The Politics Thread
- Thread starter Wandering Yid
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
General Chat is like 4Chan. The high level of offensiveness serves to keep out all but the most thick-skinned.
This forum was started because of the perceived over-moderation of another successful one.
GC's basically that sentiment taken to an extreme.
I used to post on there a few years ago and got into a debate with one particular nutcase.
He invited me to mate an associate of his, who'd been in the news for his controversial views.
Who was it? Anjem Choudary, currently awaiting trial, having been accused of recruiting for ISIS.
Yep, the Prem board is a ****ing zoo. But, GC is a jungle!....
Probably partly my fault. I thought I was getting into a discussion on whether feminism remained a positive and necessary influence or whether it had achieved its objectives but it seems that it is proven that it is a terrorist attack on of the very fabric of our society with unsuspecting denizens being entrapped by sexy photos on LinkedIn. Anyone who has a contrary opinion is biased/racist/sexist or hasn't thought it through properly.
I agree, power. I'm not familiar with the whole story, but I see no valid reason why this 'outraged' female barrister had to go to the national press over what was said.
A simple, 'your comments are unwelcome, please keep them to yourself', in response, would have sufficed.
All that vicious, angry hyperbole he was using literally every time he mentioned that barrister, the paranoid fictions he was inventing around that whole incident, the clear inability to engage with facts and the tendency towards fantasy and bitter self-pity. Calling a Linkd In friend request "entrapment" and a bizarre fixation with what the woman was wearing in her photo. Pages of never engaging with what's actually being said but furious rants at invented claims and slights. Claims that I might want to threaten him or blackmail him, an inability and/or unwillingness to listen or learn and a desire to hang out with utter morons spouting vile, nasty racist **** with them. It all makes total sense now.
You don't have to bother finishing that skeletal ****ing treatise on what's wrong with feminism, Rob. Show it to your mates in the general chat section. They'll probably think you're well intellectual.
You don't have to bother finishing that skeletal ****ing treatise on what's wrong with feminism, Rob. Show it to your mates in the general chat section. They'll probably think you're well intellectual.
I slagged him off for being a lazy, jobless scrounger, who lived of the state that he was constantly moaning about!
I have no issues with those that are genuinely unemployed, but he's just gaming the system.
Anyway, Lenny doesnt want to take part innthe discussion from the looks of it, so I'll just spell it out myself :
Any negative effects that the feminist movement has today - whether that's on men, women, business, or society - are in no way absolved by a perception that historically men have had the better deal than women.
It's of no relevance whatsoever to how feminism should be assessed, practised and regulated today.
This is not just because the perception referred to above, is probably wholly inaccurate, but that the people alive today were in no way responsible for it, and in no way benefitted from it at the time, and there should therefore be no countenance whatsoever of any entitlement for feminists to take 'revenge' today, or - as Powerspurs put it - enact a "backlash".
Any negative effects that the feminist movement has today - whether that's on men, women, business, or society - are in no way absolved by a perception that historically men have had the better deal than women.
It's of no relevance whatsoever to how feminism should be assessed, practised and regulated today.
This is not just because the perception referred to above, is probably wholly inaccurate, but that the people alive today were in no way responsible for it, and in no way benefitted from it at the time, and there should therefore be no countenance whatsoever of any entitlement for feminists to take 'revenge' today, or - as Powerspurs put it - enact a "backlash".
Last edited:
I slagged him off for being a lazy, jobless scrounger, who lived of the state that he was constantly moaning about!
I have no issues with those that are genuinely unemployed, but he's just gaming the system.
Spurs 1 ISIS 0
At the risk of igniting another 5 pages of trash, that's what she did do, but she then somehow felt that she needed to do more so published his comment and her response on Twitter. That's when the press got involved. But as Lennypops has said more eloquently than I, this is not one of the major problems the world faces at this juncture
I'd agree there too. I was just wondering when it was going to end!...
What the world?
Nip up to Leicester Square there'e usually somebody there who knows
What the world?
Nip up to Leicester Square there'e usually somebody there who knows
Used to be one on Regent St. years ago. I worked in the West End for a while and he'd be out there every day, in all weathers, with his "The end is nigh" placard on a pole.
I don't think anyone would disagree with most of that except for the wholly inaccurate bit. However to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past we have to understand them. There is no entitlement that justifies a backlash but anger and revenge is a powerful driver of human actions, and the best way of avoiding the need for revenge is not to do wrong in the first place.
I like the way they come up with new dates each time we manage to get past one
Do you remember when , who was it, the Jehovah's Witnesses or the Scientologists, saying you had to climb up a mountain and wait to be picked up as the world ended. LOL The innocent days of Armageddon
As I put it previously,
"
I'm delighted that i was not a man in the early 20h century, or the 19th century, or the 18th century, or any century going back to and beyond the stone age, because if i was, the chances are that i wouldnt be sitting in an office lording it over female secretaries, but rather i would be in the trenches facing german guns as my friends explode around me, or being bayonneted, or garotted, or having to bayonnet or garotte someone else. Or perhaps i would be on a ship, spending months at sea, or dieing from scurvy, or working all hours of the day in terrible conditions down a mine.
Who knows ?
"
But besides this ratttthhhher important point, I would suggest that you are wrong to hold men to account for the actions (eg dieing in wars protecting their wives etc - the baaaaaaaasssstards) of other men before they were born, and further wrong to assume - as I keep pointing out - that it's not only men who suffer at the hands of the feminist movement.
So, without wishing to appear deliberately adversarial, you're wrong on 3 counts.
Dunno mate. I was too busy swerving him, like everybody else.
I remember this nutter too....
You must log in or register to see images