Never forget what feminism is really about

[LJ_Reloaded]

It really isn't.

If anyone agrees with LJ's assertion above, please feel free to pipe in with support for him.

ROTFLMAO, truth does not rely on consensus. Just like you two thinking that white felons are really not chosen over black non-felons even though studies show that this happens.

This isn't a popularity contest. You suck at reading, you suck at research, you suck at arguing, you just suck in general. But it makes sense that you seek refuge in crowd support and the support of self-haters like Buttboy.

I don't need armies to back me up. Against all of you it's been an even fight so far.

 

[KimGordon67]

Both you and KKKimGordon67 really need to shut your idiot mouths up

So now there's evidence to support the actual claim you were making - why didn't you just provide that initially? It is a tiny bit more complicated than you're suggesting, and not universal, but yeah, there is some statistical evidence to support a claim that white people with a criminal record are maybe 3% more likely to get a callback than blacks without a criminal record.

 

[KimGordon67]

ROTFLMAO, truth does not rely on consensus. Just like you two thinking that white felons are really not chosen over black non-felons even though studies show that this happens.

This isn't a popularity contest. You suck at reading, you suck at research, you suck at arguing, you just suck in general. But it makes sense that you seek refuge in crowd support and the support of self-haters like Buttboy.

I don't need armies to back me up. Against all of you it's been an even fight so far.

I"m not suggesting it's a popularity contest (and I certainly wouldn't look to BotBoy for support - that's just laughable). I'm just saying your comprehension is a little lacking. As would be evidenced by the fact that other people reading the same thing would be more likely to agree with my interpretation of the words than yours. You might live in a little universe of one where words mean just whatever you feel like they mean, but for most us, the value of language is in a shared meaning.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

not

So now there's evidence to support the actual claim you were making - why didn't you just provide that initially? It is a tiny bit more complicated than you're suggesting, and not universal, but yeah, there is some statistical evidence to support a claim that white people with a criminal record are maybe 3% more likely to get a callback than blacks without a criminal record.

Because I really didn't need to, that's why. If you were half the SJW you claim to be, you would have known this.

But it was clear months ago that I have done infinitely more research into social justice statistics than you ever will.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Both you and KKKimGordon67 really need to shut your idiot mouths up

Nothing in there supports your assertion that every employer is so racist they would hire a white felon over and equally qualified black non-felon.

In fact my old man employes a black engineer....won't and can't hire any felons. Like a number of other companies out there who have hired black people but not felons of any color.

So you're wrong.

I'm using the term 'lying' a bit ironically here ... 'lying' according to his rather random definition of the term.

But yeah, between the KKK and man hating feminists armed with bazookas, you can see why he stays in his mum's basement.

His imaginary world has him to terrified to venture outside of it.

It's not a lie - perhaps if you were half the SJW you claim to be then you'd know that.

Why would anyone want to claim being a social justice bigot?

All that means is you hate white people and want free shit because work sux!

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

I"m not suggesting it's a popularity contest (and I certainly wouldn't look to BotBoy for support - that's just laughable). I'm just saying your comprehension is a little lacking. As would be evidenced by the fact that other people reading the same thing would be more likely to agree with my interpretation of the words than yours. You might live in a little universe of one where words mean just whatever you feel like they mean, but for most us, the value of language is in a shared meaning.

They would be likely to agree with you just to get a dig in at me. But in no case is calling out to a crowd for support the same thing as making a solid logical point - which you have failed to do here.

When you answer "well... yeah" when you are told about the mountainous barriers men's groups face to building shelters, you are in fact saying those barriers do not matter. No amount of crowd support is going to change that. No amount of crowd support is going to erase the advantage that women have when it comes to asking for support.

You utterly trivialized the barriers that men's groups face in building shelters for men. Own it.

http://aliciapatterson.org/stories/abandoning-men-jill-gets-welfare–jack-becomes-homeless

To put it simply: men are neither supposed nor allowed to be dependent. They are expected to take care of others and themselves. And when they cannot or will not do it, then the assumption at the heart of the culture is that they are somehow less than men and therefore unworthy of help. An irony asserts itself: by being in need of help, men forfeit the right to it.

This article is about homelessness but it also applies to battered men.

And the shit of it is that it's not just PATRIARCHY that causes this - feminists, through the specific trivialization of women's violence against men, are equally responsible for why men forfeit the right to help as soon as they become in need of it.

And you keep it going with your "Well... yeah" nonsense.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Nothing in there supports your assertion that every employer is so racist they would hire a white felon over and equally qualified black non-felon.

Except I never said every employer. So your mad rush to defend the white man wasn't even necessary at all.

You're quite good at sucking white dick. If only you could get paid for it!

 

[BotanyBoy]

Except I never said every employer.

Yes you did when you made the claim about employers at large, encompassing everything.

I laid that out for you and you didn't deny it, you told me to shut the fuck up verifying your claim that employers (that means all of them) are as racist as you claim.

When in reality there is evidence for apparently about 3% of employers being closeted bigots.....far cry from "employers" as a whole which is what you tossed out there.

You were either stupid or dishonest and you've been caught blatantly, hand in the cookie jar, on record.

So your mad rush to defend the white man wasn't even necessary at all.

I didn't defend the white man ...learn to read.

You're quite good at sucking white dick. If only you could get paid for it!

Just because I figured out how to take a whole lot more money from the white man than you have despite having been here living with white people bullshit for a fraction of the time doesn't mean I'm suckin' his dick.

Get your hustle up son.......
https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/adventuretimewithfinnandjake/images/5/5f/Funny-gif-Asian-kid-swag-sunglasses.gif/revision/latest?cb=20130211211957

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Yes you did when you made the claim about employers at large, encompassing everything.

ROTFLMAO that Betsy Devos education at work.

At large is not the same as all. Man, that's basic shit dude.

Just because I figured out how to take a whole lot more money from the white man than you have despite having been here living with white people bullshit for a fraction of the time doesn't mean I'm suckin' his dick.

Translation: you suck white dick long time. 37 dicks per hour, man. They call you the Asian Hoover.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Here comes the LJ shutdown......you can tell because he's talking about me sucking cock because he can't actually think of anything to back up his bullshit.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Here comes the LJ shutdown......you can tell because he's talking about me sucking cock because he can't actually think of anything to back up his bullshit.

...says the white man's whore who's too drooling-mouthed retarded to tell the difference between "at large" and "all". Or to ask for payment after swallowing the gravy.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I'm surprised at your stamina LJ.

You're still really bad with English though.

 

[BotanyBoy]

ROTFLMAO that Betsy Devos education at work.

At large is not the same as all. Man, that's basic shit dude.

Yes it is......you're wrong again.

...says the white man's whore who's too drooling-mouthed retarded to tell the difference between "at large" and "all". Or to ask for payment after swallowing the gravy.

There is no difference .....

at large
1. Roaming freely, as of a criminal who has not been caught. The robbery suspect is still at large and is considered very dangerous.
2. As a whole; in general. That change in curriculum has not been accepted by the teachers at large.
3. Representative of the whole, rather than smaller groups, as of certain elected offices. Who has been elected to act for the community at large?

https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/at+large


You're a fine testament to the value of public education LJ.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Yes it is......you're wrong again.



There is no difference .....



https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/at+large


You're a fine testament to the value of public education LJ.

You suck at reading comprehension.

That did not say "at large" is the same as "all" aka EVERY employer.

Literally, "That change in curriculum has not been accepted by the teachers at large." does not mean ALL or a unanimous opposition. It means it has not been accepted by a majority of teachers.

Really, you need to ask for payment, all that dried spunk on your face is almost as embarrassing as your argument skills.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

I'm surprised at your stamina LJ.

You're still really bad with English though.

...says the white man's whore who's too drooling-mouthed retarded to tell the difference between "at large" and "all". Or to ask for payment after swallowing the gravy.

Says the dude who wants America to be one giant safe space for white people and compliant Asian dudes like yourself.

 

[KimGordon67]

Because I really didn't need to, that's why. If you were half the SJW you claim to be, you would have known this.

But it was clear months ago that I have done infinitely more research into social justice statistics than you ever will.

'Social justice statistics' is a pretty broad term, especially when applied to a global context. Do you really think that because I wasn't aware of this particular research, I'm not familiar with a broad range of stats and research relating to social issues in my home country, with also a passing familiarity with a reasonable number of situations in the US. I'm pretty confident you couldn't say the reverse.

Also, to the best of my recollection I've never actually claimed to be a 'SJW' - are you lying again LJ?

 

[BotanyBoy]

You suck at reading comprehension.

That did not say "at large" is the same as "all" aka EVERY employer.

As or representative as a whole.....that means all.

You got called out for being wrong as fuck, the more you act like a child and try to pretend it never happened, the more childish you continue to look....as if that's even possible.

...says the white man's whore who's too drooling-mouthed retarded to tell the difference between "at large" and "all". Or to ask for payment after swallowing the gravy.

Only if you ignore 2 out of 3 definitions in the dictionary to keep from admitting you fucked up.

Says the dude who wants America to be one giant safe space for white people and compliant Asian dudes like yourself.

Last I checked it was the big government loving lefties like yourself who wanted the safe spaces.

Not the liberty oriented right wingers like liberals and libertarians.

 

[richard_daily]

LT, forever afraid of women.

Sad.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

I* grouped things up a bit.




So what LJ Reloaded said makes a lot of sense to me:
Men Are unfairly disadvantaged when it comes to funding, due to skewed perceptions. And the radical branch of Feminism (not the moderate Feminists, mind you) also contributed to this.
*I'm unclear about this, tho.
Yes, Radical Feminists contribute to the skewed perception through their misandric rhetoric.
But do they physically oppose funding too? (See the last underlined paragraph)



Kim agreed with* LJ Reloaded on most points but for two:
She feels that Feminists didn't sabotage (deliberately +/- unintentionally) men's rights.
She also feels that it's the sole responsibility of Men's Groups to procure funding.




LJ Reloaded, on the other hand feels that Feminists should take more responsibility regarding their own role in the difficulties that Men's Groups have regarding funding shelters.

Pretty much this. Men's groups are pushing hard for men's shelters, we're not just whining about it on the Internet. But feminists are at least partially responsible for the barriers that we face in getting this done.

So which is it? (Or who are more at fault?)

Are Men's Organizations too passive in helping their own?
Do they just bitch and moan about women, Similarly to what radical Feminists do? Should they be more proactive in advocating for men i stead?

Or are Radical Feminists responsible for the disparity in funding?
Should Moderate Feminists be more active in distancing themselves from them?

Men's groups don't just bitch and moan, and neither do radical feminists. Both sides are quite politically active, and to be honest in many cases men's groups have been successful.

Achieving equal empathy for battered men is one of the persistent tough barriers that remain resistant to our efforts, though.

'Social justice statistics' is a pretty broad term, especially when applied to a global context. Do you really think that because I wasn't aware of this particular research, I'm not familiar with a broad range of stats and research relating to social issues in my home country, with also a passing familiarity with a reasonable number of situations in the US. I'm pretty confident you couldn't say the reverse.

Also, to the best of my recollection I've never actually claimed to be a 'SJW' - are you lying again LJ?

You don't have to claim to be a SJW. SJW is as SJW does.

As or representative as a whole.....that means all.

Your reading skills still suck, kid. At large will never mean all no matter how much you try to twist it. Your call-out failed.

Last I checked it was the big government loving lefties like yourself who wanted the safe spaces.

Not the liberty oriented right wingers like liberals and libertarians.

Right wingers want a country free of non-Christians, brown people, gays and "promiscuous" women and women with minds of their own. That's as safe-spacey as they come, dumbass.

I make up lie after lie after malicious, unfounded about LT because I fear and wish to shame and silence all men who speak out against women who inflict domestic violence on men.

I've rescued over a million women on the Internet and have never been laid once!

 

[KimGordon67]

Pretty much this. Men's groups are pushing hard for men's shelters, we're not just whining about it on the Internet. But feminists are at least partially responsible for the barriers that we face in getting this done.


Men's groups don't just bitch and moan, and neither do radical feminists. Both sides are quite politically active, and to be honest in many cases men's groups have been successful.

Achieving equal empathy for battered men is one of the persistent tough barriers that remain resistant to our efforts, though.


You don't have to claim to be a SJW. SJW is as SJW does.


Your reading skills still suck, kid. At large will never mean all no matter how much you try to twist it. Your call-out failed.


Right wingers want a country free of non-Christians, brown people, gays and "promiscuous" women and women with minds of their own. That's as safe-spacey as they come, dumbass.

You said, and I quote, "If you were half the SJW you claim to be, you would have known this." (emphasis added). Lying AGAIN LJ? Gosh, that's quite a few times now.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

You said, and I quote, "If you were half the SJW you claim to be, you would have known this." (emphasis added). Lying AGAIN LJ? Gosh, that's quite a few times now.

You claim to be a feminist. By definition that's a SJW.

You have a big habit of throwing around "lying" without understanding what that word actually means.

 

[KimGordon67]

You claim to be a feminist. By definition that's a SJW.

You have a big habit of throwing around "lying" without understanding what that word actually means.

No, 'feminist' means 'feminist'. It's about one very specific social justice issue, not all of them. (Before you leap in and proclaim me as not caring about other social justice issues - I do. But as a feminist, I'm not obligated to be utterly familiar with and actively crusading for every single one of them. In fact, I'm not even obligated to be utterly familiar with and actively crusading for every single feminist issue.)

Just in case you need refamiliarising with why I'm saying this - in Post #284, you said that because I 'claim' to be a 'SJW' - because apparently saying I'm a feminist is exactly the same as claiming to be a SJW - I ought thus be familiar with the entirety of the literature on ethnicity-based employment discrimination. Which is clearly just silly.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

No, 'feminist' means 'feminist'. It's about one very specific social justice issue, not all of them. (Before you leap in and proclaim me as not caring about other social justice issues - I do. But as a feminist, I'm not obligated to be utterly familiar with and actively crusading for every single one of them. In fact, I'm not even obligated to be utterly familiar with and actively crusading for every single feminist issue.)

Just in case you need refamiliarising with why I'm saying this - in Post #284, you said that because I 'claim' to be a 'SJW' - because apparently saying I'm a feminist is exactly the same as claiming to be a SJW - I ought thus be familiar with the entirety of the literature on ethnicity-based employment discrimination. Which is clearly just silly.

SJW and feminist are the same thing. Why does that offend you so much? Are you not proud to be a SJW?

 

[KimGordon67]

SJW and feminist are the same thing. Why does that offend you so much? Are you not proud to be a SJW?

Christ, this is a real struggle for you, isn't it. Yes, feminism is a form of seeking social justice. However, based on that you then attributed the term 'SJW' to me - actually, you said I claimed it for myself, which is fundamentally untrue. 'SJW' has quite a specific contemporary meaning that isn't just about 'fighting for social justice', and you are quite clearly aware of that.
You then moved on to state that, as I'm apparently a self-proclaimed SJW, I ought thus be familiar with the entirety of the literature on ethnicity-based employment discrimination.
It's just such a ridiculous chain of 'logic' (by which I mean it's not logical at all) that I'm utterly flummoxed you could come up with it.

Also, just out of interest's sake, does this mean that, for example, the Black Panthers were feminists?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Your call-out failed.

Only if you ignore 2 out of 3 definitions in the dictionary.

You were wrong, got all caught up in hating white people.

Right wingers want a country free of non-Christians, brown people, gays and "promiscuous" women and women with minds of their own. That's as safe-spacey as they come, dumbass.

A handful of fringe whackys do, making that statement about as true as saying anyone left of libertarian wants Soviet style communism...certifiable bullshit.

Most right wingers don't give a fuck what you do, they just don't want to have to pay for it.

Not even close the same thing.