This week in patriarchy: Ukraine expels women and children so men can have combat to themselves

[TomC]

Yes I am. But I’m not an absolutist. There are very few scenarios that I can come up with that justify a draft.

This is the problem with having nuanced thoughts.
People who see things, at least on a particular issue, as black and white assume that if you're not in absolute agreement with them you must agree with those evil people who don't agree.
Tom

 

[Toni]

Yes I am. But I’m not an absolutist. There are very few scenarios that I can come up with that justify a draft.

This is the problem with having nuanced thoughts.
People who see things, at least on a particular issue, as black and white assume that if you're not in absolute agreement with them you must agree with those evil people who don't agree.
Tom

The older one becomes, the more shades of gray one can discern. I wish I were a good enough person to 100% embrace non-violence as the only solution. I do, in theory. But I also know that sometimes, evil must be stopped before all is destroyed.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yes I am. But I’m not an absolutist. There are very few scenarios that I can come up with that justify a draft.

This is the problem with having nuanced thoughts.

The other problem is that some people mistake that fences should be built between all positions.

 

[laughing dog]

Anyway, my overall take with this thread is that the most important principle of several posters is to hate on Met whenever they have an opportunity.

I am disappointed in your overall take - you are usually much better than that.

 

[TomC]

Yes I am. But I’m not an absolutist. There are very few scenarios that I can come up with that justify a draft.

This is the problem with having nuanced thoughts.

The other problem is that some people mistake that fences should be built between all positions.

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

Could you be more clear? Give an example?
Tom

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Anyway, my overall take with this thread is that the most important principle of several posters is to hate on Met whenever they have an opportunity.

Or Metaphor isn't particular good at satire or establishing an argument. The OP is their typical anti-trans screed. Then they try to reclaim the bad OP with trying to make this a discussion on the draft. Had they started with that, there could have been a discussion. Of course, mocking Ukraine for 'all available men' in some sort of partisan "gotcha" in the context of Ukraine being blindsided with an invasion from a dominant enemy is petty.

 

[Elixir]

Anyway, my overall take with this thread is that the most important principle of several posters is to hate on Met whenever they have an opportunity.

At least he has you to cover his six. A terrible task, but someone has to do it.
Most of the rest of us have to fend for ourselves.

 

[TomC]

Anyway, my overall take with this thread is that the most important principle of several posters is to hate on Met whenever they have an opportunity.

At least he has you to cover his six. A terrible task, but someone has to do it.

I had no idea what "cover my six" meant. I googled.
But no.

Most of the rest of us have to fend for ourselves.

Nope. You do not have to fend for yourselves, on this forum, by any stretch of the imagination.
Tom

 

[Elixir]

Anyway, my overall take with this thread is that the most important principle of several posters is to hate on Met whenever they have an opportunity.

At least he has you to cover his six. A terrible task, but someone has to do it.

I had no idea what "cover my six" meant. I googled.
But no.

Most of the rest of us have to fend for ourselves.

Nope. You do not have to fend for yourselves, on this forum, by any stretch of the imagination.
Tom

WHERE’S MY EMILY?

Also - Is your google broken?

 

[Emily Lake]

Anyway, my overall take with this thread is that the most important principle of several posters is to hate on Met whenever they have an opportunity.

I am disappointed in your overall take - you are usually much better than that.

There are many things I disagree with Met about, and there are plenty of times where that disagreement has gotten passionate. But I really often see responses to his posts that are just really odd. Like the first response in this thread, basically pretending like obvious sarcasm isn't obvious.

There are plenty of elements in Met's position that people could disagree with, and argue with, and discuss. But a big chunk of this thread isn't doing that, it's just attacking him. It seems rather obvious that there's more of an issue with the poster than with the concept posted.

 

[Emily Lake]

Anyway, my overall take with this thread is that the most important principle of several posters is to hate on Met whenever they have an opportunity.

At least he has you to cover his six. A terrible task, but someone has to do it.

I had no idea what "cover my six" meant. I googled.
But no.

Most of the rest of us have to fend for ourselves.

Nope. You do not have to fend for yourselves, on this forum, by any stretch of the imagination.
Tom

WHERE’S MY EMILY?

Elixir, when you find yourself facing a pile-on that you think is unjustified and motivated by personal animus rather than reason, ping me, and I'll come galloping in on my white horse.

 

[laughing dog]

Anyway, my overall take with this thread is that the most important principle of several posters is to hate on Met whenever they have an opportunity.

I am disappointed in your overall take - you are usually much better than that.

There are many things I disagree with Met about, and there are plenty of times where that disagreement has gotten passionate. But I really often see responses to his posts that are just really odd. Like the first response in this thread, basically pretending like obvious sarcasm isn't obvious.

What "obvious" sarcasm? Metaphor has a long posting history of exaggeration, blatant inaccuracies and false claims. When any of his "satires" or "facts" are "misinterpreted", he starts throwing idiotic/insulting straw men or ad homs.

This thread starts with false statements (a swipe at feminimisn with the patriarchy nonsense) and a swipe at a trans person (an irrelevant one at that) - all in the name of "satire". When you fling shite, it shouldn't be a surprise that the golden nugget of actual content is not noticed.

 

[Toni]

There are times when I truly am uncertain when Metaphor is using sarcasm or irony or satire. In return, he very often fails to discern other poster’s use of these. Sometimes he becomes very angry over perceived slights where no slight was intended. Perhaps we all do.

I blame the limits of the internet for the most part.

 

[Metaphor]

You are wrong. It does not require any suppositions or imputations about the abilities of your audience.

No, it requires a supposition about the quality of my satire. And laughing dog, as you are somebody who does not know the meaning of many commonly used words, nor seems capable of appreciating satire, I would not come to you for evaluation of my writing.

Nope. I debunked the Op claim. The link in 114 refers to conscription in the breakaway republic, not Ukraine.

You debunked nothing. Ukraine is preventing men 18-60 from leaving its borders. This has been confirmed by multiple stories.

Ukraine is Ukraine. But even if I accepted the existence of these breakaway countries as legitimate States, that would detract nothing from my argument that the State is appropriating male bodies and it would not make me oppose the draft any less.

Would you agree that if Russia takes over Ukraine, there will be zero rights for anyone in Ukriane?

I don't know what you mean by 'zero rights'. Some of the worst places in the world to live--Afghanistan, say--there are still more than zero rights. But I agree that life will be significantly worse for Ukrainians, yes.

You understand right when dictatorships like Russia claim that there are no gays or trans in their beloved country? You know what's going on there right?

Right...so? What does this have to do with the draft? That it is okay to coerce labour and killing from men who don't want to do it?

 

[Metaphor]

@Metaphor is the OP.
Managing to combine trans issues, draft issues, gender issues, and the disaster in Ukraine.
All in one post.

If you like being the object of ire, it's a masterpiece.
Tom

Actually, it's the article I link to in the OP that managed to combine those issues, except they combined it in a way that glossed over the draft and the situation of millions of men, even though of course it still had to be mentioned in passing in order for the article to be coherent.

Quite why my OP should make me the 'object of ire' nobody has managed to convince me.

 

[Metaphor]

Ah , more inept pedantry.

You debunked nothing. Ukraine is preventing men 18-60 from leaving its borders. This has been confirmed by multiple stories.

Irrelevant to the issue of conscription.

Ukraine is Ukraine. But even if I accepted the existence of these breakaway countries as legitimate States, that would detract nothing from my argument that the State is appropriating male bodies and it would not make me oppose the draft any less.

It is either incredibly disingenuous or fucking stupid to equate the legitimate government of Ukraine with the breakaway “republics” in order to avoid admitting a mistake about your claim about conscription for all men 18 to 60.

Your quoting is getting sloppier but you are wrong. Ukraine detaining men 18-60 is not irrelevant to the issue of conscription. They are detaining people that they may or intend to conscript. But even if they weren't doing that, it would still be wrong to detain them.

You are wrong that I equated the breakaway republics with Ukraine. They are part of the Ukraine, they are not the Ukraine. However, it was Ukraine that detained men and it is within Ukraine that men are being drafted to defend Ukraine.

 

[Metaphor]

What "obvious" sarcasm?

The thread title:

This week in patriarchy: Ukraine expels women and children so men can have combat to themselves​

The third sentence

I understand that this is in order to benefit men, who wanted a break from the women and children and were excited about cosplaying army to a really realistic level.

If you need help understanding why these are satirical statements, I am willing to explain it to you in agonising detail.

If you have trouble understanding the other sentences in the OP or you believe they contain falsehoods, please explain which ones.

 

[Metaphor]

There are times when I truly am uncertain when Metaphor is using sarcasm or irony or satire.

And tell me, when you read the title of the thread, did you believe I meant that as a literal claim?

When you read the third sentence of the OP, did you think I meant that as a literal claim?

 

[Metaphor]

Anyway, my overall take with this thread is that the most important principle of several posters is to hate on Met whenever they have an opportunity.

At least he has you to cover his six. A terrible task, but someone has to do it.
Most of the rest of us have to fend for ourselves.

That Emily - who almost certainly does not agree with my takes on feminism among other things, or possible even the views in the OP - can see the obvious satirical framing of my OP does not mean she is 'covering my six', though it is indeed a relief to see that there are people outside my hater nation with a more objective viewpoint.

Your last statement is surely beyond satire. You, Elixir, have views that are lockstep in line with the leftist dominance of the Political Discussions subforum. You do not routinely have pile-ons for expressing unpopular views, because by the standards of the forum, your views are popular.

"Fend for ourselves"! What do you think I've been doing on this thread?

 

[Metaphor]

Anyway, my overall take with this thread is that the most important principle of several posters is to hate on Met whenever they have an opportunity.

Or Metaphor isn't particular good at satire or establishing an argument. The OP is their typical anti-trans screed. Then they try to reclaim the bad OP with trying to make this a discussion on the draft.

The OP is a commentary on multiple things, including media bias, the appropriation of men's bodies for war, and trans issues.

It seems though that even though the Ukraine is detaining men so that their bodies can be used for war, it isn't being discussed, because apparently the leftists on the board are a-okay with it.

Had they started with that, there could have been a discussion. Of course, mocking Ukraine for 'all available men' in some sort of partisan "gotcha" in the context of Ukraine being blindsided with an invasion from a dominant enemy is petty.

Partisan 'gotcha'?

What the fuck are you talking about?