Deranged feminists sue to gain admission to fraternities that sexually assaulted them

[laughing dog]

They can test the market of which parties are more popular.

You realize you are proposing a market test of parties with sexual assault vs parties without sexual assault. Wow.

 

[repoman]

Feminism has never been about equality. It's about women wanting superiority over men under the guise of equality.

Dennis Prager had a great point. He asked, "If sex means absolutely nothing to people these days, why do women feel violated when someone rapes them? I thought sex was meaningless?"

Prager thinks rape is sex?

That's pretty disgusting.
And i have a few rape fantasies!

Keith,

The fact that women get upset over rape shows that sex is not meaningless. Something can not be both meaningless and upsetting at the same time.

If I say, "Someone poking me in the shoulder is meaningless" and then I get angry when someone pokes me in the shoulder, I am being a hypocrite, am I not? It's either meaningless or it's upsetting. Can't be both.

There is a very broad and healthy middle ground between sex being disposable and meaningless and the American Taliban instinct that some have.

This is a good video -



the opposite video for men would be "Garden State ruined a whole generation of men" given that guys are not always going to have a Manic Pixie Dream Girl when they have delayed maturity or cynicism they are not even attempting to address themselves.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ManicPixieDreamGirl

 

[Metaphor]

They can test the market of which parties are more popular.

You realize you are proposing a market test of parties with sexual assault vs parties without sexual assault. Wow.

No I quite clearly and unambiguously proposed a no-alcohol party organised by the girls versus an alcohol-allowed party organised by the boys.

 

[Half-Life]

They can test the market of which parties are more popular.

You realize you are proposing a market test of parties with sexual assault vs parties without sexual assault. Wow.

There is a simple test for those who don't believe that "clothing can make men rape you" argument.

Just as yourself this question, "If my daughter told me she was going to a frat party tonight and she was only going to wear a bikini, would I agree that is perfectly fine for her to do?"

The answer of course is that any father will of course say, "No way!" This illustrates that clothes do have an impact on what can happen to you.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Feminism has never been about equality. It's about women wanting superiority over men under the guise of equality.

Dennis Prager had a great point. He asked, "If sex means absolutely nothing to people these days, why do women feel violated when someone rapes them? I thought sex was meaningless?"

Prager thinks rape is sex?

That's pretty disgusting.
And i have a few rape fantasies!

Keith,

The fact that women get upset over rape shows that sex is not meaningless. Something can not be both meaningless and upsetting at the same time.

If I say, "Someone poking me in the shoulder is meaningless" and then I get angry when someone pokes me in the shoulder, I am being a hypocrite, am I not? It's either meaningless or it's upsetting. Can't be both.

This ONLY proves Prager, and you, think rape is sex.

Still disgusting.
And wrong. Fractally wrong.

 

[Half-Life]

Keith,

The fact that women get upset over rape shows that sex is not meaningless. Something can not be both meaningless and upsetting at the same time.

If I say, "Someone poking me in the shoulder is meaningless" and then I get angry when someone pokes me in the shoulder, I am being a hypocrite, am I not? It's either meaningless or it's upsetting. Can't be both.

This ONLY proves Prager, and you, think rape is sex.

Still disgusting.
And wrong. Fractally wrong.

Rape is forced sex. And if sex is meaningless.......

 

[Keith&Co.]

Keith,

The fact that women get upset over rape shows that sex is not meaningless. Something can not be both meaningless and upsetting at the same time.

If I say, "Someone poking me in the shoulder is meaningless" and then I get angry when someone pokes me in the shoulder, I am being a hypocrite, am I not? It's either meaningless or it's upsetting. Can't be both.

This ONLY proves Prager, and you, think rape is sex.

Still disgusting.
And wrong. Fractally wrong.

Rape is forced sex. And if sex is meaningless.......

This is saying that armed robbery is commerce because money changes hands.
Or calling kidnapping "surprise adoption."

So, no, you've proven nothing except two people's misogyny.

 

[rousseau]

Toni! I was hoping you'd come in to defend this.



Since we live in a patriarchy, this will harm their chances. The fraternities who are forced to admit women will still keep their bro networks, but now they will be additionally resentful of women leaving cooties in the common kitchen area.



Are there any dudes who can volunteer to organise a women's network? I seem to recall seeing women's networks around the place, but I must be mistaken, as only men can organise and make contacts. Even men at small chapters at obscure universities have greater organising power and access to the network than women at sororities in Yale and Harvard that were formed in the 19th century.



No, I suggested they host their own parties.

You see, despite their protestations, I am certain Yale does not give exclusive access to resources to fraternities and not sororities.

I'm also certain women are capable of using the internet. If these women want to change the boozy hookup culture of frat parties, they should offer alternative, no-alcohol parties. They can test the market of which parties are more popular.

So this is where you get to act sanctimonious because someone you don't like did something logically inconsistent?

If you mean me, I wasn't logically inconsistent. Metaphor has a number of axes to grind.

No, I didn't mean you, I meant his OP.

In Metaphor's defense I can understand the backlash against feminism in a certain light, but I don't think the way forward comes from dehumanizing feminists. So what's the goal of this thread? Is it actually to do anything constructive, or is it a kind of show of dominance, and putting them in their place.

Presuming it's the latter, this thread says a lot more about Metaphor than it does feminists.

 

[Metaphor]

If you mean me, I wasn't logically inconsistent. Metaphor has a number of axes to grind.

No, I didn't mean you, I meant his OP.

In Metaphor's defense I can understand the backlash against feminism in a certain light, but I don't think the way forward comes from dehumanizing feminists. So what's the goal of this thread? Is it actually to do anything constructive, or is it a kind of show of dominance, and putting them in their place.

Presuming it's the latter, this thread says a lot more about Metaphor than it does feminists.

The point of this thread--and similar threads--is to highlight the various absurdities and harm that come from feminist ideologies and feminist actions.

I get the feeling either that many people simply are not aware of what feminists actually advocate and argue, in which case I think it's worth bringing it to people's attention. But if they are aware and don't care or worse--agree--then I'd like to know why they don't care or why they agree.

Andrea Dworkin was super morbidly obese, but she blamed her knee problems on "the patriarchy". That's not something I made up. It's not something I could make up. I don't have the imaginative power that feminists have that make women the victims of every conceivable event.

Feminists peddle the absurd lie of 'healthy at any size'. A feminist on my Facebook friends list chastised a UK cancer charity for publicizing the link between obesity and certain types of cancer. She said it was fat shaming (and of course, women are always the primary victims in fat shaming). Her ideology simply would not permit the facts. This was an educated woman-a university lecturer. I was at her wedding. She seemed like a normal human being once.

Feminist ideology is toxic.

 

[Toni]

If you mean me, I wasn't logically inconsistent. Metaphor has a number of axes to grind.

No, I didn't mean you, I meant his OP.

In Metaphor's defense I can understand the backlash against feminism in a certain light, but I don't think the way forward comes from dehumanizing feminists. So what's the goal of this thread? Is it actually to do anything constructive, or is it a kind of show of dominance, and putting them in their place.

Presuming it's the latter, this thread says a lot more about Metaphor than it does feminists.

The point of this thread--and similar threads--is to highlight the various absurdities and harm that come from feminist ideologies and feminist actions.

I get the feeling either that many people simply are not aware of what feminists actually advocate and argue, in which case I think it's worth bringing it to people's attention. But if they are aware and don't care or worse--agree--then I'd like to know why they don't care or why they agree.

Andrea Dworkin was super morbidly obese, but she blamed her knee problems on "the patriarchy". That's not something I made up. It's not something I could make up. I don't have the imaginative power that feminists have that make women the victims of every conceivable event.

Feminists peddle the absurd lie of 'healthy at any size'. A feminist on my Facebook friends list chastised a UK cancer charity for publicizing the link between obesity and certain types of cancer. She said it was fat shaming (and of course, women are always the primary victims in fat shaming). Her ideology simply would not permit the facts. This was an educated woman-a university lecturer. I was at her wedding. She seemed like a normal human being once.

Feminist ideology is toxic.

I am uncertain what connection you see between examples of individuals you disagree with and the OP. Is it because they are women? Should I then blame you for the sins of Rupert Murdoch, since you are both Australian? Should I equate you with Milo Yiannopoulus because you are both gay?

People sometimes have absurd opinions. People sometimes misconstrue or misrepresent other people's opinions.

None of that seems to remotely justify sexual assault of women who attend parties. Why do you think that it does?

 

[Toni]

They can test the market of which parties are more popular.

You realize you are proposing a market test of parties with sexual assault vs parties without sexual assault. Wow.

There is a simple test for those who don't believe that "clothing can make men rape you" argument.

Just as yourself this question, "If my daughter told me she was going to a frat party tonight and she was only going to wear a bikini, would I agree that is perfectly fine for her to do?"

The answer of course is that any father will of course say, "No way!" This illustrates that clothes do have an impact on what can happen to you.

I cannot imagine anyone old enough to attend a frat party asking their father's advice on wardrobe or permission to attend such a party.

I realize that this will be entirely lost on you but what a woman wears or does not wear does not affect her chances of being raped. Women are raped while dressed in nuns' habits, ffs. Or in flannel nightgowns in their own beds. Or wearing grubby baggy jeans and a dirty sweatshirt. But whatever she wears, she is not the cause of her rape. Nor is her clothing.

 

[rousseau]

If you mean me, I wasn't logically inconsistent. Metaphor has a number of axes to grind.

No, I didn't mean you, I meant his OP.

In Metaphor's defense I can understand the backlash against feminism in a certain light, but I don't think the way forward comes from dehumanizing feminists. So what's the goal of this thread? Is it actually to do anything constructive, or is it a kind of show of dominance, and putting them in their place.

Presuming it's the latter, this thread says a lot more about Metaphor than it does feminists.

The point of this thread--and similar threads--is to highlight the various absurdities and harm that come from feminist ideologies and feminist actions.

I get the feeling either that many people simply are not aware of what feminists actually advocate and argue, in which case I think it's worth bringing it to people's attention. But if they are aware and don't care or worse--agree--then I'd like to know why they don't care or why they agree.

Andrea Dworkin was super morbidly obese, but she blamed her knee problems on "the patriarchy". That's not something I made up. It's not something I could make up. I don't have the imaginative power that feminists have that make women the victims of every conceivable event.

Feminists peddle the absurd lie of 'healthy at any size'. A feminist on my Facebook friends list chastised a UK cancer charity for publicizing the link between obesity and certain types of cancer. She said it was fat shaming (and of course, women are always the primary victims in fat shaming). Her ideology simply would not permit the facts. This was an educated woman-a university lecturer. I was at her wedding. She seemed like a normal human being once.

Feminist ideology is toxic.

Ok, but can you do it without dehumanizing them, or painting them like they're a universal, static whole? Feminists are a diverse bunch

And if you're in the business of highlighting absurdities why focus on feminists in particular? Why not focus on the absurdities that are spewed by basically every ideological group on the planet? If it's because you have an axe to grind with feminists in particular, then it makes you hateful, not benevolent.

 

[laughing dog]

They can test the market of which parties are more popular.

You realize you are proposing a market test of parties with sexual assault vs parties without sexual assault. Wow.

No I quite clearly and unambiguously proposed a no-alcohol party organised by the girls versus an alcohol-allowed party organised by the boys.

Why would you derail your own thread with that obtuseness?

 

[laughing dog]

They can test the market of which parties are more popular.

You realize you are proposing a market test of parties with sexual assault vs parties without sexual assault. Wow.

There is a simple test for those who don't believe that "clothing can make men rape you" argument.

Just as yourself this question, "If my daughter told me she was going to a frat party tonight and she was only going to wear a bikini, would I agree that is perfectly fine for her to do?"

The answer of course is that any father will of course say, "No way!" This illustrates that clothes do have an impact on what can happen to you.

The answer would be no because it is a frat party.

I hope you have no children.

 

[Toni]

They can test the market of which parties are more popular.

You realize you are proposing a market test of parties with sexual assault vs parties without sexual assault. Wow.

No I quite clearly and unambiguously proposed a no-alcohol party organised by the girls versus an alcohol-allowed party organised by the boys.

So you are clearly and unambiguously proposing that women who attend parties where men attend and alcohol is served deserve to be raped?

The 1950's want their attitude back. Saudi Arabia wants theirs back as well.

 

[Bronzeage]

Feminism has never been about equality. It's about women wanting superiority over men under the guise of equality.

Dennis Prager had a great point. He asked, "If sex means absolutely nothing to people these days, why do women feel violated when someone rapes them? I thought sex was meaningless?"

This is a strange use of the adjective "great."

It's easy to pretend you've established a convincing argument when you include a falsehood in the opening statement. I know a lot of people, and I don't know anyone who thinks sex is meaningless. I doubt this Dennis Prager person does either, but maybe he does. He needs to get those who don't think things through, nodding their heads in agreement, so that when he equates sexual relations between consenting people with physical assault and threat of injury, they continue nodding and don't notice they've just agreed with a sociopath who lacks all traces of human decency and empathy.

That's one explanation. There's also the chance those who nod in agreement are also sociopaths.

 

[Metaphor]

I am uncertain what connection you see between examples of individuals you disagree with and the OP. Is it because they are women?

If an orgy of evidence were ever needed to prove my point, your response here surely suffices.

The women in the OP have been infected by feminist ideology. That's what connects them. It has nothing to do with them being women. Some of the most cringey unhinged feminists I have ever encountered were men. It has everything to do with them being steeped in feminist ideology.

None of that seems to remotely justify sexual assault of women who attend parties. Why do you think that it does?

Feminism has wrecked your brain Toni.

Nowhere did I justify the sexual assault of people at parties. Nowhere. Only a feminist, or somebody whose brain had been wrecked by feminist ideology whether they know it or not, could imagine I'd said or implied that.

 

[Metaphor]

No I quite clearly and unambiguously proposed a no-alcohol party organised by the girls versus an alcohol-allowed party organised by the boys.

So you are clearly and unambiguously proposing that women who attend parties where men attend and alcohol is served deserve to be raped?

The 1950's want their attitude back. Saudi Arabia wants theirs back as well.

Feminism has wrecked your brain Toni.

Nowhere did I justify the sexual assault of people at parties. Nowhere. Only a feminist, or somebody whose brain had been wrecked by feminist ideology whether they know it or not, could imagine I'd said or implied that.

 

[Patooka]

Feminism has never been about equality. It's about women wanting superiority over men under the guise of equality.

Dennis Prager had a great point. He asked, "If sex means absolutely nothing to people these days, why do women feel violated when someone rapes them? I thought sex was meaningless?"

This is a strange use of the adjective "great."

It's easy to pretend you've established a convincing argument when you include a falsehood in the opening statement. I know a lot of people, and I don't know anyone who thinks sex is meaningless. I doubt this Dennis Prager person does either, but maybe he does. He needs to get those who don't think things through, nodding their heads in agreement, so that when he equates sexual relations between consenting people with physical assault and threat of injury, they continue nodding and don't notice they've just agreed with a sociopath who lacks all traces of human decency and empathy.

That's one explanation. There's also the chance those who nod in agreement are also sociopaths.

There could be another reason why Dennis Prager thinks women believe that sex is meaningless. It could just be women have told him that all his life. Why Half-life agrees with Prager I can only speculate, unfortunately.

 

[Metaphor]

The point of this thread--and similar threads--is to highlight the various absurdities and harm that come from feminist ideologies and feminist actions.

I get the feeling either that many people simply are not aware of what feminists actually advocate and argue, in which case I think it's worth bringing it to people's attention. But if they are aware and don't care or worse--agree--then I'd like to know why they don't care or why they agree.

Andrea Dworkin was super morbidly obese, but she blamed her knee problems on "the patriarchy". That's not something I made up. It's not something I could make up. I don't have the imaginative power that feminists have that make women the victims of every conceivable event.

Feminists peddle the absurd lie of 'healthy at any size'. A feminist on my Facebook friends list chastised a UK cancer charity for publicizing the link between obesity and certain types of cancer. She said it was fat shaming (and of course, women are always the primary victims in fat shaming). Her ideology simply would not permit the facts. This was an educated woman-a university lecturer. I was at her wedding. She seemed like a normal human being once.

Feminist ideology is toxic.

Ok, but can you do it without dehumanizing them, or painting them like they're a universal, static whole? Feminists are a diverse bunch

And if you're in the business of highlighting absurdities why focus on feminists in particular? Why not focus on the absurdities that are spewed by basically every ideological group on the planet? If it's because you have an axe to grind with feminists in particular, then it makes you hateful, not benevolent.

Why not focus on feminists in particular? Feminists focus on one particular thing--feminism. They are not equal opportunity in the things they complain about. They focus only on what they believe affects women negatively, or only on the perceived relationship between the sexes.

If feminists have free rein to hate cis white men (hi!)--and they do have free rein--why should I, as part of the group they target with their hate, not push back?

Feminist ideology is dangerous. I've already pointed out some examples. But it's also insidious. It has government policy makers in mindless thrall to its ideas, while it masquerades as the good guy. These ideas will reduce happiness. The idea that, but for "the patriarchy", there would be no occupational segregation, and, as part of a hopeless quest for equal labour market outcomes, endless amounts of social and actual capital are flushed down the toilet to "fix" women's choices,. That is harmful and wasteful. The American Psychological Association's Guidelines for Working with Men & Boys bases "best practice" on feminist principles and values and epistemology. Social workers have recommended that homeless men should be made aware of their male privilege.

Feminist madness is unending. It might be something you could overlook if feminist ideology did not influence government policy and corporate policy. But it can't be overlooked. It must be endured. And some of us will push back.