/baw/ - General Discussion

>>403922

All women everywhere might not have a gun on them and thus might require some other way to defend or protect themselves. Imagine that.

Anyone remember Guantanamo? You know, the real life Azkaban where we imprisoned hundreds of men as young as 15 for over a decade without charges? Where we tortured people without even the flimsiest connection to terrorism "just because"? The place Obama pledged he would close?

>Last Kuwaiti Held in Guantanamo Released: Fayiz al-Kandari has been repatriated after being held for more than 14 years without charge

>http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2016/1/8/last-kuwaiti-held-in-guantanamo-released.html

>http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/08/guantanamo-detainee-numbers-104-faeiz-mohammed-ahmed-al-kandari

104 prisoners remain in Guantanamo.

>Since its 2013 inception for reviewing “forever prisoners” – those detainees deemed too dangerous to release but for whom the administration lacks sufficient untainted evidence to charge with an offense – the review board has cleared 15 detainees for release out of 21 reviewed, a pace that human rights activists and even administration officials have warned is insufficient for Obama to close Guantánamo in his final year in office. Only four of those cleared have actually left Guantánamo, owing to internal bureaucracy and laborious diplomacy.

>Campaigners point out that Obama has exclusive executive authority to empty Guantánamo and shut the detention center down. Doing so would involve freeing all detainees wholesale, a step that Obama has indicated throughout his presidency he believes would place national security at risk, despite only a tenth of current Guantánamo detainees actively facing charges or sentencing.

>>403922
Why not pepper spray? or a taser? both easier to get, less chance of collateral damage and the attacker can be arrested and possibly charged with other crimes he may have committed.

>>403926
Because you don't get the visceral thrill of killing someone else with pepper spray or a taser. Why pass up an opportunity to legally kill someone in self defense by using non-lethal methods?

>>403926
What this really makes me wonder is why we don't see people who aren't quite deranged enough to mass murder going instead of mass pepper-spraying/tasering sprees. I mean it's not like it'd be all that less of a power fantasy fullfillment, as it puts the attacker in a similar position of temporary dominance over others.

>>403928
Because mass-murderers aren't deranged for the most part, they're just alienated young people brought up in a violent society that venerates killers.

>>403927
But what about the visceral feeling of faking a coughing fit and asking for a glass of water?

Seriously, it must be a pretty shitty attack for that to have an effect on anything. Some of those tips are worthless (but others are effective)

>>403931

>And whose fault is THAT?

The fault of women who might not be comfortable carrying a gun? There are women who might not be comfortable carrying a gun, you know.

>>403932
In "Everyone has a gun utopia," women who don't carry guns DESERVE to get raped.

>>403933
I've always dreamed of living in Fallout.

>>403932
>>403933
>im a little pussy whos afraid of guns therefore women also are
Women would surprise you with their gumption, and no rapist is going to touch a woman if there was 90% chance he gets his dick shot off.

But in all seriousness isn't "THEY ARE COMING FOR OUR WOMEN" among one of the oldest and most effective fear mongering tactics?

Like, I want women to be able to defend themselves with whatever means necessary but are you really going to let such antiquated rhetoric seize your heart?

>>403935
>Women would surprise you with their gumption, and no rapist is going to touch a woman if there was 90% chance he gets his dick shot off.

No one said all women are hesitant to carry guns. No one even said most women are. We said some women are. That is not a controversial statement. Some humans are hesitant to carry guns, and some humans are women, and there is overlap. That is all that statement is saying.

You keep trying to use emotion to support your point, which would be fine if the reason you were feeling those emotions wasn't because you're retarded.

>>403938

I’d feel sorrier for him if he wasn’t the de facto leader of GG.

>>403938
Yes sir, everyone is out to get you because you are a conservative and not because you are a huge asshole.

>>403925
Congress isn't making the closure of Guantonimo Bay any easier. Thanks for the reminder, this is an issue I'll consider important in upcoming elections.

>>403929
Doesn't sound like the kind of thing gun control would do anything about, media would just start glorifying another weapon. Though I could try to create some media that makes less destructive activities look cooler.

>>403941
>Doesn't sound like the kind of thing gun control would do anything about, media would just start glorifying another weapon. Though I could try to create some media that makes less destructive activities look cooler.

If the weapon they glorify is a less effective killing tool than a gun, then that's still a net benefit. Despite gun enthusiast's rhetoric, you can't do as much damage with a knife or a sword or something as quickly as you can with a gun. Which is something they know, even when they make that argument, because if they actually believed knives were as effective at killing as guns then they would be fine with people taking their guns because they would still be just as effective as "defending themselves" or hunting with knives.

>>403942
>If the weapon they glorify is a less effective killing tool than a gun, then that's still a net benefit.
And it can be done without actually making further restrictions on guns in the first place.

>>403943
The scenario we were describing was one in which guns had already been banned. You're moving the goalposts.

>>403944
>>excuse the actions of real live murderers
>
No one did that.
>>rabidly attack people who haven't done anything wrong
No one did that either.
>>because theres a 0.01% chance they might end up real live murderers
Look, I get that you consider the, on average, 28,000 people a year who die in the United States to gunshots, to be acceptable losses for your right to pretend you're John McClane, but there are many people who think that saving the lives of a few thousand people a year is worth more than you getting to compensate for your tiny penis.

>>403944
>Maybe that's why you're excusing and identifying with spree killers, while attacking people who can actually control themselves.
>
>Desperately trying to make guns less common so you won't be tempted.
If indeed that's the case, seems all the more important to roll up our sleeves and start grubbing some guns. Who knows how many other spree killers we'll spare from temptation?

>>403946
>No one did that.
See >>403929

>No one did that either.
See >>403927

>to be acceptable losses for your right
You're speaking as though removing the guns will lower the amounts of dead people, which is not correct.

Is anyone going to talk about Islamic rape culture? It's a bajillion times worse than western rape culture.

//youtube.com/watch?v=WJCLSZm4-LA

>>403948
>You're speaking as though removing the guns will lower the amounts of dead people, which is not correct.

It conclusively will. The argument has always been about whether the number of dead people that it's lowered by is enough to justify it. Like all those babies that killed each other with guns that were cited earlier? Almost all of them would not have been killed if their parents had not had guns. So we know at least 200 some odd lives would be saved. The argument has always been "Saving the lives of 200 children is not good enough to justify me not having my toys."

>>403950
All due respect, you're a bit far removed from reality, friend.

>>403942

If they unverified people for being assholes, half of all celebrities would be removed. As for Twitter being biaised that way, San Fran etc.

A little too overreacting there, i suppose. It's the problem with fruits, they are catty.

>>403950
>The argument has always been
Don't try to frame the argument when you're objectively wrong, or use emotionally manipulative language.

Removing guns might save 200 fetuses from accidentally shooting themselves, but removing guns would also cause thousands of other people to be murdered or worse because they lacked protection.

Number of gun deaths, accidental or otherwise, is about 25 thousand. This number includes your embryos.
Number of homicides with all weapons is just under 15 thousand.
Number of firearms homicides is about 8 thousand.

Number of justifiable homicides with a gun is around 250.
Number of non-lethal cases of firearms use in self defense is around 335 thousand.
Number of non-lethal cases of self defense with any other weapon is around 418 thousand.

These are only reported criminal statistics. Estimates range as high as 4.7 million cases of non-lethal self defense firearms use which doesn't get reported or enter crime statistics because the criminal never goes through with the crime.
Before you try adhoms and poisoning the well, the 4.7 million number is a nonprofit working for the Police Foundation, not the fucking NRA.

So the question isn't if you want the 200 zygotes to survive, but what increase in homicide or worse you're willing to support to satisfy your craving to feel safe.

>>403953

>referring to children as "fetuses" and "zygotes"

Cute trick.

>>403953
>tips fedora and shakes bottle of red sugar pills

>>403961

>it's just a commonsense continuation of children > toddlers > babies

No, it's a rhetorical trick designed to undercut someone's argument about pre-schoolaged children, gun violence, and gun control methodology. You sound ridiculous when you do it and everyone sees right through it. If you want to make actual arguments, take the shit you say with an ounce of seriousness—otherwise we’re going to treat you like a troll and tell you that hobos aren’t allowed to take BMs in a library’s computer room.

>>403963
>Fedoras are the reddit feminist atheists
Yes, fedoras, famed symbol of the feminist movement

>>403963

And now I don't have to take you seriously ever again. Thanks!

>>403966
This is so disingenuous I doubt even your buddy poke will step in for you.

>>403969
What is this, the do-si-do? Tag boxing? I don't need him to step in for me.

Man, if he thinks fedoralords are FEMINISTS, he must hate women worse than the Klan hates black people.

>>403949
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/koeln-das-steht-im-internen-polizeibericht-zur-silvesternacht-a-1070837.html
>Beamte wurden demnach durch enge Menschenringe daran gehindert, zu Hilferufenden vorzudringen
Police was actively blocked by the crowd from getting to the victims crying for help.

>Ein Mann wird zitiert: "Ich bin Syrer, ihr müsst mich freundlich behandeln! Frau Merkel hat mich eingeladen."
One Man is quoted: "Im syrian, you have to be nice to me! Miss Merkel invited me."

>Zeugen wurden bedroht, wenn sie Täter benannten.
Witnesses were threatened when pointing out attackers to the police.

>Menschen zerrissen dem Bericht zufolge vor den Augen der Polizisten Aufenthaltstitel, grinsten und sagten: "Ihr könnt mir nix, hole mir morgen einen neuen." Ob es sich um echte Dokumente handelte und um welche Art von Dokumenten, geht aus dem Bericht nicht hervor.
People ripped up their documentation papers/asylum papers in front of police, grinned and said: "You cant do anything about me, I'm getting new papers tomorrow.". Whether it was real documents in this case or what kind of documents it was is unknown.

>Erteilte Platzverweise wurden ignoriert; Wiederholungstäter in Gewahrsam zu nehmen, war aufgrund fehlender Kapazitäten nicht möglich.
People who were barred from the area ignored this; it was impossible to arrest them because of not enough capacity.(no cells, not enough police staff)

>Nach Gleissperrungen wegen Überfüllung seien Leute einfach auf das Nebengleis und dann über die Schienen wieder auf den gesperrten Bahnsteig gegangen.
Areas that were barred for public due to too many people were ignored. People simply walked on the tracks to reach the blocked areas.

>Beim Einsteigen in Züge gab es körperliche Auseinandersetzungen, es galt das "Recht des Stärkeren".
Getting into trains involved physical confrontation. It was "survival of the fittest".

>"Die Einsatzkräfte konnten nicht allen Ereignissen, Übergriffen, Straftaten usw. Herr werden, dafür waren es einfach zu viele zur gleichen Zeit." Man habe nicht jedem Opfer helfen können, was die Polizisten frustriert habe. Zeitweise sei es nicht möglich gewesen, Strafanzeigen aufzunehmen.
The police could not intervene in all incidents, attacks and crimes because it was simply too many simultanously. So much so that is was impossible to file official reports on the spot.

>Dem Bericht zufolge trafen die Beamten auf zahlreiche verstörte, weinende, verängstigte Passanten, insbesondere Frauen und Mädchen. Diese hätten "Schlägereien, Diebstähle, sex. Übergriffe an Frauen usw." gemeldet. Als Täter wurden immer wieder männliche Migrantengruppen genannt.
The policemen encountered numerous shocked and crying people, especially women and girls. These were talking about "brawls, theft, sex attacks etc.". They repeatedly named groups of migrant men as their assailants.

>>403969
I mean this is actually a pretty good opportunity for poke. If he were to repudiate /pol/-kun now he'd be able to reclaim a shred of credibility.

>>403976
You've got a real issue where you see everything in teams. Black and white.
Unhealthy.

>>403977
So you're defending his point here too then?

>>403979
You people sure do have a grand old time making things completely up, like that guy who said i was advocating vigilantism because i pointed out hypocrisy in his moral code.
Buncha weirdos tbh fam, smh

>>403980
Actually, was that you? Pls be honest, cause it would be really funny to me if it was.

>>403980
You didn't point out hypocrisy in anyone's moral code. All you pointed out was that you consider calling the cops on someone to be just as bad as killing them and expect other people to not see this as an absurd argument.

>>403983
Oh my God you ARE the same guy aren't you

I Love It

>>403985
No. I'm the pacifist who you tried to claim was hypocritical for being willing to call the police when threatened, but I am not >>403979. I don't give a shit about your friendship with /pol/-kun or whatever the hell it is you're on about.

Hate to rain on your parade of smug ego-stroking, but given the fact you don't understand how false equivalencies work, you probably shouldn't be all that proud of yourself to begin with.

>>403986
I'm jacking off to this post

>>403986
>>403987
>ego-stroking

stroke that ego until the white stuff comes out xD

>>403980
I just want to know why you repeatedly defend the lunatic who's out there saying things like fedoralords being feminists.

>>403989
But he didn't say that. He said the fedora, when used by women along with a matching suit, tended to command respect. That doesn't imply at all that men who wear fedoras tend to be respectful of womem.

>>403990
No he actually said precisely that.

>can't decide what a person did or didn't say when it's written down
Congrats, /pol/thread

>>403992
A lot of people in this thread seem to revise history as it's happening, like they'll literally see me saying things that are not even in the post they're reading. It's really bizarre, I'm pretty interested in the psychology behind it.

>>403990
>Fedoras are the reddit feminist atheists, that's why m'lady is a thing.
His exact words

>>403993
>A lot of people in this thread seem to revise history as it's happening
Yeah, like how you always revise history to be more favorable to your ego.

>>403994
>>403995
>>403989
>revising history
Like you ignoring the part where I posted sources. It's written right up there, everyone can see it just by scrolling up.

Who do you think you're tricking?

>>403996

A hobo with a library card.

>>403996
>Who do you think you're tricking?
A question you could stand to pose to yourself.

>>403974
Guy who attacked the police station in France was in the gang rape squads in Koln. He was known for rapes, his accomplice was there, his phone was found in Koln, and he was sighted by witnesses.

http://www.bild.de/news/inland/paris/das-ist-der-terrorist-aus-dem-deutschen-fluechtlingsheim-44093280.bild.html

>>403997
You're devolving bro, going back to calling people homeless as an insult. I thought we pointed out that was ignorant and bigoted a few threads ago. Guess you literally have nothing else left.

>>404007
>I thought we pointed out that was ignorant and bigoted a few threads ago.
No, no, see, we pointed out that YOU were ignorant and bigoted. I could see how you got mixed up.

>>404009
If this comment is serious, I don't think you know what either of those words mean.

>>404009
Milo has a point, you're a homophobic bigot, and your buddy Bowie is a child molester.

>>404011
I'm pretty sure the comment is mocking Milo’s bitchfit over being de-verified by Twitter and his exploitation of Bowie's death in furtherance of said bitchfit.

>>404012
Bowie’s Twitter account remains verified because it’s likely going to be a “run by Bowie’s PR firm/estate/etc.” account (if it wasn’t already) that tweets on an irregular basis going forward. It has broken no rules or done anything to deserve de-verification. Milo has no point.

>>404011
I was indeed mocking Milo.

>>404016
Le /pol/ meme collage

>>404017
I think you mean /k/.

>>404019
no, /pol/ is where everyone who doesn't share My Political Views is from, also they all hate jews

>>404013
>>404015
404011 here, my bad.

>>404020
>also they all hate jews
I'm glad you're confronting your anti-Semitism poke but you also have to move past it to truly improve as a person, not wallow in it like your little buddy.

>>404002
And the police are claiming that they're BANNED FROM ARRESTING MIGRANTS regardless of what they do.

http://www.bild.de/news/inland/bundespolizei/packt-aus-44108104.bild.html

>>404023
It's funny because the only time I've ever seen anyone be anti-Semitic in these threads, I'm pretty sure they were also defending tumblr-brand feminism, and I was the only one who called them on it.
Guess it's okay if they're defending the right cause, eh?

>>404025
Given your inability to understand basic discourse, I would imagine they weren't saying what you think they were, and you just said something to be contrary then convinced yourself you were calling out anti-semitism..

>>404026
>>404023
lol no one believes you except stone, and he might be actually stoned.
the marijuana kind, not the muslim kind.

>>404026
>LALALA I CANT HEAR YOU
nice (y)

>>404027
Yes yes, off to lying about Germany with you.

>>404031
Says the guy with his collection of pre-made internet-con images.

>>404031

There is absolutely nobody in this thread more predictable in their responses than you.

And as for the image: yes.

Well, at least Paul Ryan can can control himself better than Boehner.

>>404037
>Those are OC.
No they aren't.

>>404024
It's as bad in the UK, it just isn't international news yet.

Oxford: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11447263/Oxford-sex-grooming-ring-Police-dont-have-time-to-keep-girls-safe.html

Keighley: http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/11443422.28_men_arrested_in_Keighley_grooming_gang_probe/

Rochdale: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11444671/Ten-charged-in-Rochdale-child-grooming-investigation.html

Bristol: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-30078503

Telford: http://www.shropshirestar.com/news/crime/2013/05/10/horror-of-telford-girls-sex-abuse-ordeal/

Birmingham: http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/child-sexual-exploitation-force-west-9151006#ICID=sharebar_twitter

Wycombe: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-22626994

Harrow: http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/local-news/colindale-brothers-mohammad-imran-shabbir-6240834

Bury: http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/three-men-charged-over-sexual-6523744

Stevenage: http://www.thecomet.net/news/child_trafficking_trial_set_for_stevenage_trio_1_3589339

Burton: http://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/men-Burton-convicted-child-exploitation/story-21176480-detail/story.html

Chesham: http://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/NEWS/11170623.Four_men_convicted_of_sexually_abusing_schoolgirl/?ref=rss

Leeds: http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/latest-news/top-stories/twelve-in-court-over-leeds-child-sex-probe-1-6652432

Blackburn: http://www.itv.com/news/2012-05-09/nine-men-jailed-for-grooming-girls-as-young-as-13/

Blackpool: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1374443/Police-hid-abuse-60-girls-Asian-takeaway-workers-linked-Charlene-Downes-murder.html

Preston: http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/uk_national_news/10418592.display/

Nelson: http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/news/crime/teen-girls-in-grooming-case-abused-in-nelson-and-colne-by-sex-gang-1-4537508

London: http://dailybalenews.com/2014/02/28/asian-grooming-gang-held-girl-captive-and-repeatedly-raped-her/

Barking: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/child-prostitute-ring-groomed-and-then-raped-vulnerable-girls-8644315.html

Derby: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1333537/Nine-men-Derby-jailed-grooming-100-sex.html

Peterborough: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-25659042

Bradford: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2749626/Gang-trafficked-13-year-old-runaway-hotels-flats-Bradford-turns-abuse.html

Bristol: http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Eleventh-Bristol-man-accused-child-sexual/story-20445962-detail/story.html

Coventry: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/419174/10-men-accused-of-exploiting-girls

Bolton: http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/12908055.Report_reveals_how_Bolton_taxi_drivers_were_investigated_for_grooming_and_child_sex_offences/

Middlesbrough: http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/11009663.Three_Middlesbrough_men_jailed_for_grooming_underage_girls_for_sex/?ref=var_0

Aylsebury: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-33656802

>>404047
Are you having a stroke

>>404047
>some dude posting sources
>lets attack him because sources happen to not be flattering to a religion badly in need of reformation

You're right we should execute the rape victims by stoning, as Shariah commands.

The western whores have slandered the name of Islam for the last time.

Inshallah!

>>404048
I call dibs on his TF2 items

>>404050
Was that a reference to Dr. Goblin
That was a pretty vintage friend-meme if so, I gotta say

>>404060
>
>80% of people
Mras aren't actually people

>>404061
That's over 80% of the general population, only 14-18% of people identify as feminist.
http://www.vox.com/2015/4/8/8372417/feminist-gender-equality-poll

Feminism has long split away from ideas of equality and the people have noticed.

>>404062
Odd how "80% of the population hates feminism" and yet the only people who ever seem to bring up their hatred for it are angry white men who can't get laid.

>>404064
You're adorable

>>404063
>"14-18% of people identify as feminist"
>DID YOU SAY 80% OF PEOPLE HATE FEMINISM????
Welcome to /pol/ thread.

>>404064
Wow. You actually think this supports your point.

First, if you actually read the first one, the author makes it very clear that the problem there isn't feminism, it's men who claim to be feminists to score points without actually representing anything healthy about feminism--the author even says positive things about feminism itself in the beginning and just says she doesn't like men who try to use feminism to salve their conscience or to prey on women using language that sounds like support.

As for the second one:
>http://thoughtcatalog.com/janet-bloomfield/
>A regular contributor to "A Voice for Men."
You found a literal, explicit MRA to support your point that not all critics of feminism are MRAs.

>>404063
Weird how when non-feminists say male feminists just do it to get laid, suddenly non-fems are obsessed with having sex.

But feminists can use it as an insult all they want.

Neat.

>>404069
It's not an insult. It's just that most MRA communities you see, the predominant subject of discussion is about how women won't give them sex despite the fact that they see themselves as deserving it, and why this makes women villains. There's no way to take that other than "they are angry because they can't get laid."

Like you're taking it as an insult, but it's purely descriptive: the people who get upset about this stuff are almost always angry young white men who don't get as much sex as they think they're supposed to be getting.

>>404071
That was kind of a lot of words to say what amounted to
>insult
>not fact

>>404072
That was very few words to say "I am going to dismiss your point without addressing it because it makes my previous post seem like petty contrarianism."

>>404073
What point? That it's okay when you do it?
>contrarianism
You're hopeless and unfun to watch.

>>404073
>takes up a contrary position
>dismisses others for being petty contrarians
You can't make this up.

>>404075
Like all MRAs, Poke has little relation with human logic

>>404079

In a nightmarish dystopia where all feminists are Andrea Dworkin, maybe.

We don't live in that world, thankfully.

>>404078
>>404079
>>404080
I am starting to think these threads are the direct opposite of /pol/.

And that's not a good thing.

>>404078
1.) Not an MRA.
2.) He wasn't even talking to me, lol.
>>404074
Calling someone contrarian is a complete non-argument and just goes to show they have nothing to stand on. It's like calling someone stubborn. They can either defend themselves and prove you right, or say "you're right" and walk away. It's the weakest gotcha trap imaginable.

>>404080
Members of the feminist movement have worked to give preference to women in education, business and healthcare grants by the government, the latter to the point where men have a ridiculously shitty life expectancy.

Members of the feminist movement have fought for preferences to women in abortion/reproductive laws, paternity, adoption, domestic conflict, divorce, custody and alimony cases... really all family court concerns.

Preferences in the very definitions and prosecutions of rape, preferences in length of prison terms and severity of punishments, preferences in welfare/benefits, insurance and affirmative action quotas for women.

There are many other cases such as genital mutilation, labor imbalances, conscription, and so on, situations which feminists didn't directly create but fight to stop MRAs from fixing.

These members of the feminist movement would not have succeeded in these major shifts toward institutionalized sexism against men if they did not have the support of an overwhelming majority of feminists. And if any feminists exist which did not support any of these, they have not fought to regain control of the movement. Therefore #notallfeminists is not an excuse.

If feminism was about equality, fighting for preference in anything would be antithetical to it, but as people ITT are saying, everyone is clearly noticing that feminism is not about equality.

Modern feminism is a movement to grant women more rights, more privileges and more power, even if that is ridiculously more than men have.
A good example is the British labor party, where the party undemocratically installed women MPs to the point where the majority of the party are women, but the feminists still aren't satisfied by that.

>>404083
>>404084
Weren't you the same person who was on here earlier arguing that the reason more black people are punished for the same crimes that white people get off for is that black people commit crimes more, rather than racism?

>>404079
>>404083
>>404084
You are right, these are certainly things MRAs believe.

>>404085
Yes that's true, and men generally commit more crimes than women. But even taking that into account the 1300:12 disparity doesn't make sense.

Learn to read.

>>404086
Women favored in family court: Fact or Belief.

Affirmative action quotas for women existing: Fact or Belief.

Circle one.

>>404088
In your own twister little mind this is no doubt an amazing gotcha

But alas, tis not so

>>404087
Neither does the systematic disenfranchisement of black people by the courts, but you sure don't give a shit about injustice when it happens to a class of people you don't belong to, huh?

>>404091
>People in desperate situations taking a little time to distract themselves and try to have fun is a personal affront to me.

>>404093
You, I think, are exactly the sort of person the conservative news media dreams about having in their audience.

>>404095
Jesus Christ you get offended easily.

>>404097

He didn't even express offense. You, on the other hand, seem to take offense pretty easily.

>>404089
You tried to be dismissive and make light of the situation. The concerns of men aren't funny or unimportant because they have a different shaped crotch.

>>404099
That doesn't really make sense as a response to that person's post.

>>404100 here
I mean not that any of y'all in this thread make any particular effort to read each other's posts and respond to them but this is among the most incongruous.

>>404103
The dominant demographic, by nature of being dominant, is never subject to institutionalized sexism, as they are the institution.

>>404104
The dominant demographic is white women...

>>404105
>The dominant demographic is white women...
lol

>>404105
>The dominant demographic is white women...
Lolk

>>404106
>>404107
Not only are you being dismissive again, you are also showing your ignorance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_States#Sex_ratios
>total population: 0.97 male(s)/female (2010 est.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_States#Race_and_ethnicity
>Non-Hispanic White 196,817,552 63.7 %

White women are 32.8% of the country, white men are 30.9%.

White women are the majority demographic.

>>404108
lol

>>404108
Majority demographic and dominant demographic aren't the same thing, unless you're going to tell us you think that Apartheid SA was run by Bantu speakers.

>>404110
Inb4 he explains to us all how the white people in South Africa were the ones who were actually oppressed.

>>404109
I wonder how many synapses had to fire for that post.

>>404110
>>404111
Yes women in America are not allowed to vote, own property, take part in business, and are forced to special areas of cities.

White women are the majority in a democracy, this gives them the most power as well. Do you want me to whip out voter turnout levels? I can prove you're wrong any way you like.

>>404112
If indeed poll numbers were a practical demonstration of a demographics' power in a society this would be the closest you've ever gotten to having a salient point.

I mean, they aren't, and therefore it it isn't, but good effort at least.

>>404113
>they aren't
>therefore it it isn't
[citation needed]

>>404114

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States

How's about that, /pol/ hobo? At least that link won’t be blocked at the library.

>>404115
>"If I hire someone to work for me, that means they're the dominant part of the relationship"
Not how it works, the president is not a king.

He's elected to carry out the wishes of the electorate, the majority of which are women right now.

This is why feminist organizations and womens shelters get government grants, but mens rights groups and mens shelters get bupkiss.

Come on, put two and two together, you're almost there.

>>404115
>"I'm frustrated so I'm gonna use slurs and perpetuate stigmas about mental illnesses and people in poverty! >:("
You and the tumblr-social-justice anon who insists on calling everyone retards are honestly the type of person you (and he) would be attacking if you had any sort of objectivity, it's a bit sad.

>>404116

>presidents carrying out the will of the electorate

C'mon, man, really. Presidents are overwhelmingly wealthy themselves, and beholden to wealthy donors, especially in the last century of elections.

>>404116
>all women support feminist movements and all men support men's rights movements, and they only vote to give their sex more rights

you're an idiot

>>404120
>idiot
You said that to someone who posts in this thread. OF COURSE HE IS AN IDIOT.

>>404120
People who don't support either movement aren't likely to vote to give any sex more rights.

>>404124
>People who don't support either movement aren't likely to vote to give any sex more rights.
Indeed, nobody is, because the United States is a republic, not a democracy.

>>404116
>mens rights groups
"Mens rights" groups don't get government grants because they're hate groups.

>>404119
Do you consider feminism a tool of the "patriarchy"? Because the "patriarch" president is paying for it...

Either prove to me every single one of these things he listed are false:
>preference to women in education, business and healthcare grants by the government
>preferences to women in abortion/reproductive laws, paternity, adoption, domestic conflict, divorce, custody and alimony cases... really all family court concerns
>the very definitions and prosecutions of rape
>preferences in length of prison terms and severity of punishments
>preferences in welfare/benefits
>insurance and affirmative action quotas for women
Not just one or two maybe kinda differently interpreted - all of them completely false.

OR ADMIT THAT THE "PATRIARCHY" IS ACTING FOR WOMEN AND AGAINST MEN

What kind of a shitty fucking patriarchy funds feminism and worships women while subjugating men.

Your feminist conspiracy theories are full of holes.

>>403938
>>403939
>stop random gay dude from posting because he insulted someone
>allow isis to continue posting after they murder thousands of innocents, including gays
Why are progressives insane? Childhood trauma?

Oh no, the liberals and their logic are too powerful, better make 3 extra crazy posts in a row to protect myself, lest I be in danger of having a single sane thought in my life.

>>404129
It's a terrible crime.

If white dudes had done it, you'd have never dreamed of mentioning it.

>>404131
As douchey and insensitive as this post is, I'm inclined to agree with it.

>>404132
>As douchey and insensitive as this post is
You have difficulty understanding human interactions so let me help clarify what is actually douchey and insensitive for you, it's shitbag up there using the trauma those women went through to advance his anti-Muslim agenda.

>>404133
>agree with you (or at least, agree with someone you also agree with)
>still have you get all bothered over me
Honestly, it kind of gets me hot to know that I can voice literally any opinion and you guys will still get angry about what I say, it's pretty nice to have that much sway in someone's life.

>>404134
You have nobody but yourself to blame for firmly establishing yourself as a broken clock.

>>404135
I'm not blaming anyone, i literally just said that I'm pretty into having this weird sort of control over you guys.

>>404136
If you want to equate provoking disdain with control then that's your choice I guess.

>>404136
>I feel so cool about how having ugly opinions is able to make people react badly to me. It's an amazing amount of power to have over people.

>>404138
That's the thing, is that even when i share your opinions, your hateboner for me is too strong, you still HAVE to say something bad, like some sort of compulsion.
I love it.

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/07/16/muslim-clerics-letter-to-the-sun-about-preventing-sex-assault
Progressives will defend a literal rape culture, while tilting at windmills they believe to be a mysterious western patriarchy.

>>404133
If you protect extremist islam by painting it as moderate islam, you are anti LGBT and womens rights. Simple as that.

>>404139

You go out of your way to provoke even the people you agree with. No shit you think people have a "hateboner" for you.

>>404141
You're very sensitive to being "provoked" if you think Slowpoke is provocative. He's usually the mildest guy in these threads.

Maybe you should grow a thicker skin brodude.

>>404140
>If you protect extremist islam by painting it as moderate islam
Nobody in this conversation has done so.

>>404139
It's not about agreeing with people or not agreeing with people. It's about having an ugly world view. It's "douchey and insensitive" to point out someone else using heinous crimes to try to justify their hatred of entire racial groups in your world view. You are begrudging the fact that you are having to admit that obvious hate mongers like /pol/kun are mongering hate. Because, ultimately, you don't want people like him to be wrong or to be called out on their wrongness.

>>404141
1.) Like when, bruv?
2.) You whiteknight women (arguably the least oppressed "minority" in western culture) so hard that you address Big Name Feminists as "Miss Sarkeesian" and "Miss Quinn" even though they aren't present, but then fling slurs and jokes about the mentally ill and poverty-stricken, who are objectively, if not THE two most oppressed minorities, are at least rock bottom. Who do you think you are, Sage Freehaven? :^)

>>404145

>Who do you think you are, Sage Freehaven?

A broke white man stuck in a near-permanent adolescent mindset who will probably die in a gutter once he no longer has anyone to support him. How about you?

>>404146
I'm just a slowpoke.

>>404145
Another problem with you: you constantly get offended by people lumping you into a group with /pol/kun and his ilk, but consistently insist on defending them, their views, and their lingo (which you also constantly use).

>>404145
>arguably the least oppressed "minority" in western culture
>who are objectively, if not THE two most oppressed minorities, are at least rock bottom.

This is further evidence of your ugly views, you realize. First of all, speaking as a mentally ill white man, we do not have it as bad as sane women, and we ESPECIALLY don't have it as bad as mentally ill women. Second of all, calling people "crazy" is not really a thing that hurts most mentally ill people's feelings. Probably because mentally ill people who get treatment generally aren't crazy--even when their symptoms flare up, their "craziness" is more likely to result in them hiding out in their homes and not wanting to deal with the world, or sleeping for 12 hours a day, or forgetting to bathe. Not in rambling nonsensical hate speech on internet forums.

What's offensive to the mentally ill is when people are looking for reasons to explain why a shooter went on a rampage and killed a bunch of people and say "Well, he was mentally ill" as though that explains it, and demonizing the mentally ill based on complete ignorance of how mental illness actually works and what actually causes violence in society. And when people try to use us as scapegoats to say why "It's not okay to make fun of someone for having nonsensical politics, because it's harmful to the mentally ill." Because, for starters, it means you (not the people calling them crazy) associate their behavior with actual mental illness rather than just using a shorthand word like "crazy" that everyone who speaks english already knows refers less to mental illness and more to general....well, craziness.

Calling a person whose logic is completely ridiculous "insane" or "crazy" is not actually that big a deal. Comparing /pol/-kun to a crazy hobo does not hurt my feelings as an actual crazy person who takes medicine for his mental illnesses. Interesting how you're so against "white knighting" for groups you don't belong to until it represents a chance for you to score political points though.

>>404149
Hi, I'm slowpoke. Just gonna list my privileges and Minority Points here.
>cis, white, male
>bisexual, mentally ill, grew up in poverty, currently physically handicapped but not permanently so
Assumptions, man. U and mptions.
Don't speak for all mentally ill ppl tia hashtag notyourshield

>>404150
I said "most" mentally ill people specifically because I knew you were the kind of person to say that kind of bullshit for the sake of winning more political capitol. Glad to see you're still as predictable as ever.

>>404150
You forgot
>instantly retreats when faced with a hard defense

Could you fuckers please talk about politics?

>>404153
No, we're talking about me right now. :^)

>>404144
>to try to justify their hatred of entire racial groups
Nobody in this conversation has done so.

Also Islam isn't even a race, it's a religion. It has bad parts which need to be exposed, confronted and fought. You're getting in the way of that.

Please stop.

>>404156
>It has bad parts which need to be exposed, confronted and fought.
As do all religions, yet you seem rather fixated on Islam for a white dude in a Christian majority country.

>>404156
INDEED fellow redpill, a religion of the Arab, the Turk, and the Asiatic peoples. They, in their fiendishness, seek to mix with a darken the races of old Europa, but we shall fight their dusky evil every step of the way!

>>404149
>speaking as a mentally ill white man, we do not have it as bad as sane women
>sane women
>worse than mentally ill men
lol whaaaaaaaaaa?!!?

>Calling a person whose logic is completely ridiculous "insane" or "crazy" is not actually that big a deal.
>calling people <insert epithet> is not a big deal
Wow.

Dude the only hate speech in this thread is coming from YOU.

I dare you to find hateful speech from me or Slowpoke and quote it.

>>404159
"Insane" and "crazy" aren't epithets unless you also consider "irrational" and "weird" to be epithets.

>>404159
>lol whaaaaaaaaaa?!!?
This is sort of basic stuff? Like no one who earnestly pays attention to sociology would find this a controversial statement. Marginalized groups who are capable of passing as non-marginalized groups are in a much better position than people in marginalized groups who can't pass as non-marginalized groups. Most people assume, until given extreme reason to believe otherwise, that other people are neurotypical. Even outwardly displaying fairly unmistakable symptoms doesn't make most people realize non-neurotypicals are mentally ill because understanding of mental illness in this culture is so low that recognizing those symptoms is almost impossible for the majority of people.

Bisexuals in relationships with an alternate gender person don't suffer the same sorts of discrimination as people in same-sex relationships. Asexuals don't face much discrimination at all because most people don't even acknowledge the existence of asexuality. Black people who can pass as white have it better than black people who can't, and Jews who can pass as Christian have it better than Jews who can't. Women generally can't pass as men (I do not consider trans men who pass as cis men to be women passing as men, though I'm sure there are some of you who will say they are--I don't feel like having that argument with you right now), and therefore sexual discrimination is harder to avoid than discrimination against mental illness other than in the most extreme cases of mental illness. We have to suffer erasure, and lack of representation, and there are occasional moments where people who have access to our medical records can discriminate against us for jobs or raises, but by and large those issues are easier to avoid than the discrimination women face.

I mean, if you actually acknowledge that women face discrimination, and aren't like /pol/-kun and Slowpoke who seem convinced that men are oppressed by evil women and things like denying women bodily sovereignty and making them work harder for the same jobs are all make believe.

>>404157
>As do all religions
Some religions more than others.

Terrorist acts for the year, by motivation:
>1 Sikh
>1 Jewish
>2 Christian
>2 Unknown
>290 Islamic
And non religious:
>5 Nationalist
>13 Socialist

The reformation of Islam is the pressing concern of our time. Christianity has already gone through a reformation, it's high time the second largest religion does as well.

>>404162
I'd be interested to see your source, since it was recently confirmed that more Christian terrorists attacked the US in 2015 than Muslim.

>>404164
>Could the US having 0.6% muslims and 78.5% christians have something to do with that?
So why do you, an obvious American, care? Shouldn't threats closer to your home be more concerning to you?

>>404162
>The reformation of Islam is the pressing concern of our time.
I would actually agree with this. However, as you only ever hyperfocus on the crimes of radical Islam, a common tactic used by racists, especially on the internet, to discriminate a primarily non-white religion, it is extremely difficult to believe you are genuine. If indeed you consider reformation an issue, rather than just caring about the crimes of radicals, I assume you have some extensive commentary on the various sects of Islam, regional differences, and proposed reforms you would care to share with us?

>>404163
Could you provide the source for that? This is the only source I could find, and it doesn't even mention christians.

>>404165
I'm not an American you douchebag. And may I say how fucking callous it is of you to not give a shit about the rest of the world.

>>404166
>hey martin luther why do you hyperfocus on the crimes of radical christianity?
>you sound like one of them pagan devil worshippers
How would you reform islam, by ignoring the flaws? By being extra careful to mention a good thing every time you mention a bad thing? Let's be reasonable here.

>I assume you have some extensive commentary on the various sects of Islam, regional differences, and proposed reforms you would care to share with us?
Yes, do what Ataturk did.
http://www.allaboutturkey.com/reform.htm
>Traditional religious schools closed
>Sheriat (Islamic Law) abolished
^ AKA Sharia.
>Dervish brotherhoods abolished
>Fez outlawed by the Hat Law (November 25)
>Veiling of women discouraged
>Western clothing for men and women encouraged
>Western (Gregorian) calendar adopted instead of Islamic calendar
>New civil code ended Islamic polygamy and divorce by renunciation and introduced civil marriage
>Millet system ended
^ These courts were Sharia and often had summary judgements with horrible punishments.
>New Turkish alphabet (modified Latin form) adopted
>State declared secular (April 10)
>Constitutional provision establishing Islam as official religion deleted
>Islamic call to worship and public readings of the Kuran (Quran) required to be in Turkish rather than Arabic
>Women given the vote and the right to hold office
Etc.

See a small scale reformation of Islam already happened, but attitudes like some in this thread are what allowed Erdogan and radical islam to come back into Turkey.

>>404167
>>404168
That's not a source, that's a random image.

And yes I am aware of Turkish history, what military dictator do you have in mind who will implement these reforms, and how will you put him in control of every scrap of territory from West Africa to Southeast Asia?

>404167

>a small scale reformation of Islam already happened, but attitudes like some in this thread are what allowed Erdogan and radical islam to come back into Turkey.

Sykes-Picot, the Palestinian Mandate, British American support of the Saudis, the British and American coup in Iran, western backing of the mujahideen in Afghanistan, and Israeli colonialism (and Anglo-American backing thereof), the destruction of both Pan-Arabism and left-wing movements by western powers, and the last 30 plus years of invasions, sanctions, torture and drone strikes produced modern Islamic radicalism and Erdogan.

>>404169
It's called social pressure, economic pressure, re-education, protecting moderate muslims instead of attacking them, criticizing radical Islam in media, call on Western governments to stop interacting with the ummah until they fix their shit.... you know the same shit West did to help Eastern Europe.

But it can't happen until turds admit the problem exists.

>That's not a source, that's a random image.
I'm the one asking for source because that shitty random image was all I could find.

>>404170
Invasion of mongols, avars, huns, turks and moors into Christian Europe, the expansion of Arab armies throughout Christian Asia Minor, Christian North Africa and the Christian Levant, and finally the cutting off of trade routes by the caliphates, all produced Christian radicalism during the middle ages.

Who gives a shit?

It doesn't matter how it was created, it was hurting people and it had to reform. Same as radical Islam.

>>404172
>you know the same shit West did to help Eastern Europe
Yeah, and that worked out so well

>>404160
I consider making fun of the mentally ill to be epithets regardless of what words you use, same as making light of people for being poor, not having a home, etc.

>>404161
>earnestly pays attention to sociology
Oh did you do a poll among sociologists to find out if they think your opinion is bigoted? I'd like to see that poll. Until then I'm going to assume sociologists and everyone else (ie 99.99999% of the world) considers your opinion to be bigoted.

In just this post you've claimed mentally ill people can "pretend" to not be mentally ill so they don't have any problems and we should ignore them. You've called transsexuals abnormal and ignored all of their lived experiences prior to transitioning. You've attacked Jewish people and demanded they "pass as christian" or you wont treat them equally. In the previous post you claimed women were inferior to insane men thereby belittling every woman in existence, and that's just the shitty line I read before I stopped.

I don't know why I bothered reading any part of your shitposts. You are a bigot, your opinions are horrible, keep them to yourself.

>>404172

>events 500 plus years ago vs. a series of events beginning 200 years ago and continuing today

You got me! Totally fair comparison?

>who gives a shit?

Seeing that Western action created and perpetuates this threat, and uses it as justification for an ever larger and more invasive security state, you ought to.

Reform won't happen as long as people are starving and miserable. Reform won't happen as long as we back Egypt and Turkey and the Saudis while hypocritically attacking Iran for human rights abuses. Reform won't happen as long as Egyptian and Bahraini protestors are getting shot in the gut with tear gas canisters labeled "Made in the USA", and the refugees from the chaos our policies have created are let to die in the water and languish beside barbed wire because they might have come to hate us.

>>404176
If events 500 years ago are inadmissible because they're a few centuries older than events 200 years ago, then events 200 years ago are inadmissible because they're a few centuries older than NOW. It must be hurt being this stupid.

>Reform won't happen as long as people are starving and miserable.
Wrong. That's when reform happens. Reform doesn't happen when people are comfortable, you unlearned jackass.

The problem is that people like you refuse to let the ummah reform. You are the one who doesn't admit the problem exists, who tries to excuse the problem when its pointed out, who refuses to criticize the problem or even see the problem criticized by someone else.

//youtube.com/watch?v=pEP_22dIUM8

>>404177
>The problem is that people like you refuse to let the ummah reform.
Yeah man, I saw an imam preaching moderation on the street the other day and I kicked that dude's ass.

>>404178
Haram/10

>>404177

You're invoking events from 610 to 1566 as explanation for modern events without drawing connection. Its tangential as saying Henry Ford is responsible for someone dying in a car crash in 2016. Meanwhile, Sykes-Picot (1918) is having a direct effect on modern events. Daesh/ISIL's stated goals is reversing the effects of Sykes-Picot and establishing a pan-Arab nation; before that, Gamal Abdel Nasser and the Baath Parties aspired to the same. The lack of a Kurdish homeland? Sykes-Picot. (http://www.dailynews.com/general-news/20140702/watch-this-english-speaking-isis-fighter-explain-how-a-98-year-old-colonial-map-created-todays-conflict). Likewise, Israel's continual occupation of the Golan Heights and expansion into the West Bank?

Also, the Protestant Reformation, if we're taking that as precedent, occurred during a time of growing European populations and prosperity, with nascent colonization of the new world, agricultural innovation, and increasingly sophisticated economic and commercial structures that would lead to the birth of modern capitalism.

When people are oppressed and miserable, however, especially by a foreign and hostile power, they double down on their faith, turning to it as a source of assurance and identity. That is why Poland, after its centuries of oppression by Russia, Germany, and then the USSR, and Ireland, long a British colony, were/are some of the more conservative Catholic nations, compared to secular France. Only if the pressure is let off and peace allowed to return to the Muslim world will we see organic reform develop. As long as the Islamic world views itself as under siege, Muslim liberals will be seen as quislings and calls for reform dismissed as capitulation.

>>404179

same lol

And of course all of this is tangential to the fact that you don't actually care about Islamic reformation, you just don't want brown people around. As anon pointed out awhile ago, the same crimes you continue to link and obsess over, committed by Islamic refugees in Germany, you would never mention if committed by white men.

>>404180
Only gay sex is haram, if I preggers and marry her no one can say a thing.

>>404179
You attacked a dude in this thread for pointing out crimes of radical islam.

This guy >>404182 is doing it right now.

>you just don't want brown people around
No idea how he's coming to this conclusion. Hey you know how they say every assumption is a few parts of the target and a few parts of the person making the assumption? Well the target in this case has said nothing racist, so ALL OF THE PARTS of this assumption are coming from the anon >>404182

That's fucked up!

>>404185
Dude, nobody is buying this.

>>404191
KC Green fucking hates that edit.

>>404192
KC has that pesky empathy business going on

>>404193
KC is a self hating fedora which is trying to get redemption for his days of talking about friendzones and ladder theories. See 50% of SJW webcomic writers.

>>404194
Unlike fine gentlemen such as yourself, who continue to talk about friendzones and ladder theories while loving your fedoras.

>>404194
>>404195
What's a ladder theory?

>>404196
It's the basis of the Alpha/Beta thing that all the fedoralords go on about, and how women only ever "move up on the ladder," never down or laterally.

>>404197
Ah, thanks.

>>404195
I didn't see people talking friendzones for a loooooong time. That stereotype is pretty dead, no matter how you wish it still exist.

Now it just politicals slapfights and ideological bullshit. Honestly, I regret atheist wank.

>For months, Republican leaders have worried about how to stop 2016 frontrunner Donald Trump. Now, one of the conservative movement’s most influential publications is taking matters into its own hands.

>National Review is dedicating a special issue of its magazine, one week before the Iowa caucuses, to stopping Trump. “Against Trump,” blares the magazine cover. Inside, a blistering editorial questions Trump's commitment to conservatism, warning voters that backing him is tantamount to allowing the conservative movement to have “fallen in behind a huckster.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/trump-nationalreview-218079

>>404191

ITT we all laugh at you for saying 'in this in this thread'.

And also for being a sad excuse for a human being.