"Could It Be Time To Deny White Men The Franchise?" and the culture war.

[parmalee]

You know, when people tell you to stop being dishonest, this is the kind of shit they're talking about:

Again would facebook and tumblr count? I'm talking about popular image, that is what the public sees in general.



Oh boy the "not all" fallacy, no I suggest that modern feminism as seen by the general public has been part of ideological trend or "ziegiest" that has been detrimental to leftism, and that this article is a perfect example of denigration of the left, by the left.

Two days ago:

Pretty sure there are large numbers of feminist that think it is a reassemble to consider disenfranchising white males,

And before that:

(modern feminism) is garbage to me, and liberals philosophies based around modern feminism is part of the reason why trump won.

So which one are you actually whining about? Your own profoundly ignorant take on "modern feminism," or the public perception of it?

And for the billionth fucking time, there are presently 1.86 billion active facebook users, so a bunch of troll posts from your creepy misogynist buds is hardly of statistical significance.

 

[Tiassa]

Distraction: Click for what u want.​

It occurs to wonder if maybe part of the problem might have something to do with the right wing so believing its own bullshit after all these years that we should probably blame this all on the gays because, you know, it would have to be their fault if Republicans forgot that "straight man" also has a definition considering nothing of whose naughty bits a comedian gets freaky with.

 

[iceaura]

What if the left wing says 2+2=3?

In an imagined alternative universe all things are possible.
Then they would have the wrong answer. That would not improve the right wing's chance of having the right answer, especially not back in this universe.

I suggest that modern feminism as seen by the general public has been part of ideological trend or "ziegiest" that has been detrimental to leftism, and that this article is a perfect example of denigration of the left, by the left.

Where's the denigration by the left? Nobody around here was coerced or manipulated into seeing that article as anything other than satirical, for instance, and none of the lefties did.

Meanwhile, "modern feminism" of this kind is not seen at all by the Republican voter except as presented by their chosen media venues, in the manner favored by those venues. The denigration of the left, seen on these venues, is not by the left.

So the Republican core voter is not getting their impression of the left from "the left", and nothing "the left" does or says is responsible for the Republican voter's deceived misperceptions.

 

[ElectricFetus]

nobody cares what your anti progressive says. your dealing in strawmen using a neocon snarl word

Again with the "if the right say it, it must be wrong" fallacy. We lost, go out and ask people why we lost.

 

[ElectricFetus]

In an imagined alternative universe all things are possible.

Your just looping.

So the Republican core voter is not getting their impression of the left from "the left", and nothing "the left" does or says is responsible for the Republican voter's deceived misperceptions.

Oh so this was a right wing outlet that published this article? Rigthwing media certainly has been amplifying what happened, and there are alot of non-republicans that read that.

 

[iceaura]

Oh so this was a right wing outlet that published this article?

Nope. So it wasn't in the experience of Republican voters in its original form, which was taken to be mildly amusing satire by everyone who read it

except:

Rigthwing media certainly has been amplifying what happened

and those versions of the event are the only acquaintanceship the Republican voter is going to have. And they will be deceptive - that's how you were manipulated into misperception, for example.

So the way one would describe the entire punking of that one editor, presumably a lefty (has anyone asked?), and apparently nobody else (at least, not on the left) is: the right denigrating the left. The rightwing media once again completely responsible for the Republican voter's deceived misperceptions.

Unless one were to blame the voters themselves, for continuing to get their view of the world from such completely unreliable, unethical, manipulative, worthless sources.

 

[ElectricFetus]

Nope. So it wasn't in the experience of Republican voters in its original form, which was taken to be mildly amusing satire by everyone who read it

and those versions of the event are the only acquaintanceship the Republican voter is going to have. And they will be deceptive - that's how you were manipulated into misperception, for example.

Mispreception? the editor agreed with it. Your the only people using the satire excuse, again if I say we need to do something 'bout jewish domination, do you think it is satire? Simple solution is don't give the right wing media ammo, like don't post "satire" that makes the left look like hatemongers that want to strip people of fundamental rights, don't have editors double down on it, bringing down the name of leftist ideologies like feminism in the process and then have to be fired for violation of press code.

So the way one would describe the entire punking of that one editor, presumably a lefty (has anyone asked?)

Yes you can read the links I posted.

Unless one were to blame the voters themselves, for continuing to get their view of the world from such completely unreliable, unethical, manipulative, worthless sources.

So are you saying this didn't happen?

 

[wellwisher]

The Democrat party get way more donations, from trial lawyers, than do Republicans. The reason for this is the philosophy of the left, creates more jobs for lawyers. Their philosophy appears to molded by trial lawyers. The Democrats pit groups against each other, such as in this topic, which is compensation by whites for black. This scam tends to blame all whites for the suffering of all blacks, even if you did not do anything and/or nothing was done to you. It is all based on purely racist standards, where skin color is the bottom line of the argument. It has nothing to do with personal liability. This is not rational or fair, which results in a backlash from the reasonable people, who then voted for Trump to make it stop.

I never owned slaves, nor did any in my family tree own any slaves. My grandparents were immigrants, who were poor people, a notch above slaves themselves, seeking a better life in the USA. In a rational world, I would be exempt from slavery charges since there is no cause and affect. But to the racist leftist, because I am white, that alone makes me guilty, with facts not important. This is a scam, by racists, for racist lawyers. The left lives in an irrational bizarre world, that people on the right wish no part of. The swamp needs to drained of these scamming left wing racists who divide the country based on blame, liability and benefit all dependent on race and not facts.

The worse racists and slave owners were all Democrats. This is based on historical fact. The Republican party formed to end slavery. The Democrats almost divided the USA to maintain slavery. The Democrats hide their group liability, by running this scam, which tries to make everyone pay and allows lawyers a cut. When you talk slavey, in reality, you only talk of white Democrats. I would a place an extra tax on anyone who registers as a Democrat, to pay recompense for Democratic parties slavery and segregation past. This is closer to being rational; based on facts. Bit it still lumps the innocent with the guilty so the guilty can escape justice.

 

[spidergoat]

Giving up what exactly? we are still pro-choice, still pro-equal rights, what exactly are we giving up?

Feminism is civil rights.

 

[ElectricFetus]

Feminism is civil rights.

All of feminism? I don't remember shaming men for sitting with their legs spread as a civil right issue.

 

[billvon]

All of feminism?

Yes. Feminism is the advocacy of civil rights for women. Some feminists, of course, go overboard.

 

[Tiassa]

All of feminism? I don't remember shaming men for sitting with their legs spread as a civil right issue.

Why is general societal courtesy specifically and exclusively feminist?

 

[ElectricFetus]

Why is general societal courtesy specifically and exclusively feminist?

Typical of you to take a perfect example of modern pop feminism making an ass of its self and the left and try to twist it.

Yes. Feminism is the advocacy of civil rights for women. Some feminists, of course, go overboard.

And the left suffers for it.

Now tell me what civil rights issue is left for women in the USA? Lets see oh there is the whining about the wage gap, no solution proposed despite decades of it being illegal to pay a women less for the same work as a man. Oh I have an idea, why don't we demand higher minimum wage, that would do more for women's income then whining, and not alienate another voting demographic. wait wait I found the feminist solution:

Let me guess "satire" or right wing propaganda put on to the BBC no less to make he left look bad.

 

[birch]

The worse racists and slave owners were all Democrats. This is based on historical fact. The Republican party formed to end slavery. The Democrats almost divided the USA to maintain slavery. The Democrats hide their group liability, by running this scam, which tries to make everyone pay and allows lawyers a cut. When you talk slavey, in reality, you only talk of white Democrats. I would a place an extra tax on anyone who registers as a Democrat, to pay recompense for Democratic parties slavery and segregation past. This is closer to being rational; based on facts. Bit it still lumps the innocent with the guilty so the guilty can escape justice.

The problem with this logic is the chameleon effect. Just as how the romans who tortured christians became the christians later or even today etc redefining as parties change flavor. The democrats of today would have been the republicans who tried to end slavery etc. So your black/white line down the middle and hammer-like conservative dogmatism is not rational.

 

[Tiassa]

Typical of you to take a perfect example of modern pop feminism making an ass of its self and the left and try to twist it.

Ah, I see. It would help greatly if you would #startmakingsense.

Let me know if you ever get around to having something to say.

 

[billvon]

And the left suffers for it.

Probably. They certainly suffered due to all those Bernie "my way or burn it down" supporters.

Now tell me what civil rights issue is left for women in the USA?

-Women being fired because they get pregnant
-Women being denied coverage for birth control while men get coverage for Viagra
-Paid maternity leave
-Reproductive rights (abortion being effectively outlawed in many places)

 

[wellwisher]

The problem with this logic is the chameleon effect. Just as how the romans who tortured christians became the christians later or even today etc redefining as parties change flavor. The democrats of today would have been the republicans who tried to end slavery etc. So your black/white line down the middle and hammer-like conservative dogmatism is not rational.

Your problem is you buy into revisionist history. Revisionist history tries to define the past in term of the present and the present in terms of the past. This is not valid, based on basic principles of science. It is a con artist scam. Time is a dimension like x, y and z. I cannot be in two places at the same time (x1,y1,z1,t1) and (x2,y2,z2,t2). I can be in two places but in different times. I was not born when there was slavery. I was in t1 not t2.

I am not responsible for what you may have done, nor are you responsible for what I may have done, due to two different points in space and time, that each of us occupied and which we cannot overlap. You cannot accept credit for what I have done, nor can I accept credit for what you have done, due to the same reason. I can't say because Trump is white and I am white, I own half his assets.

Somehow, to those on the left, white and black can be in many places in time and space, simultaneously. Our ghosts or souls can transcend space and time. This is the leftist argument for slavery. It is not scientifically valid.

If you read about slavery, only about 1% of whites owned slaves. They are the only ones who count in terms of the slavery compensation. I have no problem with justice if time and space are coordinated, for a crime and a compensation. The 99% are free to go.

By the time of Lincoln, only Democrats owned slaves, but not all Democrats owned slaves. Maybe 95% get to go. Segregation on the other hand, was more widespread among the southern Democrats. Maybe 65% can be borough to trial. Northern Democrats were closer to the moderate Republicans so they can go. Beyond that is lawyer scam. This lawyers need to be in prison for their crimes against innocent people, based on time and space.

 

[ElectricFetus]

Probably. They certainly suffered due to all those Bernie "my way or burn it down" supporters.

Can't blame me, when push came to shove I voted for Hillary. Had the Hillary Primary voters understood the anti-establishment wave that was occurring and voted Bernie, we would not be here.

-Women being fired because they get pregnant
-Women being denied coverage for birth control while men get coverage for Viagra
-Paid maternity leave
-Reproductive rights (abortion being effectively outlawed in many places)

All fine issues, sadly not the issues feminist discuss much on popular media, nor the most pressing issues our society faces.

 

[billvon]

All fine issues, sadly not the issues feminist discuss much on popular media, nor the most pressing issues our society faces.

They are certainly not the most pressing issues. They are very commonly discussed in popular media.

 

[iceaura]

Mispreception? the editor agreed with it. Your the only people using the satire excuse, again if I say we need to do something 'bout jewish domination, do you think it is satire?

That depends - is it or isn't it? Write it and see.

Yes you can read the links I posted.

They weren't clear about the lefty nature of that editor. She sounds lefty to me, authoritarian - she's a type, probably - but it would have been nice to verify. There are rightwing feminists, if you recall.

Mispreception? the editor agreed with it.

So?
Apparently everybody else read it like everybody here - except a few rightwing folks, but they're famous for missing that boat.

Simple solution is don't give the right wing media ammo,

Nobody did. They made their own, out of lies and slander, like usual. Some righty even wrote the thing, apparently, and the whole silly business of taking one punked editor way too seriously was a creation of right wing media folks. Somebody is supposed to keep daily track of every dingbat on the planet who calls themself a lefty? We've got people calling themselves lefties right here who get their entire political vocabulary and worldview from wingnut videos and can't find their left ass cheek with map and a flashlight - of course they're going to get punked, if anyone tries.

Thing is: it was a sendup. The guy who wrote it says he wrote it as a sendup - satire. The people who read it say they read it that way. So that's how an honest reporting - if anyone thought to bother - would handle things: careless editor out of touch with writers and readers both, gets punked. Maybe a sidebar about how righties continue to be clueless.

Referring to that essay as an expression of the solemn, serious, straight, sober thinking of the American left is what people in the trade call "lying". It's what the people in the trade of selling horrible Republican politicians to their miserable voting base do for a living. That's common knowledge. That is not the fault of the Left.