Thread: Misogyny is the new blasphemy

Every time you are called a misogynist for criticizing women, you can replace misogynist with blasphemer to remind yourself that you are dealing with religious nuts. Gods come and go, worshippers remain the same. It looks like (most? all?) humans are bound to worship something (Latin religio supernatural constraint; religare to restrain, tie back). If it is not God, or a god, then it is Woman, singular and with a capital W; or Nature, or Life. Something. Anything.

(Just putting this thought out there to get it out of my system.)

Racism, Homophobic, Sexist and my personal fave - Hater. I love the word Hater. That one really sums it up for me, it is a war on critical thought. Don't like a song? HATER! Don't like the politics? HATER! Don't question, don't analyze, don't do anything at all!

Do nothing, Say nothing, Be nothing.

Originally Posted by Morlock

it is a war on critical thought.

Absolutely. And when they scream HATER, they look like … haters. But it requires critical thought to notice that, so they are safe.



Edit: The mentality is “critical thought is fine, as long as it is applied to things I don’t like”. That is why I called them religious nuts, they just can’t stand it if the object of their worship is not revered by everybody else.

This thread title is a VERY GOOD metaphor.

Challenging myths of the so-called empathetic sex is a HATE CRIME, ya know! Gotta be a GOOD little GOY and report this thread to the SPLC...

RAAAAaaaAAAPE!

In all seriousness, they wore out the MYSOGYNY word like they did the WAYCIST one in yet another dependable moment of female hysteria. (Goofy silly females, hahaha!)

Therefore their formerly dependable shaming weaponized words have been rendered rather diluted. Thus people just don't care that much anymore. When it comes to the average Joe or Joan.

Originally Posted by Ace Francis

This thread title is a VERY GOOD metaphor.

Challenging myths of the so-called empathetic sex is a HATE CRIME, ya know! Gotta be a GOOD little so-called goy and report this thread to the SPLC...

RAAAAaaaAAAPE!

In all seriousness, they wore out the MYSOGYNY word like they did the WAYCIST one in yet another dependable moment of female hysteria. (Goofy silly females, hahaha!)

Therefore their formerly dependable shaming weaponized words have been rendered rather diluted. Thus people just don't care that much anymore. When it comes to the average Joe or Joan.

The problem with shaming language is that eventually it starts sounding like a self parody. People get called racist because they don't like Indian food, people are called sexist because they criticize a female politician's policies. I have seen documentaries desperately trying to discredit Hitler to the point where they make doco's about his flatulence and stomach troubles!

As you say in the end they wear it out and so they look for new terms. I love the "White male privilege one" that is designed just to shut people up. White Leftard Feminist's even claim that white women deserve to be raped by the Muslim's because Muslims are being discriminated against! I could go on and on but it is just stupidity in action.

Originally Posted by Morlock

I love the "White male privilege one" that is designed just to shut people up.

I thought of a reply to that. To explain:

A [insert label here] cannot benefit more than [insert a different label here] unless someone else, a person or persons, is showing [first label] preference or special treatment beyond what is being given to [second label]. The person or persons showing this preference to others is discriminating.

So, the white male is the beneficiary of discrimination performed by a discriminator. The beneficiary is not the discriminator.

If someone does not like that such discrimination occurs, the person to approach, the person to accuse, is the one doing the discriminating, not the beneficiary of the discrimination.

But, to accuse the correct party would require facts in order to effect change, and to the accusers this sounds like work, and the whole thing could get legal, which makes the accusation less accessible to your rank-and-file street-level big-mouth SJW. It's much easier for them to do as the female mind thinks, and shoot their mouth off anywhere it gains traction, logic be damned, and blame an entire group of people. Who cares how unfair this is because it allows all sorts of people to participate in the accusation and feel good about it.

If it shuts people up, I offer that it's not because we do not sense something is inherently wrong with the accusation but that we have no articulation for what we may sense.

Next time someone accuses white male privilege, don't argue whether it actually exists, instead tell them to stop blaming the victim. Tell them that all recipients of discrimination are victims. Remind the accuser of their flawed course of action with what they think. If need be, create a vocabulary to assist their thinking, of positive victims of discrimination and negative victims of discrimination.

Tell them if they blame white people or white males just because they believe these people have the same skin color as the discriminators, then they are practicing racism, for that is what that is.

Tell them to quit being stupid and to take their lazy racism somewhere else.

Originally Posted by Unboxxed

I thought of a reply to that. To explain:

A [insert label here] cannot benefit more than [insert a different label here] unless someone else, a person or persons, is showing [first label] preference or special treatment beyond what is being given to [second label]. The person or persons showing this preference to others is discriminating.

So, the white male is the beneficiary of discrimination performed by a discriminator. The beneficiary is not the discriminator.

If someone does not like that such discrimination occurs, the person to approach, the person to accuse, is the one doing the discriminating, not the beneficiary of the discrimination.

But, to accuse the correct party would require facts in order to effect change, and to the accusers this sounds like work, and the whole thing could get legal, which makes the accusation less accessible to your rank-and-file street-level big-mouth SJW. It's much easier for them to do as the female mind thinks, and shoot their mouth off anywhere it gains traction, logic be damned, and blame an entire group of people. Who cares how unfair this is because it allows all sorts of people to participate in the accusation and feel good about it.

If it shuts people up, I offer that it's not because we do not sense something is inherently wrong with the accusation but that we have no articulation for what we may sense.

Next time someone accuses white male privilege, don't argue whether it actually exists, instead tell them to stop blaming the victim. Tell them that all recipients of discrimination are victims. Remind the accuser of their flawed course of action with what they think. If need be, create a vocabulary to assist their thinking, of positive victims of discrimination and negative victims of discrimination.

Tell them if they blame white people or white males just because they believe these people have the same skin color as the discriminators, then they are practicing racism, for that is what that is.

Tell them to quit being stupid and to take their lazy racism somewhere else.

I've done similar and they always have some stupid come back, usually something like "You just don't like others having the same rights as yourself" yeah ok. I am 45 years old and I am still waiting to see this privilege they keep talking about. In the end these people are so brainwashed that is like trying to tell or ask a devout Christian that if we are all descended from Adam and Eve than why are we different colours and doesn't that mean we are all inbred?

They have their beliefs and as wrong as they may know they are they will cling to them until death.

Further on your post, it made me think of this which is basically what we are talking about; link https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ri...ticulturalism/

“Here is how they do it,” Lamm said: First to destroy America, “Turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country. History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. The historical scholar Seymour Lipset put it this way: ‘The histories of bilingual and bi-cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans.”
Lamm went on: Second, to destroy America, “Invent ‘multiculturalism’ and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal. That there are no cultural differences. I would make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds.
Third, “We could make the United States a ‘Hispanic Quebec’ without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently: ‘The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved! Not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.'”
Lamm said, “I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that we have various cultural subgroups living in America reinforcing their differences rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities.”
“Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% dropout rate from high school.”
“My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of ‘Victimology.’ I would get all minorities to think their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population.”
“My sixth plan for America’s downfall would include dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity. I would stress differences rather than similarities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other – that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity! Unity is what it takes to keep a nation together. Look at the ancient Greeks. The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshiped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic Games.

Originally Posted by Ace Francis

Challenging myths of the so-called empathetic sex is a HATE CRIME, ya know! Gotta be a GOOD little GOY and report this thread to the SPLC...

Originally Posted by Zoidberg

oh my GOSH, MGTOW is Satanic! (Okay, I inadvertently exposed myself as a female trying to get you all back on the plantation...)

On the other hand, unfortunately this AGAIN, confirms The Voice of Reason's video about the 666s popping up too often lately. Except for this time it's in the flesh! (Need to hear that Exodus song from 1987 about cannibalism called Pleasures of the Flesh: https://youtu.be/RcYJkXzv21Q )

Why not?! That's a metaphor for for what the blue pilled world is doing to itself! For decades now.