|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
posted October 25, 2017 02:51 PM |
|
|
I am not de facto doubting the reality of its existence but contemplating on the statement technically being falsifiable or not. Falsifiable doesnt mean necessarily false.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted October 25, 2017 03:08 PM |
|
|
You mean if it is possible to make an experiment that can show if the universe isn't real?
It kind of makes me think of when I am dreaming and I wonder in my dream if I am dreaming or if it's reality. When I was younger the most problematic part was when I dreamt I went to the toilet, later it was more problematic during other bodily fluid activities, but anyway I also learned if I told myself what I saw wasn't real and if I tried to manipulate reality around me via my thoughts I could usually do so, but would wake up almost immediately.
Nowadays I often think I am dreaming, but I can't really control anything and since my usual technique doesn't work I conclude what I see is reality, even when I question strange things I manage to make sense of it.
Something else funny is that when I was younger and awake I was horrible at imagining geometry in my head, now I can calculate relative simple math and similar in my dreams and when I wake up it still makes sense and I still remember it as long as I want to.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 25, 2017 09:45 PM |
|
|
artu said:
I am not de facto doubting the reality of its existence but contemplating on the statement technically being falsifiable or not. Falsifiable doesnt mean necessarily false.
I'd say, it's falsifiable only from outside of it, not from "within".
As in, can you falsify that YOU think or are?. Someone else can, though.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 11:04 AM |
|
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 01:40 PM |
|
|
|
Looks to me like an unnecessarily long analysis of an artificial issue overblown by a small number of women with personality problems who try to appear as "righteous". You don't like being "touched", you get away from the guy or slap him if he's too insistent, you don't go crying on the streets that male pigs are sexually attracted to women.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 02:04 PM |
|
|
One more toxic-feminist attempt to impale those daring to go - or have a critical attitude based on sanity and natural behavior - against what is considered as progressist today: paint all white males as potential predators, pigs and rapists then take revenge. One should read the original Deneuve's letter first, then compare with this much biased article, where the author unveils her frenzied attitude from the start ("like men didn't have enough rights").
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 02:25 PM |
|
|
|
I think, the article is pretty spot-on, in tone as well as issue.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 02:47 PM |
|
|
It is light-years away from "frenzied" that is fot sure.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 03:18 PM |
|
|
Oh yes, is frenzied, but you skip the context. First, you should remember that less than 20% of women identify themselves as feminists, mostly because they can see how this movement turned aggressive and vindictive, it is about revenge now. Then there is a matter of context, the family social backbone is being slowly shattered with consequences being already visible - bad nutrition/increased obesity, lack of education/state indoctrination, lack of responsibility/increase of welfare dependence, the man (preferably white) is depicted as an evil, a pig and a colonizateur, the society is progressively compartmentalized (by the left as always) in races and genders, while the natality and demographics are at historical lowest, rather dramatically.
If common sense prevailed, we should instead call for more cohesion and trust between groups rather than fueling this constant hate and dangerous generalizations. Then Deneuve's letter does not call for a NEW men's right, it only explains that there are social codes in use, then if you destroy them by using filthy amalgams you will end by destroying the society. Whose survival is about men dating then living with females, period.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 03:37 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 15:40, 14 Jan 2018.
|
Sal, it is becoming rather dull to insert the same "doom scenario" as "the context" in everything you evaluate. There are much more conservative places on Earth than France, including your country of origin, if you are so in love with "family values," move into one of them and raise one traditionally. It is not outlawed or anything.
The ratio of women who define themselves as feminists is beside the point, too, since this is about the #metoo movement which went quite viral and which had participants that didnt necessarilly call themselves feminist.
The writer acknowledges things can turn into a witch hunt in certain circles (progressive ones like university campuses), she acknowledges some moves can be considered part of flirting if the setting is not YOUR WORK but a bar or a party, she also acknowledges that not every move means the guy is a predator but sometimes just inapproperiate and people should just move on and get over it in such cases. Her point is that the movement is important because it focuses on situations where there is a hierarchy of power involved and that is very uncomfortable for millions of women.
Now, if you call such an argument frenzied, then, we really have a very different understanding of the word and I'm pretty sure mine is not the one that's off.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 03:56 PM |
|
|
But I am not criticizing such arguments, I am pointing to the ones you skip. She is pillorying Deneuve's letter by calling it awkward and silly, because somehow it asks for new "rights" for the gender who apparently has "enough rights". This is feminism at its purest and lowest and the term of frenzied is meant as "insidiously violent and damaging".
Also I do not promote a scenario, those are already facts between the dots. Any attempt to undermine man-women relations is destroying their chances to naturally go along. Family, heritage and education are the consequences; is not some obsession of mine, there are tons of studies about.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 04:10 PM |
|
|
She says the letter is a sledgehammer when the movement needs to be handled with subtlety and that is not incorrect at all. Deneuve's letter ignores the fact that at the root of the hashtag, there are not highshool lovers or persistent romanticts but CEO's and bosses who abuse their power, so "the right to bother" becomes something else. Now, even if you miss that angle or disagree with it, a frenzied article would be aggressive in tone and this one is the opposite, it even starts by explaining how many of her friends thought she would be one of the people to support the letter. So what if she uses a little sarcasm about man already having enough rights, 10.000 years of patriarchy earns you that stinginess easily.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 04:17 PM |
|
|
ok, next time a war strikes, what about we send females to horribly die in order to save each's one ass, to finally claim the end of patriarchy.
Then what you're talking about? Deneuve's letter says “Rape is a crime, but trying to seduce someone, even persistently or cack-handedly, is not – nor is men being gentlemanly a macho attack,”. it never excludes what ut happened, it adds nuances to an aggressive and vindictive anti-man movement.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 04:24 PM |
|
|
Really? Somebody still using "let women go to war then" argument would only indicate feminism indeed has a lot of work to do yet. Modern armies already have them, btw and by that logic soldiers should have more rights than pianists just as well.
And it is different when you "persistently seduce" a woman at a party or a woman who is there for casting or who is your secretary, Deneuve's letter ignores that part.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 05:10 PM |
|
|
Deneuve explains how seduction works, and she has way more experience than the so called feminists militants, often single and frustrated women. Men have to insist in order to provoke signals, and the ones doing it better the better chances they have, seduction is about power and persuasion mostly. If you criminalize this natural and established social code because of a minority who indeed crosses the line, you will destroy the backbone of society's survival, which is long term and trusted relationship between males and females.
And no, the war argument is okay, you can't demolish patriarchy and men while skipping their core role into preserving nations and cultures, by defending them with their lives. To each one its role, and I feel very unease when a movement as "throw your pig" (this is how the feminist movement is labeling men today) is becoming viral.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 05:35 PM |
|
Edited by fred79 at 17:38, 14 Jan 2018.
|
artu said:
Has #MeToo gone too far, or not far enough? The answer is both by Laura Kipnis
two issues with the article that i'd like to point out:
1:
Quote:
The innovation of the Deneuve statement is to enumerate a new right for men (as if they didn’t have enough already) – “the right to bother” – which is regarded by the signatories as indispensable to sexual freedom.
to say that "men have enough rights already" is a great way to have any males stop reading then and there(especially any male who has actually been subjected to laws that side with women; like mere claims of abuse(sexual or otherwise) that end up incarcerating or stigmatizing an innocent male; or any male who has divorced a woman and has had half of his stuff taken by her, and with only visitation rights to his children).
"the right to bother"... if this is indeed something that any anti-male-hate-progaganda group has to try for, then it only proves how ridiculous their opposition are by comparison. outlawing flirting(if that's what's being covered) is absurdly ridiculous. take note of this simple fact, radicalized feminists(and moreover, WHY do the majority of the feminist movement let these RADICALIZED versions of them be their spokespeople, and the primary people pushing their views? or are ALL current feminists of the radicalized persuasion?)
2:
Quote:
Women didn’t even get the vote in France until 1944; birth control was illegal until 1967. What kind of freedom does a woman have who can’t prevent a pregnancy because male politicians have denied her that right?
It’s the historical amnesia of the Deneuve document that’s so objectionable.
why is it, that groups like feminists and the blm movement, CONSTANTLY use a past that NO LONGER EXISTS to somehow prove to everyone, that they're STILL the victims of sexism or racism?
i'll leave that question as-is, and won't even elaborate further on that, until THAT QUESTION SPECIFICALLY can be answered. it speaks for itself, and i doubt that any feminist or blm member could ever answer that honestly, without "but... muh victimization!".
finally, after having read the article that this article was in response to, i can say that i mostly agree with the other article. it's pretty plain to see, that the writer of the above article feels victimized(and she should, but only for the scumbag who goosed her). she should have kicked the guy that goosed her in the nuts or something(twice, actually; since the guy did it twice); her own self-loathing at being passive over that incident helped with her disliking men in general(i'm guessing the rest is from the popular feminist movement tripe). that's my 2 cents, anyway.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 05:36 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 17:45, 14 Jan 2018.
|
@Sal
Oh, come on... Feminists being ugly and lonely is a really old cliche and I witnessed more than a few exceptions first-hand. Most smart women I know are feminists, even if they are not obbsessed with it. Instead of evaluating an article by the arguments, you assume she speaks like that because she is unattractive, her personal experience shared in the article suggests otherwise and even if she was so, you would never do that if the article was written by a man, which again proves feminists has a point.
Also, your usual argument was that patriarchy was mainly over, feminism turned into a movement of revenge of the past and that it's baseless animosity. Now suddenly, you say patriarchy is not over and shouldn't be because men go to war to defend their culture. That's quite the jump there. I wonder how many wars were about "defending a culture" and how many were about rich oligarchs preserving their profit while the poor died in masses for them but well, you hold onto that rhetoric and then keep creating your doom scenarios accordingly. However, you accusing the opposed rhetoric as frenzied is kind of starting to sound ironic.
@fred
Quote:
why is it, that groups like feminists and the blm movement, CONSTANTLY use a past that NO LONGER EXISTS to somehow prove to everyone, that they're STILL the victims of sexism or racism?
Well, usually, it's because social norms and mind sets take real time to really change. 1967 is as recent as yesterday in terms of social transformation, it's the times most of our parents were raised and they raised us. So pointing out how something that seems really wrong now was a daily reality back then is a good tactic to demonstrate there can be still things that are wrong, yet you dont take the time to notice them unless you are actually one of those people.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 06:10 PM |
|
|
|
That's actually a good way to alienate all sorts of moderates who might support your view if you don't play the "medieval past" card. You know full well that the human mind doesn't work that way. Saying that men have a history of raping women automatically puts all men in the "potential rapists" category right here, right now so if you have something to fill your pants, you are a potential criminal my brother. And while that might be the holy truth, it won't make any man listen to you any more than telling a woman that she's a potential wh**e because she's a woman. That's the main problem with the messages of these "groups", they overgeneralize (to the point of becoming annoying at best and dangerous at worst) and treat a huge number of people as probable or real enemies rather than relying on reason to get their arguments through. And as fred said, one can point out quite a few situations when the law and the society as a whole will be favouring the woman rather than the man so let's cut the grossly misinterpreted "equality" crap already.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 06:19 PM |
|
|
artu said:
Most smart women I know are feminists, even if they are not obbsessed with it.
I never put in doubt their intelligence, so your argument is off topic. I only wonder how do we seduce a women when she is convinced that touching her or insisting is already rape. Oh, or maybe we don't even have the desire of seducing such individuals, hence their fanaticism and frustration?
artu said:
Instead of evaluating an article by the arguments, you assume she speaks like that because she is unattractive,
I never said that, I specified is about feminist militants; as a man, if I have to wonder about what women want, I would rather listen to Deneuve rather than a bunch of lone women raging over men's supposed extra rights.
artu said:
I wonder how many wars were about "defending a culture" and how many were about rich oligarchs preserving their profit while the poor died in masses for them but well
I think all of them were about defending family, clan, country and culture. I do not believe individuals accepted to be slaughtered only to defend their lord interests, you have to come with better evidence in order to claim that, while I can link you tons of heartbreaking personal letters about their motivations. But that confirms why some people consider any social claim as "courageous" today, maybe it is because they lost any track of what courage really means?
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 14, 2018 06:24 PM |
|
|
artu said:
So pointing out how something that seems really wrong now was a daily reality back then is a good tactic to demonstrate there can be still things that are wrong, yet you dont take the time to notice them unless you are actually one of those people.
but most of the feminists and the blm movement weren't even born when the actually sexist/racist stuff was happening. that's like me talking about the horrors of ww2, man. that's literally like me hating germans because of what happened in ww2. or hating vietnamese for the vietnam war, etc. it's literally THAT ridiculous. it's one of the weakest and most ridiculous arguments i've ever seen them try to base any of their rightousness off of.
to expand on that(because i wanted to clarify that part primarily before moving on), it doesn't help that so many people ENJOY bringing up a horrible past, like it still exists today. that's why i have such a problem with CONTINUING RACISM movies about how black people had to "overcome" the injustices of whatever in the past. what was the last movie about? running? swimming? and moreover, they don't care that they're being baited and made to relive the hatred by hollywood, or by anyone else. they'd rather play the victim card.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
