driver on 9/2/2015 at 12:04
At the rate this thread is going, by page 7 it'll have moved onto the Illuminati.
So, what about them chem trails, huh?
DaBeast on 9/2/2015 at 18:42
Quote Posted by driver
At the rate this thread is going, by page 7 it'll have moved onto the Illuminati.
So, what about them chem trails, huh?
If you're interested in human behaviour, observing the whole gamergate vs anti-gamergate thing can be *ahem* illuminating.......:(
So yea, both sides have elements that are genuinely convinced that both sides are engaging in some hidden PR campaign and are alerting supporters to what they think is going on and trying to organise methods to counter it. At first it seems reasonable enough, but when you look at exactly what they say, like corporate level PR companies being involved and the things they cite as evidence, the first thing that comes to mind is Alex Jones.
Like how when he was on a British radio show, a caller phoned in and pointed out that a lot of what he says is incorrect, Jones responded with accusations that the random British caller was actually a CIA misinformation expert/operative.
In a more broad scope, aside from what I reckon most would consider genuine, rational points, both sides' supporters seems to latch onto the kind of ridiculous stuff, that has zero evidence, and spread it around as if it were a legit thing that supported their beliefs. Which is so much like the kind of nutty conspiracy guys who support all the crazy nutty stuff Alex Jones etc come out with.
Tony_Tarantula on 10/2/2015 at 17:13
Quote Posted by Starker
Seriously, for someone who accuses other people of being on a high horse, you and Manwe are so high on your fcking horses* that you can't even see the ground any more. I'd suggest cutting back on the stronger stuff.
* not to confuse with regular horses
The difference is that I'm not the one out there screaming, demanding that the government censor your opinions.
Tony_Tarantula on 10/2/2015 at 17:18
Quote Posted by Muzman
No. Not true at all. All the arguments were the same, including this one. It's the original reactionary neo-con position. And further too; these feminists and their desire to disrupt and silence show the left's true colours as crypto Stalinists who wish only authoritarian control, whether they realise it or not. All this getting men not to rape and people to not say mean things is going to bring the entire Western Liberalism project unglued.
The other thing they don't pick up on is that what they call "rape culture" is in reality just an evolution of the same culture of objectifying, casual sex that progressives originally championed. It can be education to look at entertainment from earlier eras in that regard. While the portrayal of gender relationships isn't remotely what I'd call "equal", the level of respect for women is on a level that is almost inconceivable in any modern cinema where they're usually just sex objects or fall into the "badass bitch" trope.
It would be nice if we could, once and for all, root out the puritanical strain on America's culture but I've got no idea how to do that.
Sulphur on 10/2/2015 at 18:33
To paraphrase: 'If you get raped, it's because you and others like you were too free with your vaginas.'
In the future, women decide rape's no big deal because they should have just worn burqas and stainless steel chastity belts all along, elsewise random penises were liable to walk into their cootches entirely by accident.
This is the best thread of the year so far. :thumb:
Tony_Tarantula on 10/2/2015 at 22:29
Of course, let's just ignore the points being made and scream VICTIM BLAMING!!! in the hopes that we can successfully redirect the course of conversation onto an irrelevant topic, ostracize the person who said something that's outside acceptable orthodoxy, and end all debate on the topic. Perhaps while you're at it you'd like to suggest that I be burned at the stake for heresy?
Sorry, I'm not so fucking retarded as to take your bait.
What I am actually implying is that "free love" led to rape culture. Once society and media no longer view sex as an emotionally intimate experience and star treating it merely as a way to get pleasure, then you've torn down the barrier that prevents men from seeing women only as objects that dispense sexual pleasure.
froghawk on 10/2/2015 at 23:35
Right, because there was no rape before the free love movement. Are you serious right now?
DDL on 11/2/2015 at 00:05
Vikings were well known for their looting, pillaging, and polite respecting of female dignity. Then the hippies ruined it all.
Tony_Tarantula on 11/2/2015 at 00:29
Quote Posted by froghawk
Right, because there was no rape before the free love movement. Are you serious right now?
"rape culture" != rape.
Since nobody cared to define it when I asked, let's use this website:
(
http://www.wavaw.ca/what-is-rape-culture/)
Quote:
a complex set of beliefs that encourage male sexual aggression and supports violence against women. It is a society where violence is seen as sexy and sexuality as violent. In a rape culture, women perceive a continuum of threatened violence that ranges from sexual remarks to sexual touching to rape itself.
It doesn't sound much like the 40's and 50's, but it sure as hell does sound like 50 shades.
Sulphur on 11/2/2015 at 03:11
Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula
Sorry, I'm not so fucking retarded as to take your bait.
What I am actually implying is that "free love" led to rape. Once society and media no longer view sex as an emotionally intimate experience and star treating it merely as a way to get pleasure, then you've torn down the barrier that prevents men from seeing women only as objects that dispense sexual pleasure.
So you refuse to take the bait, yet you do. Good job, you're halfway to rephrasing the original post with a more elaborate set of words that still boil down to the same thing.
