fact is, of you don't want Nazis in your country, you will not be the fertile soil for this.

If you hate Nazis, really, if you want to be remembered not as an individual but as part of a *sort* of individual, as an instance of something we can count on next time, then today you will show that you can reject the comforts and the utilities of the trains running on time because you are one of those who will ultimately blow up the tracks before they can carry trains of people. Name those Nazis as what they are, and speak the words into history necessary to make the next instance of you who reads the words in the next cycle and understand before things get so out of hand as you let them get here.

MAGA are Nazis.

Those who pretend "MAGA" isn't "Nazis" are cheeky Nazis.

Your entire post boils down to "conservatives are nazis, we should make sure that there are no conservatives"

You strenuously object whenever someone boils down your posts to their view of its essence. In this case, the fuel for your boiling is the erroneous conflation of conservative with MAGA. There are plenty of conservatives who did not and do not support Trump.

I know it's difficult to parse, but perhaps you might try reading all of Jarhyn's post?

I did. Your boiled essence is pure balderdash. There is no mention of conservatives. Maybe you should take your own advice. I repeat - there are plenty of conservatives who are not MAGA.

There are plenty. Clearly they're not motivated enough to take over their party though.

 

[southernhybrid]

The thing that girls and women need to learn is how to stand up to bullies.

Yeah, all those women who are sexually assaulted and raped every year, they just need to learn how to stand up to their attackers. It's their own fault for not being strong enough.

I never said it was their fault. I said that all of us women need to learn how to stand up to bullies because in the majority of cases it weakens the bully and stop his aggression. Look at Trump for example. All of those who have stood up to him are doing better compared to those who gave in to his demands. Once you give in to a bully, they want more and more and more. I wan't only talking about sexual assault. I was talking about all kinds of bullying. My late father never tried to sexually assault his daughters, but he was a bully and I'm the one who stood up to him and told him off. It worked. It worked when I shamed the man who threatened to rape me. It worked when I've told nasty doctors off etc. It might not always work, but it's the best defense we women have, so we can at least learn or train ourselves to do that. We can also take self defense courses. I've never done that but one is offered at our senior center. There are many things women can to do to help us stay safe.

I recall when one of my female high school teachers told us that the one thing a bad man is afraid of is a bad woman. She told us how she had scared off a man who had threatened to assault her. I don't remember all of the details as I was in high school in the mid 60s, but what she told us had a lot of truth in it.

No offense Emily, but you often have a way of misinterpreting what another posters writes. Of course, it's never the woman's fault if someone attacks her. I'm just encouraging us all to learn how to ward off the bullies, as it usually works. I'll leave it at that.

 

[Elixir]

all those women who are sexually assaulted and raped every year, they just need to learn how to stand up to their attackers.

Wouldn't hurt* if they did.
*Except possibly the attacker.
If Trump had been kicked in the balls then kneed in the teeth by one of his victims early on, it might well have been his last victim.
Males who physically attack females are typically cowards.

But yeah - it's very true that guys shouldn't attack women. So lets try to change the eons of habitual behavior by males that is born of sexual dimorphism. Good luck with that. It's the same conditioning that keeps most women from kicking attackers in the balls and kneeing them in the teeth.

 

[Elixir]

You fucking tell me what I think all the goddamned time.

Utter bullshit. QUOTE ME!
You cannot quote me saying "you think (x)" or "you believe (x)" and yet you keep making that dishonest assertion.
Conflating being told what the consequences of your expressed position is, with being told what you think, is either dishonest or stupid or both.
Get that through your skull, and you might yet become an honest broker in discussion.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

This was published in a paper in England but either forwarded from or about New York:
Birmingham Evening Mail. Tue, May 05, 1981 ·Page 10.

A new scandal rocked women's tennis today when it was revealed that teenage star Tracy Austin was under round-the-clock protection to guard her from lesbians.

A woman bodyguard accompanied the 18-year-old star in the locker rooms and onto court to protect her from sexual advances.
...
...

Tracy's mother Jenne recruited the hefty bodyguard after her young daughter told her stories of how teenage stars were recruited to lesbianism.

...
...
...Tracy had been approached by lesbian members of the women's circuit.

...

Other papers are quoted as saying she had the bodyguard to protect her from advances from lesbians in locker rooms. Presumably these alleged advances constitute today what we would call harassment and since she was a minor, some kind of legal infraction.

Allegations of lesbian harassment and recruiting to brainwashing in locker rooms were actually a big deal in the 80s cultural zeitgeist. So were allegations of gay harassment. People actually tried to use some of those allegations as self-defense arguments when they murdered a gay person.

It's kind of interesting (and relevant) how people's ideas about safety change over time as it pertains to groups.

 

[WAB]

The thing that girls and women need to learn is how to stand up to bullies.

Yeah, all those women who are sexually assaulted and raped every year, they just need to learn how to stand up to their attackers. It's their own fault for not being strong enough.

I never said it was their fault. I said that all of us women need to learn how to stand up to bullies because in the majority of cases it weakens the bully and stop his aggression. Look at Trump for example. All of those who have stood up to him are doing better compared to those who gave in to his demands. Once you give in to a bully, they want more and more and more. I wan't only talking about sexual assault. I was talking about all kinds of bullying. My late father never tried to sexually assault his daughters, but he was a bully and I'm the one who stood up to him and told him off. It worked. It worked when I shamed the man who threatened to rape me. It worked when I've told nasty doctors off etc. It might not always work, but it's the best defense we women have, so we can at least learn or train ourselves to do that. We can also take self defense courses. I've never done that but one is offered at our senior center. There are many things women can to do to help us stay safe.

I recall when one of my female high school teachers told us that the one thing a bad man is afraid of is a bad woman. She told us how she had scared off a man who had threatened to assault her. I don't remember all of the details as I was in high school in the mid 60s, but what she told us had a lot of truth in it.

No offense Emily, but you often have a way of misinterpreting what another posters writes. Of course, it's never the woman's fault if someone attacks her. I'm just encouraging us all to learn how to ward off the bullies, as it usually works. I'll leave it at that.

Not everyone is strong or brave. There are plenty of people who will not want to further antagonize their bully or attacker for fear that any kind of aggressive resistance will serve to incur greater harm. I extend my sympathies especially to a victim of sexual assault and/or rape, and even more especially to women, who are typically not as physically strong as a man. I can easily understand them not resisting to any great extent, for fear of severe injury, or death.

I can see why, ideally speaking, it's good advice to suggest that people should stand up to bullies, but realistically, it could also get someone killed.

I am NOT saying that people being abused, assaulted, or raped should just shut up, do nothing, and take it meekly. Just saying people are different in how they react under stress in extreme situations.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Are you blind to how he's totally stomping all over the Constitution?

And note that your approach to avoiding war is appeasement. History will tell you how bad a solution this is.

I see him stomping on the constitution, just like Biden, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Reagan. Before that I was too young to follow politics but the history books say others before them did the same.

No one thinks of themself as evil. It takes someone else to hold up the mirror.
Perhaps 'fascist' is the wrong word.
How about: Power Hungry Authoriatarian Anti-democracy Tyrant wanta-be. And the people who support that shit (MAGA).
'Fascist' is just shorthand. Common usage. It didn't have the evil conatation when it was coined. But it absolutly does now.

True, nobody thinks themselves the villains in their own stories. Fascist isn't the only shorthand. Communist, Theocrat, Socialist, Nazi, and Fascist are all suitable shortcuts.

I read that during the time of U.S. Slavery, slaves from different plantations would actually fight each other over who had the wealthier master who who's master had the fancier mansion.

“Fighting” cannot succeed if it means violence as a means of directly forcing an end, but it can motivate people.
We are in this fix right now largely because violence on 1/6 was so successfully sold as a rallying cry.

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

I'm still amused that people call it "violent", usually the same people who call "summer of love" in 2000 "mostly peaceful" while standing in front of burning buildings.

 

[Spacetime Inhabitant]

Are you blind to how he's totally stomping all over the Constitution?

And note that your approach to avoiding war is appeasement. History will tell you how bad a solution this is.

I see him stomping on the constitution, just like Biden, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Reagan. Before that I was too young to follow politics but the history books say others before them did the same.

No one thinks of themself as evil. It takes someone else to hold up the mirror.
Perhaps 'fascist' is the wrong word.
How about: Power Hungry Authoriatarian Anti-democracy Tyrant wanta-be. And the people who support that shit (MAGA).
'Fascist' is just shorthand. Common usage. It didn't have the evil conatation when it was coined. But it absolutly does now.

True, nobody thinks themselves the villains in their own stories. Fascist isn't the only shorthand. Communist, Theocrat, Socialist, Nazi, and Fascist are all suitable shortcuts.

I read that during the time of U.S. Slavery, slaves from different plantations would actually fight each other over who had the wealthier master who who's master had the fancier mansion.

“Fighting” cannot succeed if it means violence as a means of directly forcing an end, but it can motivate people.
We are in this fix right now largely because violence on 1/6 was so successfully sold as a rallying cry.

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

I'm still amused that people call it "violent", usually the same people who call "summer of love" in 2000 "mostly peaceful" while standing in front of burning buildings.

FROM THE BBC:
More than two dozen FBI informants were in Washington DC ahead of the riot at the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, but no full-time undercover agents were present or took part in the riot itself, according to a new justice department report.
The report said none of the agency's informants were authorised to enter the Capitol or join the riot, but four did enter the building.
The report also found that the FBI failed in the "basic step" of adequately using its field offices across the US to gather intelligence that could have predicted the riot.
Some on the right, including House Republicans, have for years promoted a fringe conspiracy theory that the FBI helped to orchestrate the riot

How can you claim it wasn't violent when one of your own people died trying to enter the building? We can all actually see on film many violent confrontations, and weapon wielding "protesters".

 

[laughing dog]

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

Source?

 

[GenesisNemesis]

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

Source?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

Source?

 

[ZiprHead]

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

Source?

 

[ZiprHead]

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

Source?

 

[Elixir]

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

Source?

https://i.redd.it/gwx9tgyfynr61.gif