Get Free Email Updates!
Join us for FREE to get instant email updates!
All These Anti-Trump Women Protests and Marches
Exactly as I predicted, the inauguration of Donald Trump (a dishonest authoritarian with zero emotional control who supports government health care, hates freedom of speech, and is terrified that you might find out what’s in his tax returns), has ignited and mobilized the left in ways we have literally never seen before. Right after his inauguration, there were left-wing protests in the USA and around the world, of record sizes, primarily based around women’s issues. Grab your popcorn folks; the sleeping giant has awoken.
-By Caleb Jones
I am not a conservative, nor alt-right, nor Republican, nor religious. This means I am for unlimited women’s rights, the same as for men. I think women should do literally whatever the hell they want with their lives, provided they don’t directly violate other people’s bodies or property. I think the law should treat men and women identically. As an Alpha Male 2.0, I literally never tell a women I’m dating what to do, since I don’t care, she’s an adult, I’m not threatened by other men, I don’t like babysitting people, I don’t like drama, and I have bigger things in my life to concern myself with, namely my own goals and Mission.
At the same time, I am 100% opposed to socialism or anything that looks like it. Regardless of your gender, the government has no right to put a gun in an innocent person’s face and force that person to pay for your food, healthcare, birth control, abortion, pap smear, time off work, or whatever else you want for free. Uh, no. Fuck you. If you want something, get your ass out there and earn it yourself; don’t put a gun in my face and force me to pay for it. Last time I checked, you’re not my daughter, mother, or wife, and I have my own bills to pay, thank you very much. And before you call me sexist, I am constantly saying this to men all the damn time; so now I’m saying it to you women too. See? I treat men and women the same. You wanted equality, right? Great. Get your ass to work.
I also believe that while men and women should be treated identically under the law, we have to also acknowledge common sense, and the fact that men and women have very different bodies. Expecting all women to be as effective as firefighters as all men are, where they are expected to lug a 250 pound man out of a burning building, is a little silly to say the least.
Are there exceptions to the rule? Are there some bodybuilder women out there who could do this? Of course, and let those women be firefighters if they want, but you cant change the overall standards for jobs that require strong upper-body strength (as just one example) because a few women get butt-hurt about it. You don’t see me whining about how I can’t nurse babies, do you?
Now that you have context, here are my responses to this article about these woman protests that’s been going around lately. The author is actually directing the article to other women who think these protests are pathetic. It still think that it’s a good article to use, since it’s indicative of the arguments most of these protesting women are making. You can make your own choices, speak and be heard, vote, work, control your body, defend yourself, defend your family, because of the women who marched. You did nothing to earn those rights. You were born into those rights. You did nothing, but you reap the benefits of women, strong women, women who fought misogyny and pushed through patriarchy and fought for you. And you sit on your pedestal, a pedestal you are fortunate enough to have, and type.
As I’ve said many times to right-wing men who post on my blogs, just because someone did something 100 years ago that somehow has improved my life, doesn’t mean that I must now make choices today that make me less happy. I do not honor the dead. Trust me, they don’t care. They’re dead. I honor the living, namely, myself and my loved ones. Implying that I must make choices today that damage my happiness because some dead guy did something 100 years ago that benefited me is the height of stupidity and irrational Societal Programming.
Of course I’m thankful for these people, but today I’m on my own. George Washington was a great man, but he isn’t going to pay your alimony payments if you get divorced, nor is he going to get you laid tomorrow. That’s all on you. This applies to women as well. I don’t think women today need to sit around masturbating about Susan B. Anthony or Eleanor Roosevelt. I think instead they need to get their asses to work (you know, that thing you wanted the right to do?) and improve their own, individual lives. You still make less than a man for doing the same work.
This is false, and has been refuted on the internet so many times that I tire of seeing this argument and linking to its refutations. Women make within 2-3%, at worst, of men when the women make the exact same life choices as men. Moreover, childless women in their 20s make more money than men in their 20s. If anything, women are on the rise. It's men who are regressing.
Seriously, ladies, get off this argument already. It’s making you look stupid. You still don’t have full rights over your own body. Men are still debating over your uterus. I don’t disagree. Not only am I pro-abortion in the first trimester, I think that not enough women have abortions and that more should occur. The fewer babies the government forces me at gunpoint to pay for, the better. For more detail on my opinion regarding abortion, read this. Over your prenatal care.
You still have to pay taxes for your basic sanitary needs.
I don’t get this. If you’re saying you shouldn't pay income tax, then I’m right with you, sister! I shouldn't either! Libertarian all the way!
But if you’re saying that the government (meaning me, the taxpayer) should provide for your “basic sanitary needs,” then with all due respect, you can go to hell. Pay for it yourself, Ms. Independent Don't Need A Man. Otherwise, explain to me why the government shouldn’t take over all farms and grocery stores and provide us all with free government food.
You still have to carry mace when walking alone at night.
This is a wise precaution. I always recommend women carry at least mace if they walk around at night alone regularly. A gun would be even better. Oh, but wait, you don’t like those and want those to be illegal so that just criminals have them. Oh yeah.
I don’t like that you have to carry mace either, but human nature is the way it is. Laws and bitching aren’t going to change this.
You still have to prove to the court why you were drunk on the night you were raped. You still have to justify your behavior when a man forces himself on you.
If you choose to go over to a man’s house of whom you don’t know, in the middle of the night, and choose to get drunk while there, and then get raped, then yes, you do need to explain your behavior. That doesn’t mean he’s not guilty of rape; if he raped you, he needs to go to prison. But that doesn’t mean you’re 100% blameless either.
With this rape thing, women don't seem to understand that personal responsibility is not a zero sum game. He can be 100% responsible for his crime and his actions and at the same time, you can hold some percentage of responsibility for your reckless, dangerous behavior. You still have a measure of personal responsibility, don’t you? Or are you a child who is incapable of controlling herself?
And before you call me a rape apologist (or whatever new meaningless phrase you feminists have invented), please read this.
You still don’t have paid (or even unpaid) maternity leave.
Then quit your job and find a new job that offers it.
Or wait until you make more money before you have kids.
Or marry a guy with more money.
Or save up some cash before you have kids.
Or don’t have kids at all.
So many options other than putting guns to small business owners’ heads!
You still have to go back to work while your body is broken.
No, you don’t “have” to do anything. You chose to have that baby while working at that job, as I explained here. No one forced you. That was your decision.
Women have nine forms of birth control, plus the Plan B bill, plus abortion. We men have just one. This is why we men laugh at you when you talk about how you’re “forced” to do something when it comes to having a baby. You have so many more options than we do, it’s ridiculous. (And you still don’t see us men bitching about our “reproductive rights,” do you?)
You still have to fight to breastfeed in public. You still have to prove to other women it’s your right to do so. You still offend others with your breasts.
I agree with you on this. Americans and Canadians in particular need to lighten up. It’s just a boob, people. Boobs are good. Boobs make the world go ‘round.
You are still objectified. You are still catcalled. You are still sexualized.
Yep, you are sexualized when you post closeups of your cleavage or bubble butt on Instagram. When women stop doing this kind of thing, then they can complain about being sexualized. Until then, cause and effect, baby.
You are still told you’re too skinny or you’re too fat.
Well, that depends on what you're talking about, doesn't it? If you are a woman and weigh 200-250 pounds, you are indeed too fat (unless you’re 6’0” or something) to live a happy and healthy life. This is not my opinion, this is fact. Ask a doctor if you don’t believe me.
If you’re a little chubby, then fine, but if you’re truly fat, then I’m not sure why we’re all supposed to pretend that this is a good thing. It is not, for women or men.
You’re still told you’re too old or too young.
I agree this is wrong and should end. On the younger side, I’ve said many times that age of consent and legal adulthood (as just two examples) should be 16, not 18 or 21. On the older side, I’ve said many times that women over 30 and over 40 are still super attractive and I love them to death.
Just remember I said that when you see a man my age on a date with a much younger woman, okay ladies? Remember, all this stuff needs to apply to both genders equally, or else you’re a bunch of hypocrites.
You’re applauded when you “age gracefully.”
Why is this bad? I love it when people say that to me.
You’re still told men age “better.”
We do. Fact.
Hey, women live longer, and you don’t see me bitching about that. Sometimes the facts benefit me, other times they benefit you. Not a big deal.
You’re still told to dress like a lady. You are still judged on your outfit instead of what’s in your head. What brand bag you have still matters more than your college degree.
Um, who cares more about that kind of thing: men or women? Be very honest, ladies.
Do you seriously think that when I’m looking at a woman, I care about the kind of handbag she’s carrying? Do you think I even notice?
You are still being abused by your husband, by your boyfriend. You’re still being murdered by your partners. Being beaten by your soulmate.
This all happens to men too, Sweetheart. Check the stats. This is not a gender issue.
(Oh, and by the way, the biggest single reason for people beating up their partners? Monogamy! If everyone just lightened up a little bit and let their partners get a little on the side occasionally, there would be far less violence in the world. I'm very serious about this.)
You are still worse off if you are a woman of color, a gay woman, a transgender woman.
Again, this is not a gender issue. You can say the exact same thing about non-white, gay, or transgender men. Moreover, gay/transgender men suffer more, in terms of violence and discrimination, than gay/transgender women. Google the stats if you don’t believe me. (Seriously, do you see a lot of lesbians getting beaten up? I don't.)
Why do you keep trying to make gender issues where there are none? Are you bored or something?
Your daughters are still told they are beautiful before they are told they are smart.
And this is a bad thing, because...?
And for the record, I'm pretty sure I told my daughter that she was a smartASS before I told her she was smart.
Your daughters are still told to behave even though “boys will be boys.”
Not only is this false, but it’s an outright lie. Everyone who knows the school system well knows that it’s actually the precise opposite. Girls are treated normally while boys are treated like dysfunctional girls. Boys are punished far more often for being loud and not settling down like girls are biologically designed to do.
I saw this happen with my own two kids as they grew up. Both of my kids were always well-behaved, but my son had way more trouble with his teachers than my daughter ever did, and she’s WAY more of a smartass than he is.
This has already been examined and talked about in great detail by people who know more than I do about this issue, so I’m not going to rehash it all here, but you complaining that girls are treated worse than boys by the school system is so laughable that it’s disgusting.
Your daughters are still told boys pull hair or pinch them because they like them.
And when they grow up, boys are told to pay for multiple dinner dates with no sex if they really like a girl. I’d be more than happy to switch places and have little girls pull my hair and pinch me only to have them buy me dinner for the first few dates when we both grow up. Deal.
Yeah. That’s called socialism. We don’t do that quite as well here in the US as they do in Europe, and I’m glad we don’t. If you want to take time off work, then great, take the time, but don’t make me or your boss pay for it. That’s your problem.
Singapore’s women feel safe walking alone at night. American women do not.
Correct. This is because Singapore is in Asia, and Asia is on the rise, and America is in the West, which is in a state of collapse, thanks in large part to left-wingers like you.
Just remember that one of the primary reasons the West is collapsing is because of largely left-wing social and economic policies that you support and that I have been opposing for decades. There’s that darn cause and effect again.
Not that I care anymore. Since people like you have destroyed the West, I’ll soon be living elsewhere, so good luck with that mace!
New Zealand’s women have the smallest gender gap in wages, at 5.6%. United States’ pay gap is 20%.
See above about what I said about this pay gap stuff being complete bullshit and how it makes you sound stupid. There is no real gender pay gap in the US or New Zealand.
Iceland has the highest number of women CEOs, at 44%. United States is at 4.0%.
Then you should probably ask why so many American women aren’t going for the CEO spot.
The United States ranks at 45 for women’s equality. Behind Rwanda, Cuba, Philippines, Jamaica.
Ah, so should we be more like Rwanda, Cuba, the Philippines, and Jamaica then? Would you like to be a woman living in Rwanda, Cuba, the Philippines, or Jamaica?
But I get it. You don’t want to admit it. You don’t want to be a victim.
Correct. I don’t. And I feel sorry that people like you idolize victimhood.
You think feminism is a dirty word.
No, I just think that feminism already accomplished its goals many decades ago (women can work now, women can vote now, etc) and now I think you’re just looking around for things to complain about and want a bunch of free shit that you want me to pay for.
You think it’s not classy to fight for equality.
I think equality is great. It’s socialism I don’t like. You can’t put a gun to my head and force me to pay your living expenses. You can ask me for that, and if you really need my help and I know you and love you, maybe I will. I can also choose to donate to charity to help the less fortunate, and I do so every month. But force me at gunpoint to do it? Nope. (But please feel free to move to North Korea whenever you like.)
You hate the word pussy.
I love that word so much, it's my third favorite one (after "freedom" and "money").
Unless of course you use it to call a man who isn’t up to your standard of manhood. You know the type of man that “allows” “his” woman to do whatever she damn well pleases.
Yeah, that’s very Alpha 2.0. Women I date can do whatever they want.
Now if you’re talking about a woman who bosses a man around, well, that would be a beta male, and yeah, he is a pussy.
You believe feminists are emotional, irrational, unreasonable.
At least today’s feminists. Those ones back in the 60s and 70s were pretty cool though. They paid for their own dates, thought monogamy was stupid, and never wanted to get traditionally married. Cool! Where did those feminists go? (You probably had them all killed.)
Why aren’t women just satisfied with their lives, right?
No. Instead, my question is: Why don’t you stop worrying about Donald Trump (who will become a non-issue in just a few years when the left-wing juggernaut continues) and focus instead on your own life and your own happiness? Why are you bothering me with this crap? I'm just trying to get to work while you're blocking the roads and flashing your undersized tits.
You get what you get and you don’t get upset, right?
Not at all. Go out there and get what you want. Just don’t complain about me paying for it. Pay for it yourself, Ms. Independent!
I get it. You want to feel empowered. You don’t want to believe you’re oppressed. Because that would mean you are indeed a “second-class citizen.” You don’t want to feel like one. I get it. But don’t worry. I will walk for you. I will walk for your daughter. And your daughter’s daughter. And maybe you will still believe the world did not change. You will believe you’ve always had the rights you have today. And that’s okay. Because women who actually care and support other women don’t care what you think about them. They care about their future and the future of the women who come after them.
I’m going to tell you what I tell all left-wingers. Guess what? You have nothing to worry about. You’ve already won, and won quite a while ago. All you have to do now is wait to collect your winnings, much of which you’ve already collected (a welfare state, high minimum wage, government health care, gay marriage, single motherhood celebrated, etc).
Seriously. All you have to do is wait a few years, particularly after Trump leaves office, and all the politically correct, socialistic bullshit you don't have yet will soon be a reality in the US (and Europe, and Canada, etc). You on the left have already won, most Republican elites are more or less on your side, and the minority alt-right has a lot of anger and slogans but no actual plan. So there’s really no need to scream and yell and smash your signs into people. Just chill and be patient. The future is yours.
Yeah, I realize Trump irritates you, but he’s objectively and measurably the most hated man ever elected to be president, the Lizard Queen got almost three million more votes, at least 17% of his own voters don't think he’s qualified for the job, his inauguration looked like a damn funeral dirge, and the day after he became president we had the largest protests in history against him. So don’t worry about him; in a few years he’ll be gone like the wind and you’ll have a socialist, Bernie Sanders type running things just the way you want.
I won’t be here when that all happens of course, because unlike you, I actually like to be happy, and I have no interest in living in a collapsing society. But by all means, ladies, keep screaming at all of these useless protests for things you already have or will have very soon. They'll keep you nice and furious, and I’ll be laughing at you from afar, and we’ll both have what we want.
Want over 35 hours of how-to podcasts on how to improve your woman life and financial life? Want to be able to coach with me twice a month? Want access to hours of technique-based video and audio? The SMIC Program is a monthly podcast and coaching program where you get access to massive amounts of exclusive, members-only Alpha 2.0 content as soon as you sign up, and you can cancel whenever you want. Click here for the details.
Get Free Email Updates!
Join us for FREE to get instant email updates!
AL 2017-01-26 05:28:26
The protesters are just rent-a-mob. As they were today in Australia on Australia Day. As they were in the U.K. during the Thatcher years. I defend the right to protest (peacefully) but maybe getting off their asses and voting when they had the chance to prevent Trump winning would have been better. The left was so confident of a win that many of them were too lazy to go to vote. (Yes, I know the system skews it so she got more votes but still lost, but there were more votes out there.) No that much actually changes with elections or protests anyway. 🙂 But as usual BD, the points you make in your article are all well made.
Arthur 2017-01-26 05:33:53
'You believe feminists are emotional, irrational, unreasonable.' Yes, yes, a thousand times yes.
Roberto 2017-01-26 05:54:33
What is the point of these demonstrations in places like London, Berlin, Sydney? People there could not vote for or against Trump and can do nothing to influence anything now. I am not sure what the point of the demonstrations is in the United States, either. Of course, I respect the rights of people to protest about whatever they want to, provided they do so peacefully and don't cause damage to person or property. But I really can't understand what they hope to achieve. The man was, apparently, lawfully elected according to the system in place. I realise that he, reprehensibly, said that he would not accept the result of the presidential election if he did not win it, but it makes no logical sense for these protesters now to be saying, or implying, that they don't accept the result because he did win it. Far better would be to present reasoned arguments against his actions (when he has done an action) rather than just yelling and screaming because he is there.
AL 2017-01-26 06:08:27
@ Roberto You are 100% correct.
tond 2017-01-26 06:23:56
STILL not tired of winning! #MAGA
Vince 2017-01-26 06:49:00
'Hillary won almost 3m more votes' Which came almost entirely from California. 'Trump most hated president ever' According to polls conducted by the same people who were 100% sure Clinton would win with a huge lead. Hated almost entirely by the increasingly radicalized left, who profess love for all except the huge number they hate, physically attacking Trump supporters and even threatening to bomb the White House etc. There is a name for such attacks conducted with a political objective: terrorism. 'His inauguration was like a funeral dirge' Is that according to CNN who had pics of the venue at 8:30am, while BLM and women's protestors prevented attendees entering? Did you watch his speech. It was powerful. 'Huge protest marches next day' Largely women's groups, many funded by the left. '17% of his supporters say he is unqualified to be president' Again, according to polls conducted by who? Would it be better if he were a career politician with no prior achievements of any sort? He has accomplished more in his time as PE and Pres than Obama did in eight years. His popularity increases every day, even among many on the left. 'He supports govt health care' Is that why he just repealed Obamacare? 'Hates free speech' Will repeal net neutrality and open up press briefings beyond just MSM. Hillary planned to shut down all non-MSM 'Scared to reveal tax returns' Plays by the same rules as other businessmen. I suggest you look beyond getting your news via MSM. They have lost and are losing a massive part of their constituency to so-called 'alt media'. Aside from the above I agree with your points about feminism, lived in Asia for 25 years 🙂
Fernando 2017-01-26 06:58:09
That's just cultural Marxism. You can't go out there and tell people "let's be socialists, it's wonderful", no one buys that crap. But you sell nice overall ideas like feminism and racial equality, distort in a multitude of ways to make it a huge conflict between left and right, and use these causes to gather people toward socialism without even knowing. The useful idiots Lenin talked about This happens all over the world, there are books and manuals written by Antonio Gramsci and guys from the school of Frankfurt about how to do that to society. What these groups say is irrelevant, it's all about creating conflict and turning it into votes
Vince 2017-01-26 07:24:07
Oh, and how many votes for the Democrats came from voter fraud, votes by illegals etc? I think you will find that the credibility of the left and their MSM support has taken a serious hit recently, and it is getting worse for them, by their own hand. Even Europe is seeing a significant pushback.
Lovergirl 2017-01-26 07:45:40
I'm not so sure about the wage gap not being real. In my office I am the only female manager, amongst about 15 men. I run a dept that was previously run by a man. He got paid more than me and was given a better title- Im an "assistant " manager despite the fact that there is no one directly over me in this dept and I do all the work the guy before me did, who was called the "manager" and made more. People in other depts are shocked when I tell them I'm the assistant because everyone assumes I'm the manager. Again, there is no one over me, lol. I've upped sales now over 100% from the guy before me and still getting paid less than he was. He thinks it's bs too (he works for another company now in the same industry and I come across him frequently). They hired a male to "help" me and he was given the same title as me and like $3000 more a year, to START, than I was paid when I originally took the position. I make only about $3000 more than him at this point. I do more work than he does and am in charge of the budget, etc which he doesn't even know how to do yet. Now they are trying to put another man over me but they won't come out and admit what they are doing because they are too afraid I will quit and someone has to train this guy (me- he is the manager over another dept and I'm having to teach him how to do everything). No one can come up with any other reason besides that I don't have a penis. Anyone who works with me or around me knows I am good at what I do. I'm not getting paid less due to performance- I made a lot of money in bonuses the past year, but my base pay is lower than a man in the same position. Hmmm.... Then there are issues that come up with being a female in management - like they said I wasn't firing enough people. I have fired 7 people in 6 months and the guy before me never fired a SINGLE person, yet I'm being accused of being too soft. Um, what? Just because my persona is not threatening doesn't mean I'm not doing the job. The guy before me was a big, burly, intimidating, fellow but way too easy on people. Okay, so what happens if I come across as harsh? On a conference call the other day I made some statements about issues we were having with our call center. I said "I spent six hours correcting their mistakes this weekend, it was a mess." The response from the corporate guy over all of us was "wow, that was blunt. Does anyone have anything NICE to say about the call center?" Can you imagine someone saying that to a male manager? "Now, be nice!" All of the men in my office who were on the call agreed that it needed to be said and that if anything it was understated. I wasn't "not nice," I was being honest and letting them know there were issues. Men can be direct and not get their hands slapped. To say sexism no longer exists in the workplace is untrue. It does- maybe more in some industries than others but it hasn't gone away.
CrabRangoon 2017-01-26 08:37:58
@Fernando Great points. These people are "useful idiots" and both the right and left use them all the time to push their agendas. For most people "socialism" is a scary word so they have to sell it under the guise of compassion and fair share...although many millennials seem to think socialism is way cool! Just saw a FB post about letting in as many refugees as possible and that it's the only "humane" thing to do. They even use some little girl in Aleppo saying she'll be Trump's best friend if she can come here. The US should not be the world police nor the world's nanny. I'm against all these wars overseas and the US getting involved but I also don't think all these refugees are our problem. We can't sustain our own system as it stands, nevermind flooding it with more unfortunates from all over the globe. Many other countries around the world do not let anyone in the country for the most part and no one moans about that. Every sovereign nation has the right to establish it's own rules and preferences for migrants.
Max Cantor 2017-01-26 08:41:34
Excellent post !
K 2017-01-26 08:50:17
You still have to pay taxes for your basic sanitary needs.Not sure but this could have referred to the sales tax... Over here 21% sales tax is imposed on sanitary pads - as well as on toilet paper, though.
Ed 2017-01-26 09:02:59
Lovergirl, Quit whining, and quit your job, write them an essay about what jerks they are, and exit stage left. Get another job before you exit stage left, one that you make what your worth. Why do you take that crap??? MOVE ON. Unless you really like telling everyone how your beaten down by men, and under paid. As I assume you must by posting this whining, self pity post for all men to see. Want paid like your male counter parts, then act like one. Pull up your big boy pants, and move on. By the way, my boss is a woman!
Lovergirl 2017-01-26 09:17:27
No one is whining about anything. I love my job. Like I said, I kill it in bonuses because i am good at what I do. I'm pointing out the facts that women are still treated differently and in many cases, unfairly, in the workplace.
Lovergirl 2017-01-26 09:18:44
Also, Im the boss over about 20 people right now. No one said women couldn't be bosses.
Brick 2017-01-26 09:41:39
Lots of things are out in the open now. Western men are seeing first hand how Muslim men are treated by their wives, and American men have been seeing happy Latino families with supportive wives and happy husbands, while they are treated like the flu by their corporate feminist "partners" or ex wives who left them out of boredom. There isn't much the Left has to offer hetero men. It's not like the Right is going to make non-marital sex illegal, so who cares if they are in power? If it all boils down to abortion rights, well, the Left is once again making no sense because they court the immigrant voters, many of whom are very traditional in one way or another unlike their condo dwelling patrons on the coasts. Like BD, I believe in personal freedom; so women shouldn't be limited by laws or bigotry. However, as most people are average (mediocre) most women are too, so they have no cultural incentive or peer pressure via social norms to keep their word or maintain loyalty in relationships. Not all women, certainly, but if the prevailing culture is pure hedonism with zero accountability water will just find it's level. Libertarianism doesn't work for the very reasons that libertarians feel constrained: most people don't excel or have much discipline, so the tyranny of the mob and low expectations rule when the traditional expectations and limits are removed. What do you do with all the regular peeps? They won't just disappear because you happen to be a Galt type who made his own fortune or excellence. The best deal for a person of excellence would be migrating to the (formerly) elite cities and making their own life while the rurals kept the farm and went to church. The liberals always liberate the idiots and then we end up with a huge mess. See: average IQ, etc. For the record, I'm no tradcon, but politics is a lot like womanizing: the world is what it is, and people are what they are. For the mob, it's either going to be Jesus, Muhammad (pbuh), or Obama, etc. A wise society would keep the religions in check and keep the state out of a (wo)man's pockets as much as possible, while still encouraging the masses to do what they do best: conform.
Vince 2017-01-26 10:07:30
Fernando 2017-01-26 10:26:37
@CrabRangoon Immigrants are not a problem when they come to work and live a regular life in the country they are moving to. America was built by immigrants. Beggar refugees are a different matter. Doing like some European countries and bringing these refugees under public housing and government welfare is a big, big mistake. The most efficient way to create hate between two ethnicities is by making one pay for the other expenses because "they can't do it for themselves". The ones paying will feel revolt for having to do it, and the ones receiving will hate the fact they are treated like an inferior race. That's whats been happening in France for decades, and resulting in so much hate and terrorist attacks. Wanna come to America? Join the culture, get a job, and live like an American. Living in a refugee camp sustained by taxpayers money is bs
Wood Chipper 2017-01-26 10:32:06
"You still have to pay taxes for your basic sanitary needs." That's from the meme that pads and tampons are taxed as "luxury items" instead of being free because they are a "basic need". Toilet paper is classified the same.
Blackdragon 2017-01-26 10:43:38
What is the point of these demonstrations in places like London, Berlin, Sydney?Venting emotions of people who don't have anything else better to do. In other words, nothing. @Vince You realize you didn't actually refute anything I said about Trump, don't you? You just made comments about what I said. (For example, it doesn't matter if the 3 million people were in California. California is in the US.) Not one thing I reported about Trump was inaccurate. (Except for the funeral dirge thing, which is an opinion.) As I said to left-wingers over the years about Obama, I'll say the same thing to people like you about Trump: You can worship the man all you want, but the facts I report about him are accurate.
I’m not so sure about the wage gap not being real. In my office...As usual LG, you use your own individual experiences to attempt to refute societal-level statistics and realities. I'm not sure why you keep doing this.
To say sexism no longer exists in the workplace is untrue.I didn't say that. I said women who make the exact same life choices as men throughout their entire lives tend to make the same amount of money as men.
Not sure but this could have referred to the sales tax… Over here 21% sales tax is imposed on sanitary pads – as well as on toilet paper, though.Good point; maybe that's what she meant. I hate all taxes but I support a small sales tax if you eliminate all other taxes (income tax, payroll tax, etc). 21% is not small; I'm talking more like 1-3%.
American men have been seeing happy Latino families with supportive wives and happy husbandsEhh... that's not what I see when I look at Latino families living in the US. Maybe you mean Latino families living in Latino countries. I get your point though.
Libertarianism doesn’t work for the very reasons that libertarians feel constrained: most people don’t excel or have much discipline, so the tyranny of the mob and low expectations rule when the traditional expectations and limits are removed. What do you do with all the regular peeps?http://calebjonesblog.com/how-to-handle-the-poor-part-1/ http://calebjonesblog.com/how-to-handle-the-poor-part-2/ http://calebjonesblog.com/how-to-handle-the-poor-part-3/
Wanna come to America? Join the culture, get a job, and live like an American. Living in a refugee camp sustained by taxpayers money is bsAmen! STOP FORCING ME TO PAY FOR YOUR PROBLEMS!
“You still have to pay taxes for your basic sanitary needs.” That’s from the meme that pads and tampons are taxed as “luxury items” instead of being free because they are a “basic need”. Toilet paper is classified the same.Ah, okay. Then I somewhat agree with that complaint.
Wood Chipper 2017-01-26 10:44:34
"Seriously, do you see a lot of lesbians getting beaten up? I don’t." They do... by their female partners. Lesbians have the worst domestic violence rates. But I'm sure that is a man's fault somehow too. Lol.
66Scorpio 2017-01-26 11:01:22
The gender-wage gap non-issue is probably the most annoying, and it does make feminists look stupid when they buy into it or repeat it. Studies that account for known wage determinants cut the gap to under 5%, but saying that is discrimination is an argument from ignorance. That 5% is the outside maximum given our current knowledge. Warren Farrell knocked it out of the park a decade ago with his book "Why Men Earn More" but feminist ignore it. Other studies by Thomas Sowell found that the reason there are so few women in top management is because they generally don't apply for promotions when a position opens up. I think the part about paying taxes for their sanitary needs is a reference to feminine hygiene not being sales tax exempt. In Canada the government changed the Excise Tax Act back in 2015 to make them exempt, at a cost of $36 million a year in lost revenue. Women are not really told that they are too fat or too thin, but sort of the opposite. The WHO and CDC adopted the BMI (Big Meal Intake? no, no, Body Mass Index) as the standard metric with the 18.5/25/30 lines for underweight, normal, overweight and obese; all the government agencies fell in line. The thing is, there is no differentiation between men and women which is retarded. So a 5'10" 175 pound guy is "overweight" but a 5'4" woman who is 145 pounds is not. Various studies that either a) there should be a gap between male and female BMIs of between 1.6 and 5 points in estimating healthy body fat percentages or b) the scaling factor (BMI takes the square of your height) should be as low as 1.45 for women and just a bit under 2 (the square) for men. Statistically, the actual distribution of BMIs in the US is similar among men and women but because the same cut off - 25 - is used for both men and women, it hides the fact that far more women are - in reality - overweight compared to men. The whole "beautiful at any size" movement and the Amy Schumers of the nation (with the help of the US fashion industry - ya right, like she is a size 6) are reflections of women not being told enough.
Blackdragon 2017-01-26 11:02:31
They do… by their female partners.Even if true, that's not what these feminists are bitching about. They're talking about the Evil White Homophobic Men™ beating up gay people. Even in the rare cases I see this reported, these guys are always beating up gay men, not gay women.
Gil Galad 2017-01-26 12:28:19
Western men are seeing first hand how Muslim men are treated by their wivesHaha, no. In my home country, most muslim men are beta and they are even beginning to get screwed over in divorces, LOL (though I'm North African; the Middle East except Lebanon remains more traditionalist, but changing too). It's been years that I no longer identify with my home culture apart from secondary stuff like food etc, and in certain ways I hate it. Apart from truly nonreligious Arabs (who are a growing but relatively silent minority), the typical "progressive" there is gonna be a painfully cognitively dissonant mix of vestigial Islam, a vague marxism, some aspects of feminism (including the bad ones), and modern Western consumerism. I would've happily traded this crap for a true Eastern scientific revolution and Enlightenment, even if it takes us two centuries, over this bastardized parody of the West. The only upside is that more and more young Arabs are taking religion less and less seriously and will probably not teach it all that much to their children, which means that the frightening Muslim demographics won't mean much 3-5 decades from now, even if they're officially "3 billion" for example. I assure you that ideas like "rape culture" and omega men saying "I'm ashamed of my gender" or cheering women on for talking about genitally mutilating an older man for banging a VYW etc already exist on Arab social media. I'll do all I can to stay abroad; the next goal is to also leave the West for a more stable place, BD style.
So a 5’10” 175 pound guy is “overweight”I'm shorter than that, I weigh 180-185 and I would get depressed if I lost weight (when I have more freedom to work out I plan to shoot for a lean 200 lbs). Screw the BMI recommendations; as long as the additional weight is mostly muscle and you have a flat stomach, you're fine.
Makeshift 2017-01-26 13:03:40
So basically women don't want to be held to any standard of behavior, want zero accountability, and are so self centered and childish they only care about what they don't have, regardless of why it's that way? I should start injecting estrogen into my eyeballs for its reality warping capabilities so that I can live in ignorant bliss inoculated against logic and facts.
Roberto 2017-01-26 13:15:48
Venting emotions of people who don’t have anything else better to do. In other words, nothing.That is, no point to them. Haha, I think you're right, BD, about these people having nothing better to do. For some, the protests are no doubt a social outlet too. But before we all generalise too much, we need to remember that the demonstrators are a small minority of people, including in the US. It's just that they're very noisy and often have the ear of people/organisations that can amplify their noise.
Gil Galad 2017-01-26 13:29:40
Oh and I was forgetting: I've seen many people from my home country share videos of these anti-Trump protests. I don't know how much of a minority the protesters are, but you can see that the people giving them the nod or enthusiastically approving are really many, from all over the world. Not to say it's good or bad, but it is indeed a widespread phenomenon. I wanted to vomit in the months leading up to the election when I saw how predictably the the girls I know from my country were massively pro-Hillary (and both girls and guys pro-Bernie). BD isn't mistaken when he says the entire world is moving left.
Blackdragon 2017-01-26 13:39:12
I think you’re right, BD, about these people having nothing better to do. For some, the protests are no doubt a social outlet too.I've been with two MLTRs who were big time activists for various (left-wing) political issues. While they believed in their causes, you could tell the primary reason they were doing it was simply for a social outlet to talk to people, make friends, and hang out with friends. Nothing wrong with that I guess, but it helps out all this stuff into context.
But before we all generalise too much, we need to remember that the demonstrators are a small minority of people, including in the US.Correct. This article is about bored feminists, not women. Most of the women I know think most of this stuff is bullshit once you get beyond the basics (like abortion remaining legal, etc). You're absolutely right; this outrage feminism is a tiny percentage of today's women, as I talked about here.
Brick 2017-01-26 13:44:37
Western men are seeing first hand how Muslim men are treated by their wives
Haha, no. In my home country, most muslim men are beta and they are even beginning to get screwed over in divorces, LOL (though I’m North African; the Middle East except Lebanon remains more traditionalist, but changing too).It’s been years that I no longer identify with my home culture apart from secondary stuff like food etc, and in certain ways I hate it. Apart from truly nonreligious Arabs (who are a growing but relatively silent minority), the typical “progressive” there is gonna be a painfully cognitively dissonant mix of vestigial Islam, a vague marxism, some aspects of feminism (including the bad ones), and modern Western consumerism. I would’ve happily traded this crap for a true Eastern scientific revolution and Enlightenment, even if it takes us two centuries, over this bastardized parody of the West. Fair enough. I will take your word as someone from that culture. Your above description of the "typical progressive" sounds just like the difficult American women I've encountered who rejected their religious upbringings, yet retained the prudishness and replaced Jesus with Gloria Steinem. If this mentality is global, that's a massive bummer.
So basically women don’t want to be held to any standard of behavior, want zero accountability, and are so self centered and childish they only care about what they don’t have, regardless of why it’s that way? I should start injecting estrogen into my eyeballs for its reality warping capabilities so that I can live in ignorant bliss inoculated against logic and facts.I believe it is injected into our eyes via tv, movies and iphones.
hilsey 2017-01-26 13:56:25
Of the small percent of violence against transgender women, the majority of the attacked are nonwhite. http://www.advocate.com/transgender/2016/10/14/these-are-trans-people-killed-2016 Most girls who are over punished in the school system are nonwhite. www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2014/03/21/study-black-girls-suspended-at-higher-rates-than-most-boys/ But feminism attempts (poorly) to address *all* issues of women and girls even if It's not solely a gender issue. So there is Trans-feminism and Black-feminism and Post-Colonial-feminism and Lesbian-feminism and Eco-feminism--all kinds of hyphenated feminism. "Why do you keep trying to make gender issues where there are none? Are you bored or something?" It's not just boredom but making feminism more accessible--putting on the guise of inclusiveness is better PR (produces more "useful idiots" as Fernando pointed out) instead of admitting feminism alone can't properly address certain issues.
Brick 2017-01-26 14:00:28
@Gil Galad Point taken. Your description of "progressives" from your homeland sounds eerily similar to my experience with feminists raised in trad households who were later exposed to the ideology in college - rather than absorbing it from pop culture and public schools since childhood. They are a weird mix of secular piety, prudery, and all sorts of random puritanism.
So basically women don’t want to be held to any standard of behavior, want zero accountability, and are so self centered and childish they only care about what they don’t have, regardless of why it’s that way? I should start injecting estrogen into my eyeballs for its reality warping capabilities so that I can live in ignorant bliss inoculated against logic and facts.Some of the feminists at the "Women's March" were talking about "marriage slavery" going back to the prehistoric origin of agriculture. They are walking, talking epistemological black holes. Look up the vid of the buzzcut lesbians chanting "Allahu Akhbar".
Lovergirl 2017-01-26 17:51:50
As usual LG, you use your own individual experiences to attempt to refute societal-level statistics and realities. I’m not sure why you keep doing this. Because if I'm experiencing wage differences with the men that have done the same work for a company that I am, then chances are good I'm not the only one and there is some truth to the claim these women are making.
Blackdragon 2017-01-26 17:56:30
Because if I’m experiencing wage differences with the men that have done the same work for a company that I am, then chances are good I’m not the only one and there is some truth to the claim these women are making.Nope. Statistics are still statistics, and still show the overall picture, regardless of your personal experiences.
Lovergirl 2017-01-26 18:08:48
Not when people are smart enough to do it in a way that they can get away with (I.e. not giving me the official title but having me do the same work.) Corporate people know every loophole.
Randy 2017-01-26 18:51:24
Great article BD. Given this seemingly huge response to Trump, how socialist do you think the left's 2020 candidate is going to be? More extreme then Bernie Sanders?
Marsupial 2017-01-26 19:16:59
"You still have to pay taxes for your basic sanitary needs."There are a thousand things that arguably (wrongly, but arguably) ought to be free of sales tax. Why tampons in particular? Because removing the sales tax from tampons benefits women and only women. Never forget that feminism is class warfare, the classes being "all men" and "all women".
Roberto 2017-01-26 19:51:13
Given this seemingly huge response to Trump, how socialist do you think the left’s 2020 candidate is going to be? More extreme then Bernie Sanders?My opinion is that the Democrats will need to appeal to the great mass of people in the middle. A Sanders-like figure will appeal tremendously to some people, but probably not to enough. Part (not all) of Trump's success has been due to the fact that he has been seen as a non-politician. Part (again, not all) of Clinton's downfall has been caused by her being seen as the consummate politician and very much a Washington insider. We seem to living in peculiar times, at least certainly apparently different from the recent past, and the next few years might show whether this public perception of the worth of apparent politicians continues. That might determine the sort of figure that the Democrats embrace for the 2020 election. But I'd be surprised if someone more extreme than Bernie Sanders would, per se, give them much joy at the ballot box.
Blackdragon 2017-01-26 20:12:05
Given this seemingly huge response to Trump, how socialist do you think the left’s 2020 candidate is going to be? More extreme then Bernie Sanders?No. Roberto is correct; someone more left than Bernie Sanders would be too much. However, that's not saying much. People don't realize that there has never been a true leftist US president in the modern era. Clinton and Obama were left-leaning corporatists, not true leftist progressives. But the president after Trump will be a progressive, at least to a noticeable degree. Such a person in the presidency will be as terrifying to the conservatives as Trump is to the left... even if he/she is more like a watered-down Elizabeth Warren than a full-on Bernie Sanders (though a full-on Sanders is within the realm of possibility in four or eight years into the future, with even more Millennial and non-white eligible voters than there are now). And the collapse of the USA will continue. (To be clear, this will be terrifying to anyone not already planning on leaving the country. It will just be more sad entertainment for people like me.)
Just Curious 2017-01-27 00:29:52
Women's DISPOSABLE feminine products are considered a luxury because there is an alternative. Not a nice one but one that was utilized for centuries. Perhaps there should be an additional tax added to them and disposable diapers to help offset the amount of waste they create.
Gil Galad 2017-01-27 01:01:36
though a full-on Sanders is within the realm of possibility in four or eight years into the future, with even more Millennial and non-white eligible voters than there are nowI think that ten years from now Millennials will look pretty moderate. I'm especially worried by the generation that will come out of the madness that has developed in some American universities in the past 5-10 years. I can't wait for this shit to peak so we can finally see its decline, but it seems set to take many decades. If I were more emotional and Alpha 1.0, i'd probably set a goal for myself to "outlive cultural marxism" (2117 ?), but I'm more likely to just be watching it from some small quiet country that doesn't give a shit.
zygothor 2017-01-27 01:32:48
Women have nine forms of birth control, plus the Plan B bill, plus abortion. We men have just one. This is why we men laugh at you when you talk about how you’re “forced” to do something when it comes to having a baby. You have so many more options than we do, it’s ridiculous. (And you still don’t see us men bitching about our “reproductive rights,” do you?)You completely misunderstood this part. The problem she is bitching about is that men are abdicated from all responsibility for creating a child, and women have to suffer all the consequences if they do get pregnant. They have to manage all of the other (often expensive) birth control methods by themselves. I don't think it's fair that if you live in a right-wing state and let's say your man fucks up his condom usage or breaks it, and you get pregnant then you're basically fucked. The abortion clinic you go to gets torched by psycho arsonists, then later when you finally find some other doctor that will actually do the abortion and isn't under religious mind-control he makes you wait some arbitrary "cool-off" period before you can get an abortion thanks to retarded lawmakers, and then he gets his legs broken by some "pro-life" fuck with a tire iron and can't come into work on the day you're supposed to get it. All because Billy-Bob couldn't use a fucking rubber correctly. Why should Billy-Bob get to force her to have his kid thanks to his mishap that he thinks is "an act of God" or some bullshit? Most of the other shit she says I agree with you on, but I'm actually really tired of the right-wing "we don't give a shit about basic logic" stance on abortion and birth control. Abortion should be 100% legal across the country, because making abortion illegal just results in more unsafe abortions.
anon1 2017-01-27 02:03:34
@zygothor In order to help pay for women's abortions, we should partner with PP and open a fast food shop chain called KFF (Kentucky Fried Fetus) :).
johnnybegood 2017-01-27 08:46:00
Blackdragon: You kicked the politics can, so here we go. The Trump supporters in your comment section are delusional. Beyond delusional. Trumps approval rating is sitting at 35% upon inauguration, typically the highest approval time and "honeymoon" period. You are absolutely right. Trump has awoken a previously apathetic liberal giant. Trump won 46% of 55% of the eligible voters who voted. That's 25.3% of adults in the country, and they are pretty heavily outnumbered (yes many Repubs didn't vote either, I know). The protests are largely symbolic: the day of reckoning will be soon. Paul Ryan, sniveling weasel who is now fully fellating Donnie (abandoning his traditional conservative values, not to mention libertarian voters, by agreeing to a 20 billion dollar pointless wall courtesy of your money) will be trebucheted out of office in about 2 years. One thing I do agree with you on, BD: The country is going to hell. Bad trade deals with Mexico already -- a healthcare system going from bad to worse. I'm moving to Asia before I'm expected to pay for, or clean up, this trash-fire of a country.
johnnybegood 2017-01-27 09:04:32
Okay non-political response:
You are still told you’re too skinny or you’re too fat.This is kinda funny. The acceptable weight range for women is: pretty much anything. Now, the acceptable weight range to be a "generally attractive" women to most men is actually pretty damn huge. The range is something like: Lower range: anorexic skeleton is a turnoff. If you don't have a diagnosed eating disorder, you're probably fine honey. Higher range: anything up to the Michelin man pretty much. Like, your torso shouldn't be shaped like a giant basketball. You know how many women fit this description in the millenia of human history prior to the 1980s, unless they were in a slave labor camp? 99.9%. The bar is not high. Don't eat for pure entertainment. At least, don't eat for entertainment for at least 4 days a week. Then you'll no longer be a butterball. Yeah, it's hard. Replace that addiction with something like porn, or video games, or exercise. Or a hobby.
POB 2017-01-27 12:02:07
You guys are so clueless about the fun of dating a real activist! My last mono GF was a vegetarian fanatic who managed to stay "civilized" when I was around. Anyway, I remember this one time when she decided to "protest" against us barbaric meat eaters. Their veggie friends gathered on the most busy avenue they could find and she was charged with the marvelous task of wearing a dead pig head as some kind of organic helmet (the head was clean BTW). Problem is it was probably 35ºC that day (not kidding). When the fun was over and she came back, I asked her how it went. She told me the pig head story while my jaw was getting close to my feet. Well, I said, I hope it is the last time you do this cause it's really insane you know. Are you crazy? Of course I'll do it again! Next week we'll have another one, this time against the barbaric butchers of meat industry! Also I was talking to this dude that said I was a hypocrite because I was not vegan, thus not caring enough about the animals!!! So I'l start my vegan diet as soon as possible...let me google right now where I can buy some edible algae and cheap tofu! Oh those good ol' days...
KryptoKate 2017-01-27 12:24:02
TLDR version: it's not really the fault of extreme lefties and feminists who authentically believe in the moral correctness of their views because their world has been designed so they've always been in a dependent position and they truly cannot understand the perspective of power and responsibility. It's mostly the fault of extended formal education which now goes on for 20-30 years and trains people into a wired-in psychology of powerlessness/dependency. -------------------------------------------- The article you've quoted is one of the worst examples of hectoring, lecturing, condescending, smug rhetoric I've seen, and it's amazing that the author doesn't even realize that her tone will turn off every single person who doesn't already agree with all her points. Demanding that others "say thank you"??? Lol! Yes, people just love being talked to as if they are 3 year-olds being scolded by mommy. Here's my analysis: there is a psychology of power and a psychology of dependence. These are totally different mental states that are actually wired-in to one's brain (though wiring can be changed), and they color how one views the world, like looking through a filter. The psychology of power is the perspective of a parent: one has power, agency, influence, authority, and (most importantly) responsibility. One has freedom and the ability to exercise power and make choices for themselves and also for others, but the flip-side is that there is a hugely increased burden of responsibility. On the other hand, the psychology of dependence is the perspective of a child: one feels powerless but entitled to protection, one feels capable of making demands but not capable of fulfilling them, one feels like their only ability to exercise their will is to complain or elicit sympathy to get others with power to do things for you, but one does not feel like they have the ability to make things happen or do things for themself, and (most importantly) one therefore is prone to feeling victimized but does NOT generally have feelings of responsibility. Here's the thing. It is almost impossible for someone whose brain is wired (by circumstances, training, and inborn temperament) for a psychology of dependence to understand or comprehend the mindset of someone whose brain is wired in a psychology of power, and vice versa. However, everyone was once a child and once in a dependent psychological state, so those who have a "power" mindset have at least some inkling of the mindset of dependency, while those who have ALWAYS been in a dependent mindset may have zero comprehension or awareness of the power mindset at all. It isn't exactly the "fault" of those in a dependent mindset, since all of their experiences have oriented them that way and they've never been in circumstances of power, so they simply can't understand that there is an alternative way of viewing the world. An independently-inclined person may get there through reading or will or whatever, but clearly they're a minority. What we have now is an absolute epidemic of people trapped in the dependency mindset, and IMO the fact that we have been encouraging everyone to go to college is the primary reason for this because university is prime breeding ground for this mindset. High school is too, to a certain extent, but once you're in college everything that happens to you is oriented towards convincing you that you're both powerless but entitled to protection, and that complaining that others need to fix things is the only way to exercise power in the world. At university, students are adults yet dependent on their parents or the federal government or scholarships or banks that are paying for them to be there. The money that others are paying entitles them to a position of privilege and protection but does not provide them with any actual power, only dependent power since they aren't earning money or holding the actual purse-strings. They are told what to do and what to read and when and where to go to classes just like they were as children, so there are people with authority above them but no one that they have authority over (such as their own children). And then if they take any humanities courses at all, their heads are filled with horror stories about all the terrible things that those OTHER people (the ones with power) have done and continue to do to all the poor innocent people over whom the bad guys exercise their power. So basically at college you have adults who are stuck in a childlike state where they are being paid for and cared for and catered to and protected *but they are not actually exercising any power or agency such as one does when they are earning a living*. For those earning multiple degrees, this situation can persist all the way through their 20s. This is a very unnatural and bizarre situation to be in for 5-15 years after one hits physical adulthood. What do you get when you marinate young people in this setting during all of their formative young-adult years? You get people with no sense of power and only a sense of dependency and victimhood. They are smart and understand logic and have facts and knowledge but they do not understand, on a fundamental emotional level, what actual power and responsibility FEEL like, and what a joint sense of strength and responsibility power provides. I don't know what the solution is. Perhaps things will change when the college-bubble collapses and we stop this ridiculous idea that it is a worthwhile use of time and money to send everyone (rather than the 10% or so who are actually intellectually and academically inclined) to spend their most productive and able-bodied years in an environment of extended childlike dependency in order to gain a credential to stay out of the lower class. The only other solution is that you somehow actually force people into positions of responsibility and power, because nothing will change your mindset faster than actually having responsibility over others and having to make the difficult choices that comes with that power. A lot of people will not grow up and become responsible until they are forced into it. Being dependent breeds an enormous amount of resentment and jealousy for power, but it is also ultimately easier. I used to be a raging liberal. I still don't agree with you Caleb on a lot of macro-economic issues. But I will say that *nothing* knocked me further away from the left than when I was forced into a top management position at my company (which I had not wanted). The irony is that the only reason I was forced to take the position is because the company wanted so badly to have a woman represented on their board. But serving in that position for several years did nothing but push me into far more conservative positions that many would view as less "woman friendly". There is nothing that will change your perspective like seeing what a huge PAIN IN THE ASS being in the position of power is, and how even though there are benefits to power there are also huge detriments in being responsible for others, and having to make actual difficult decisions where there are tradeoffs. There were a few women who would constantly complain and bitch because they thought they were being discriminated against when the reality was that the company was BENDING OVER BACKWARDS doing everything to accommodate them, but they could not see this and truly believed they were being treated unfairly rather than been treated with extra privilege. (I want to be clear though that it was not most women who acted like that, just a few, and the majority who exercised a sense of power were very, very successful). Don't get me wrong. People who have, for whatever reason, gotten too used to being in a position of power can be real assholes who have zero empathy or ability to understand what it's like to truly be powerless. But as a society we have spent a few decades constantly educating people about this and portraying helpless victims in media and movies and school, so I think it's now much less common than the opposite problem, which is people who have zero ability to understand or empathize with what it's like to have power/responsibility. It's kind of like how kids never truly appreciate their parents until they become parents themselves. I don't know how you get privileged, spoiled leftist victim-mongers to actually appreciate the exercise of power until you somehow force them into positions of responsibility. Also, in the same way that spoiled children aren't to blame, their parents are, you can't fully blame women who have delusions about their own privilege and exaggerated ideas about being a victim. It's the fault of others who let them get away with thinking those things without a dose of reality. Notice that the most hardcore feminists are ALWAYS the most privileged who went to the fanciest schools and probably have never had a real fear of being hungry or homeless in their life. I don't know ANY working class women who take their perspective.
Blackdragon 2017-01-27 12:36:54
I think that ten years from now Millennials will look pretty moderate.Correct. The USA will move further and further left every decade.
You completely misunderstood this part. The problem she is bitching about is that men are abdicated from all responsibility for creating a child, and women have to suffer all the consequences if they do get pregnant.But they don't. The man is forced at gunpoint to pay her child support, and goes to prison if he doesn't. (Yes, there are rare exceptions to the rule.)
They have to manage all of the other (often expensive) birth control methods by themselves.Boo fucking hoo. I'd love to have the birth control options women have.
I don’t think it’s fair that if you live in a right-wing state and let’s say your man fucks up his condom usage or breaks it, and you get pregnant then you’re basically fucked.No you're not. You can get pregnancy tested in 4 weeks and get an abortion the week after. You're not making any sense.
The abortion clinic you go to gets torched by psycho arsonists, then later when you finally find some other doctor that will actually do the abortion and isn’t under religious mind-controlNow you're in lala land and talking about the bizarre and rare exceptions to the rule in order to make your point, which means your point isn't valid.
Abortion should be 100% legal across the country, because making abortion illegal just results in more unsafe abortions.I completely agree, as long as I'm not forced to pay for them. Now please, try to get back to Earth.
The Trump supporters in your comment section are delusional.The true believers are, yes. Look at Vince in the comments above. He actually thinks Trump repealed Obamacare. The Trump worshipers are as delusional as the Obama worshipers were back in 2008. And they're going to be just as disappointed in a few years (if not more so). Even after all this crap, society has learned nothing about political hero worship. It's sad.
I’m moving to Asia before I’m expected to pay for, or clean up, this trash-fire of a country.Me too. (Not sure yet if it will be Asia, but I'll definitely be doing business there.)
HanFengZi 2017-01-27 13:02:51
Not when people are smart enough to do it in a way that they can get away with (I.e. not giving me the official title but having me do the same work.) Corporate people know every loophole.Not for the first time, I wonder what it is you get out of this blog, LG. I've had this conversation ("I work harder for less money and lower title") with many women and beta men over the years, and I always give the same advice: of course your company wants you to work harder for less money and title! You have to stand up for yourself. At your next review, or the next time you save the day or do something above your pay/seniority grade, just calmly and confidently point out that you are contributing at the higher level. If they try to contradict you or BS you about it, calmly stand your ground, shrug it off. If they know that you know and wont put up with it forever, and you really are a performer, they will be forced to stop dicking around. My experience is that most people in that situation are too addicted to martyrdom / too afraid of confrontation / believe the kindergarten morality of "if you are good, you will get a gold star" to take my advice. No sexism or oppression is required to be in that situation.
Gil Galad 2017-01-27 13:55:02
It isn’t exactly the “fault” of those in a dependent mindset@Kate: if you follow that line of thinking nobody is responsible for anything. Philosophically, I actually do think that (in a certain sense) the worst fanatics of any ideology are "not responsible", or at least that it's not worth wasting much energy into hating them, especially that all it would take to "make me them" is a similar upbringing. I do have some minimum confidence in my intelligence and rationality to think that I would eventually snap out of it, partly because I'm already on record for rejecting some reaaaaaaaally powerful dogma taught from childhood. I suggest we redefine responsibility to avoid these dilemmas. When I say "it's your fault", what I'm really saying isn't "you could have done different" (which sounds right but collapses into meaninglessness when you analyse it), I'm actually saying "you wronged me, and of all the intricate causes that led to this, you are the only part that I can single out as a conscious agent that I can quarrel with, therefore I'm doing just that, because it may have an effect on your *future* behavior". Responsibility and punishment are retaliatory responses that focus on a past action of which it is said that it "could have been avoided" to pragmatically yield the result of *avoiding it in the future*. This isn't just an image, it's the evolutionary root of retaliatory behavior. See, you don't need to reject causality in order to accept a pragmatic endorsement of responsibility. The fact is that once you're an adult, regardless of the past causes of your current state of brainwashing, and how hard it may be for you to change your views, you're still the only person with the power to do that, so yeah, I'm putting the responsibility on you even though you are in a sense a victim and not a villain. A brainwashed person is selectively rational: you can see that in areas other than their dogma, they can call out BS anytime. So holding them responsible means challenging them to "universalize their BS-detecting software", which is ultimately doable, just kinda painful.
Gil Galad 2017-01-27 15:35:25
The acceptable weight range for women is: pretty much anything.To be fair, I'm personally not as strict as many men are in this regard. If a woman has a great face and skin, and if whatever "extra weight" she has is spread so that there's still a clear difference between waist size and hip size, instead of those ugly waist rolls or fast ass, I'll still call her hot. Fat-induced ugliness (to me) isn't caused by weight in and of itself, but the way extra fat erases the typical feminine shapes (waist-to-hip ratio and boobs, butt firmness, etc). I'll take a slightly overweight hourglass over the typical anorexic VS model any day. A BMI of 16-18 is a boner killer for me, unless the chick has an exceptional face (Miranda Kerr etc). High twenties and beyond is when there's really a problem.
KryptoKate 2017-01-27 15:37:00
@ Gil and BD I suppose my point in saying "it isn't really their fault" was to indicate my lack of interest in moral blame because I see it as irrelevant. I'm only interested in the past/causal explanation to the extent that it allows changes to future behavior. And I'm saying that leftist/feminist thinking will NOT change until the actual circumstances in which those people live their lives change. The ideology flows from living in a state of extended childhood and dependency through age 30, where one is protected and supported but one does not have any actual power. You don't change someone's ideology and then change their circumstances, you have to change the circumstances first. I understand that there are outlier independent thinkers who break away from social programming via their own inquiry but they are a minority and I'm not really concerned about them. I'm concerned about the great majority who are going to drive this country off a cliff with total well-meaning intentions. Because unlike BD, I like where I live and am rather attached to it here and have no plans to move to a foreign country. So I'd rather things DON'T fall apart. I don't think you will get rid of excessive leftism unless and until the formal-education ponzi scheme collapses, because it seems to be the common thread. It's not as if formal education is necessary or even conducive to learning nowadays when information is freely available to all. I learned a hell of a lot more through my own reading outside of university than I did while I was there. So I'm not against learning, just this obsession with adding on years of pricey formal education -- really a holding cell of dependency to keep people out of the job market -- for young people. People are staying in school for longer and longer yet all we hear about is that the solution is MORE education. And of course there is no evidence whatsoever people are actually learning anything now that they have 5 or 6 more years of formal education than they did 50 years ago. Instead we just have evidence that young people start out more and more indebted, dependent, inexperienced with earning their own living in a competitive environment, and more obsessed with victimhood and a greater sense of entitlement. Arguing with these people is useless. Their actual circumstances need to change. If people want to go back to the supposed glory days of a strong middle class and good wages, they could start by going back to the mid-20th century educational system, where less than 10% of students enrolled in college and everyone else learned marketable vocational skills and went right to work. Instead we are now enrolling 70% of students (most of whom have zero intellectual talent or interest) to go get indebted for 5 years while earning nothing and having their formative adult experience be a situation where they are not competing for resources, like they will when they graduate, but instead are being paid for while they hone their skills in providing correct answers. Very, very weird system for training humans in how to be an adult, and IMO it explains about 90% of the increase in leftist thought, which has always sprung from extended formal education. And that includes these feminists complaining about how oppressed they are, who are typically some of the most privileged people in the country and usually have multiple degrees in some non-technical area. You can guess who someone voted for this election much easier by looking at what (if any) degrees they have in what subjects than by almost any other factor.
KryptoKate 2017-01-27 15:47:45
Also BD -- I was in Portland visiting a friend last weekend and I stayed in a hotel downtown so I got to see the whole women's march there. Holy shit!! LOL. I am pretty sure I did not see a single masculine-looking guy who didn't appear either sickly or like he goes home, gets on his knees to self-flagellate and then says "thank you ma'am can I have another?" Not kidding, I can see how you must totally clean up in that market. There's probably a ton of women who are so confused about why on earth you are not kissing their ass that they're not sure how it is that they ended up having sex with you. Haha. Seriously that place is outta control. Great Louis CK show last weekend.
zygothor 2017-01-27 17:15:18
But they don’t. The man is forced at gunpoint to pay her child support, and goes to prison if he doesn’t. (Yes, there are rare exceptions to the rule.)How is child support in any way comparable to actually raising the fucking child? Not to mention child support is usually not 100% of the funds needed to raise the child anyway.
JudoJohn 2017-01-27 17:17:38
I was in Portland visiting a friend last weekend and I stayed in a hotel downtown so I got to see the whole women’s march there. Holy shit!! LOL. I am pretty sure I did not see a single masculine-looking guy who didn’t appear either sickly or like he goes home, gets on his knees to self-flagellate and then says “thank you ma’am can I have another?”Goddamn as if I wasn't tempted enough.....anyway, I was listening to NPR (yeah yeah, I was driving to Colorado Springs and had to restore balance to the universe) and they interviewed a local march leader. The interviewer asked, "What do you want people to know?" She said, "I can go on all day..." He says, "Well, you have the microphone for a minute!" She stammered for a bit, and the best she could come up with was campus rape culture. WTF? Reproductive rights and health, domestic violence concerns, etc, and the best she could do was that? Reading above about how it's kind of a coffee klatch for many really brought it home. That's not to say there aren't real concerns. I have a close female friend who recently had a bad falling out with a male roommate, because she started dating after a dry spell....clearly, he thought he had a chance (and clearly he didn't). She had to leave her apartment after having him (legitimately) arrested for violent threats and destruction of property. That.....is a broken lease, and now the state has to put the rights of the threatened female (person?) over the rights of the landlord. I don't entirely see how to look at this one in a gender neutral way. I'm more prone to allow a female in this situation to break a lease than a male, which of course is sexist as hell because as a martial artist I know good and well that it's hard to find an even fight (brackets are there for a reason). If a guy tried to get out of a lease this way, he would be laughed at.....unless his roommate was a real lunkhead. A lunkhead, of course, could never get out of a lease this way, because there wasn't a legitimate threat of harm. I guess it's SP to say that the threat of harm to the female is higher than the threat of harm to the diminutive male.....it just doesn't feel right haha.
buzz 2017-01-27 17:45:06
I have learned a lot from you BD and I will take this opportunity to say thank you. I would not take the time to comment if I didn't care. BD you have 3 blogs and this one is supposed to be about relations between men and women and you have another one about politics, right? But anyway you have a very negative attitude about Trump, you have given your word that you will apologize if you are wrong, right? Next subject. Before the "pussy" march the organizers said it was not really an anti Trump march, just a woman's march. So recently we have had people of color blocking freeways, smashing windows, starting fires, damaging squad cars and shooting police partially because they don't like Trump. Seriously even if you would have asked BD could you have gotten large numbers of women to walk around in public with pussy hats on LOL! Did these women block freeways, smash windows, start fires, damage squad cars or shoot police? NO Did anyone else block freeways, smash windows, start fires, damage squad cars or shoot police while these women were marching? NO Were lots of good laughs had by all? YES I do think they should have required the men that were involved to wear pussy hats too (Michael More). I think that it is a very good idea for women to get together, wear pussy hats, walk around and bitch publically. I bet a lot of them were horny when they got done 🙂 It seems like they got to you BD, messed up your frame. It was just a bunch of women wearing pussy hats getting some exercise and letting off steam and the worst they did was litter and pee in the bushes. you go girls!!!!!!
JudoJohn 2017-01-27 18:15:46
I bet a lot of them were horny when they got doneMan, I was kicking myself that day. I was driving to visit conservatives in Colorado Springs. I drive a hybrid and work in renewable energy. I know that language. I really should have attended that march. Denver had one of the bigger turnouts.
Lovergirl 2017-01-27 19:03:45
I was talking to a guy the other day who happened upon one of the women's marches. He was actually at a father-son activity with his son's school which coincidentally coincided with this march lol. They walked into a restaurant afterwards where there were a bunch of 20-something women sitting and talking that still had their signs sitting next to them. One of the signs said "I want my 33 cents". His son, being a bighearted kid, asked "Dad, don't you have some change I could give her?" He decided against it. LMAO 😉
Blackdragon 2017-01-27 19:13:52
I’m concerned about the great majority who are going to drive this country off a cliff with total well-meaning intentions. Because unlike BD, I like where I live and am rather attached to it here and have no plans to move to a foreign country. So I’d rather things DON’T fall apart.Yeah, that's exactly what most people say. That's fine, as long as you realize that barring a radical tech revolution that turns the world in to an instant paradise, you're fucked in the long-term if you stay here. By the way, I would love to stay in the United States for the rest of my life if the country was going to survive and prosper (instead of slowly collapse), and if taxes and regulations here decreased by 70% or more. But I have this weird trait: I don't want to be screwed by my society. So I'm leaving. It's not that I don't like where I live; it's that where I live gets worse every year, and since I have high standards for my personal happiness, I can only tolerate so much. But yes, I'm in the minority; that's quite true. (Truly happy people are always in the minority.)
Also BD — I was in Portland visiting a friend last weekend and I stayed in a hotel downtown so I got to see the whole women’s march there. Holy shit!! LOL. I am pretty sure I did not see a single masculine-looking guy who didn’t appear either sickly or like he goes home, gets on his knees to self-flagellate and then says “thank you ma’am can I have another?” Not kidding, I can see how you must totally clean up in that market.Haha. Yes, the skinny hipster beta is the standard in downtown Portland, but to be fair, you were looking at a mob of left-wing political activists, where skinny hipster girly men are going to be the norm. I'm certainly not the only big masculine man in the Portland / Seattle area, and the vast majority of the women I've been with were from the various suburbs (not downtown), but yeah, downtown Portland in particular invested with effeminate, left-wing betas. Stands to reason. Effeminate, left-wing beta males are the future of this country. (Yet another reason I'm leaving; these men vote.)
How is child support in any way comparable to actually raising the fucking child?As I said, if you don't want to raise a kid, get an abortion (super easy these days; in many cases you just take a pill) or give the child up for adoption. As I said in the above article, no one is forcing you to do anything, and acting like they are is just stupid.
Not to mention child support is usually not 100% of the funds needed to raise the child anyway.Correct, it's 50%. 50% of that child is your responsibility. Right? As women love to scream at us men, making a child is a 50/50 responsibility. Right?
I have learned a lot from you BD and I will take this opportunity to say thank you.You're welcome, Buzz. Based on your past comments, I'm sure I'm about to hear some serious right-wing bullshit. (Weren't you the same guy who was saying that bombing civilians in the the Middle East with our drones was awesome?) But thanks for the lube before the penetration.
BD you have 3 blogs and this one is supposed to be about relations between men and women and you have another one about politics, right?Partially right. The CJ Blog is about economics, finance, and lifestyle in addition to politics. That doesn't mean I can never touch on politics here at this blog when it's directly related to man/woman issues. Clearly I've done that many times, and will continue to do so.
you have a very negative attitude about TrumpAh ha! I was right! Here it comes!
you have given your word that you will apologize if you are wrong, right?If your Savior, God Trump, single-handedly saves the entire United States and brings it all back to 1950s glory, then yes, I will apologize. (Somehow I don't think I'll need to worry about this.) Will you Trump worshipers apologize to me if by 2025 the USA is still financially insolvent and still slowly collapsing? Hmmmm.... somehow I doubt that.
I bet a lot of them were horny when they got doneNo thanks. Feminists are usually ugly and have small tits. Or they're fat. Either way, I'll pass. (I'm 50/50 on banging Laci Green though. Tits.)
It seems like they got to you BD, messed up your frame.Yes, I'm clearly upset and depressed about all of these protests. Or... I stopped caring about all of this about 15 years ago and consider it all entertainment at this point, as well as a way to make some money. Which is it, do you think?
Liquorice 2017-01-27 21:14:21
These protests are not so much about an actual point than it is about feeling empowered. Attending one of these marches is a great way to be part of something, without actually having to do something or make any sacrifices. It falls in the same line as the intersectional feminism nonsense that is going around nowadays. A black woman that twerks in public is empowered; on the same token, a Muslim woman dressed up as a ninja is empowered and all of us are oppressed by the cis white male patriarchy. What it boils down to is an excuse to not have to name the elephant in the room, namely that some cultures have track record of not being very female friendly. But because these cultures are that of minorities, who are oppressed, the leftist brain starts to chain react when confronted with facts and melts down into a frenzied rage. The most amusing (or sad) part is where the Woman's March has been organized by a Muslim woman that promotes the Sharia law. All those Megs in pink hats end up condoning the exact thing they claim to be marching against. Protesting against Trump is easy and low risk. Protesting for the rights of Saudi women, e.g. the right to wear a skirt in public or the right to drive a car, without being branded islamophobe, racist and fascist, is a different story. Time will tell if all of this is a last ditch effort of the left-wing or whether the next generation is going to be dominated by this idiocracy.
Michael 2017-01-28 10:46:50
Maybe you were just bored, BD. I mean, you counter an article that in itself wouldn't deserve to be countered, and how? With verbalized logic, which you know to be totally out-of-place in this context, thus useless (this is one of your system's tenets!). And of course you know all of the above lol. (You also know these "protesters" aren't moved by political reasons, have no idea of what their real motivations are, and all what I could go on typing but won't.)
acknowledge common sense, and the fact that men and women have very different bodies. Expecting all women to be as effective as firefighters as all men are, where they are expected to lug a 250 pound man out of a burning building, is a little silly to say the least.Well, it's lucky that the brain is the same though, is it not? Eheh.
I am not a conservative, nor alt-right, nor Republican, nor religious. This means I am for unlimited women’s rights, the same as for men.and
I think the law should trat men and women identicallyYou must know some on the alt-right complain about female privilege and would support real gender equality. And many times you've said you agree with the alt-right and old conservatism ideas 90% of times. If you weren't a true conservative/alt-right to a good extent, that wouldn't be reflected by the political orientation of your commenters (= most affectionate readers), but it is. And pretty much all PUA and game coaches are "alt-right", just because the alt-right is, currently (nothing is forever), the party of rebels who want to state what they see, and of course the mating game is based on reality observation.
They have already wonWell, these mobs of disoriented folk which very usefully (for some other people) protest will never win. Their function is to be useful. (Oops, I didn't follow through my intention not to write some things I know you know, lol). And speaking of the smarter ones who don't rally in squares but make rallies happen, from the Brexit campaign to the French presidential campaign to the USA election, haven't they looked a bit, well, worried? If their grip was so secure as you claim, such smart people as the string-pullers wouldn't be worried. Politics mirror human nature, and human nature is as irrational as it is unpredictable. Think what amazing peace you had there in the West just 5 years before WWI broke out, and think what happened later, from Russia to the USA, through Asia. You, I, all of us, can never know what's ahead.
I would love to stay in the United States for the rest of my life if the country was going to survive and prosper (instead of slowly collapse), and if taxes and regulations here decreased by 70% or more. But I have this weird trait: I don’t want to be screwed by my society. So I’m leaving.If it were possible (but it is not) to subject to taxation the mega-rich and big corporations, then high-skill high-working moderately wealthy people like you could be made exempt from fiscal bullying. Sad this can't come.
Blackdragon 2017-01-28 11:12:16
Maybe you were just bored, BD.Yes. I run three companies, work 7 days a week, have an active dating life, an active fitness life, have children, and travel often. Clearly I'm just bored, and have lots of free time to be bored in.
I mean, you counter an article that in itself wouldn’t deserve to be countered, and how? With verbalized logic, which you know to be totally out-of-place in this context, thus useless (this is one of your system’s tenets!).My tenet is to not verbalize logic to women. This might be a surprise to you, but this is a blog for men, not women.
Well, it’s lucky that the brain is the same though, is it not?Not sure if you're trying to be sarcastic, but if you're not, women and men have different brain structures.
You must know some on the alt-right complain about female privilege and would support real gender equality.And some on the left want lower taxes. Exceptions to the rule do not make the rule.
And many times you’ve said you agree with the alt-right and old conservatism ideas 90% of times.It's about 80%, not 90%, but yes. Regardless, this women-need-to-be-in-the-home shit is in the 20% I disagree with them on, vehemently. Fuck no, women need to get their asses out in the workplace and get to work and pay their own fucking bills. On that issue, I am diametrically opposed to traditional conservatives.
And pretty much all PUA and game coaches are “alt-right”I know, but not me. I'm a libertarian. I agree with some of the alt-right stuff, but not all. All these executive orders Trump has been signing this week have been giving the alt-right boners, but many of them are making me shake my head. (More big government. How the hell are we going to pay for all this shit, Trump?)
If their grip was so secure as you claim, such smart people as the string-pullers wouldn’t be worried.They're worried because they're idiots, not because they haven't won. And yes, I include many of the string-pullers when I say "idiots." (Look me in the eye and tell me the elites behind the utterly incompetent Hillary Clinton campaign weren't idiots.) This is why much of this is so hard to understand. Yes my friend, the idiots have won. I know how implausible that sounds, but that's exactly what's happened.
Politics mirror human nature,Correct.
human nature is as irrational as it is unpredictableUtterly incorrect, and if you really believe that, you have a lot more research to do. Human behavior is irrational, and it's also extremely predictable, almost to the point of barely trying. My success in both the financial and woman areas are a testament to how easily predicable human beings are.
You, I, all of us, can never know what’s ahead.Know for sure, no, but we can lay odds on what is most likely to occur with a high degree of accuracy, provided we apply it to a large time span and don't nail down specific dates to our predictions/guesses. Example: The USA is headed for collapse in a few decades at the most, regardless of Trump, but I don't know exactly when or how. The only thing that could stop would be some huge, unexpected tech revolution, which may or may not happen; politics won't stop it, because it can't.
buzz 2017-01-28 15:21:31
Just to set the record straight, I have been a democrat my whole life. The most horrible mistake I ever made, which I wish I could take back, was I voted for obunghole the first time. you are a little off, Trump would not be possible without and is payback for 8 years of obunghole trashing this country and the first real hope we have seen that we might make it out of the mess we are in. The left is going to be seriously downsized. The women marchers were not all from left but they were mostly white and they said a lot of conflicting things, their message isn't clear yet, but you could see their power. Did you see BLM causing them any problems? Did you see any muslim or other immigrant gangs trying to rape them? I haven't checked but I bet there was a big drop in shootings in Chicago too. you openly challenge 500,000 white women (even if they are wearing pussy hats) and you die a humiliating death and they new it.... MAGA!
buzz 2017-01-28 15:32:14
Oh ya. I am an atheist there are and never were any gods.
JudoJohn 2017-01-28 19:14:10
I am an atheist there are and never were any gods.Nope. There is no god(s), so you're an atheist 🙂 as am I.
Professor 2017-01-28 22:21:59
Everyone blaming the protesters needs to remember that it's Trump who is fueling their fire. Wait for the enormous backlash from the left. Thanks Trump. And yes. It's our fault.
buzz 2017-01-28 22:46:32
@ JudoJohn With approximately 4,200 known religions and one of them being Hinduism which according the their scriptures has 320 million gods, Some Hindu's will say there is only one god with 320 million forms, but certainly enough believe in this total that are would be better than is But it should have been I am an atheist there are no and never were any gods and so Trump is not my god, just a miracle 🙂 I don't agree with him on abortion and I am sure some other things will come up but you can't have everything. He has already been entertaining in less than a week. MAGA!
Michael 2017-01-29 08:45:50
My tenet is to not verbalize logic to women. This might be a surprise to you, but this is a blog for men, not women.Lol. What's the point of picking up one of the thousands of feminine screeds on the Internet and debunking it piece by piece? I think replying to it with logic is not needed even if you talk with men, because it's obvious it makes no sense. Never mind though.
Well, it’s lucky that the brain is the same though, is it not?Not sure if you’re trying to be sarcastic, but if you’re not, women and men have different brain structures.
(Look me in the eye and tell me the elites behind the utterly incompetent Hillary Clinton campaign weren’t idiots.)Not sure they could have done a better job without changing candidate. They obviously knew an attractive, amicable-looking 40-year-old brown women with a clean "political sheet" and all the political correctness boxes checked would have won easy (so I think). Hillary, how should we say, imposed herself, and they lost.
human nature is as irrational as it is unpredictableUtterly incorrect, and if you really believe that, you have a lot more research to do. Human behavior is irrational, and it’s also extremely predictable
Blackdragon 2017-01-29 21:17:08
What’s the point of picking up one of the thousands of feminine screeds on the Internet and debunking it piece by piece?1. Traffic. 2. Income. 3. Spurring discussion about topics many of my readers like to talk about. 4. This.
Shubert 2017-01-30 04:48:15
Lol, these demonstrations are pointless. The participants are useful idiots. Soros' puppets. Oh well. They want their feels and a government paycheck as well.
MD 2017-01-30 04:55:28
Something similar on TED talks. http://www.ted.com/talks/ashley_judd_how_online_abuse_of_women_has_spiraled_out_of_control
masterdev 2017-01-30 19:53:11
Best article about anything in particular I have read in a while. Bravo!
Bill 2017-01-31 07:51:25
By the way, BD and dear libertarians. Have you read Steve Bannons speech in the Vatican? He thinks ayn rand libertarianism and a secular state are great evils, and wants to establish a theocracy in the US. Think about that. He tells Trump what to do.
Snfl 2017-01-31 10:00:25
Lol, these demonstrations are pointless. The participants are useful idiots. Soros’ puppets.Lol, the fact that you think even 5% of the people who protested give a fuck about Soros is hilarious. Keep wearing that tinfoil hat buddy.
Snfl 2017-01-31 10:14:55
The women marchers were not all from left but they were mostly white and they said a lot of conflicting things, their message isn’t clear yet, but you could see their power. Did you see BLM causing them any problems? Did you see any muslim or other immigrant gangs trying to rape them?Wow you are seriously delusional. There is a lot of overlap between BLM protesters, immigrant groups, and the women's march protesters. Why the fuck would BLM do anything to them when half of them are in the same march?
Blackdragon 2017-01-31 12:54:15
By the way, BD and dear libertarians. Have you read Steve Bannons speech in the Vatican? He thinks ayn rand libertarianism and a secular state are great evils, and wants to establish a theocracy in the US. Think about that. He tells Trump what to do.Trump never wanted to be president; he just wants to be famous. So he's handing massive power over to his subordinates, many of whom worship big government. But tell that to the former libertarians who are now enthusiastic Trump supporters (Vox Day, Stefan Molyneux, Wayne Allyn Root, etc), who apparently don't mind. Trump killed whatever was left of libertarianism. (Not that there was very much to being with. People hate freedom.) Ah well. Not that I care. 🙂
Ash 2017-02-02 18:25:44
I agree with many of your views, but above all I think women should stop giving a damn about what people think so much. Believe me, there are a lot of morons out there sometimes it comes down to a point where nothing we say or do will stop them from making idiotic judgements about women and saying stupid shit online to "support" their measly opinion. Just stop giving a fuck. I'm a big fan of doing whatever you want as long you aren't hurting anyone else. Those who don't like it can suck it. I just wish women had more of this attitude, you know, like men do. They need it badly. Fuck what Trump thinks.
Mike 2017-02-04 05:39:47
Blackdragon I think you are right about many things, marriage especially (and your advice has changed my life)... However just like you were wrong about Romney in 2012, I feel you are deeply mistaken about Trump. Although just to prove how much I respect the fact you may be right– I live in China now and have been for the past 5 months. I'm learning Mandarin and making every preparation to thrive in Asia. Yet I do think you are wrong for many reasons. 1) As someone else pointed out, Trump may have lost the popular vote (investigations underway), but it was only thanks to one state. A state where he virtually never campaigned. Trump played the Electoral College game and dominated it. If the vote was a popular vote, he would've played that game and dominated it equally as well. 2) Most of the protestors are being funded, and most Americans do not agree with the angles taken by the protestors. Trump called it the "silent majority" and he's right. Most people are NOT these crazy leftists. They're just a loud as fuck minority that gets their way because the right allows them to. However, the violent protests will be stopping soon. 3) Trump doesn't lose supporters. The left is continually bleeding theirs. You can say that the leftist movement has already won, yet I'm seeing the exact opposite in the world. First Brexit, then Trump. The silent majority is rising up against SJW, socialism and outrage culture. The idea that Trump would be losing supporters, after he won the whitehouse and is delivering on all his promises, is laughable. Trump supporters were never scared by SJW's and we certainly aren't now that we won. Meanwhile stars like Tucker Carlson, Milo Yianopolous, Tami Lahren are seeing HUGE boosts in popularity. The right wing radio stars like Rush, Michael Savage and Alex Jones dominate liberal news ratings. And thanks to that... 4) The next generation following millennials will be conservatives. Trump supporters have "won the internet", in the fact that any medium NOT heavily censored is dominated by positive Trump support. This is something you can only actually see if you're in the trenches of all these places. Sure Trump gets raped on Twitter. But Twitter is hugely biased against the right. He does very well on Facebook, YouTube, and if he wasn't heavily, heavily censored and limited, would even dominate SJW heaven, Reddit. 5) Trump's policies will have positive effects even for those who hate him. Even people who love Obamacare are seeing huge premium increases (a huge reason Hillary lost IMO). This will end with Trump and lower taxes will come as well. ISIS will be defeated and hopefully sooner rather than later, law and order will be restored. All of this can happen in 4 years very easily. Again Trump will not lose his support provided he continues to deliver, and the left only stands to lose based on their incredibly hateful and violent temper tantrums. They really are an absurdly vocal minority. And even if they manage to get a few million people to march on Washington and hear Madonna talk about blowing up the whitehouse... the rest of America is disgusted. Just my two cents. Cheers from China... 🙂
buzz 2017-02-04 15:05:12
I read this post again and I do agree with more of BD's opinions than I thought at first except for I don't think the left was a sleeping giant I think the left was stomping all over everything like Godzilla 🙂 Maybe BD did not understand the woman's post but I don't think women's sanitary needs (tampons, pads) should be taxed at all they need them and we are glad they use them. So this is getting to be an old post now and everybody including BD has moved on but let's see.... BD seems to be seriously annoyed by Trump and all the attention he is getting and he is not a democrat either, some psychologists claim that we are most annoyed by people that are most like ourselves.... So are BD and Trump alike? I have never met either one of them in person just heard about them on the internet and this blog and on TV with Trump. I believe they both have said they never drink, smoke or do drugs. They are both heterosexual. I guessing BD has been with more women but Trump has been with more expensive women. Trump was probably bragging when he said he was worth ten billion, I think Forbes estimated his worth at 3 to 4 billion. BD is alpha 2.0 and Trump is definitely alpha 1 and LOVES DRAMA but the billions insulate him from the problems us poor folk have to worry about like child support and alimony and Trumps two x wives speak well of him now but that could have been a requirement of their settlements from him. They are both businessmen but I don't think Trump has ever had a job and BD did when he first started out. They are both workaholics and they both can do a lot more work than I can, BD is around 40 and Trump is around 70 but I think Trump has the edge there. It just came out that Trump does Propecia for his prostate and it helps some with his hair but does he shoot Testosterone too? He does seem to be in very good shape for his age what drugs could you buy with that much money? growth hormone? steroids? Is Trump spray tanning? what the hell, why is he orange? I think there is a pill that makes you look tan? BD has written that you need to be a little bit of an asshole to best seduce women and there is no doubt that Trump can be a freaking, flying, fucking asshole when he wants to be. So what would happen if these two guys met in person? oh and just to make it interesting they are both wired with mics and recorders. BD is 40 and about 5' 11" Trump is about 70, 6' 3" and at one time was a wrestling promoter, I have seen TV of him fighting dirty on the floor with some guy, I don't know if it was staged though. Trump is president and BD does not want to be president, so which one of them would make the best president? Any comments?
Blackdragon 2017-02-04 21:48:44
Trump played the Electoral College game and dominated it.
Only 25.5% of the United States voted for Trump. This is not indicative of a right-wing wave overcoming the country.
Most of the protestors are being funded, and most Americans do not agree with the angles taken by the protestors.
Correct, most of the country are not insane, extreme leftists. Instead, most of the country is center-left. All the surveys clearly show this. Just because most of the country are not feminists doesn't mean most of the country wants small government or all the Mexicans to be forcibly deported at gunpoint.
Trump doesn’t lose supporters. The left is continually bleeding theirs.
Incorrect. The left didn't lose supporters; they just didn't turn out because Hillary was such a shitty candidate. The millions of blacks who voted for Obama but didn't vote for Hillary did not vote for Trump.
The next generation following millennials will be conservatives.
You are utterly wrong, and all the data trends point to the exact opposite of what you just said. But there's no way of either of proving our points; we'll just have to wait and see.
Trump’s policies will have positive effects even for those who hate him.
...until the left-wing president right after him returns the USA to its left-wing decline.
BD seems to be seriously annoyed by Trump and all the attention he is getting and he is not a democrat either, some psychologists claim that we are most annoyed by people that are most like ourselves
I refuted your points, so your response is change topics, put words in my mouth (Trump doesn't seriously annoy me; Obama annoyed me far worse) and psychoanalyze me. That says something about your arguments.
Mike Silvertree 2017-02-12 12:54:51
Talk about stirring the pot. This will have a million replies by August. I was seriously bummed out after watching the first GOP debate because I knew that Trump was going to win the nomination, which would make Hillary President for sure. I stayed that way until late Spring when I realized that he was the only candidate who could beat Hillary. Any one of the other candidates would have been crushed by the huge negative campaign the Clinton Machine always unleashes. Trump just not being Hillary is enough for me. I hate both parties, but the Democrats do more things I find abhorrent than the Republicans, and the Libertarians aren't Libertarians. Gary Johnson couldn't name the government department he would just close down as a useless violator of the people's rights, and thinks the government should force Christian bakers to make cakes for Gay weddings. Does he also think a black caterer should have to provide the food at a KKK conference? I bet not. Plus, I am enjoying the show. The Democrat temper tantrum is magnificent to behold. I think it will be the end of their party. It's not selling well to the middle. Trump keeps poking them with a stick. It's like watching Bugs Bunny goad the Tasmanian Devil. Trump will manage the economy better than Hillary, and I doubt the government can behave any worse than it has been anyway. Overall, I believe I will be better off because he won and Hillary didn't. That's as good as it gets. I know I'm never going to live in an Anarcho-Capitalist utopia. I gotta comment on this... Singapore’s women feel safe walking alone at night. American women do not. That's because they have an authoritarian one party state that canes people for spitting their gum on the sidewalk and other crimes against the quality of life, and will give you a long prison sentence for assaulting anyone at any time. Law and Order governments do provide public safety.
joelsuf 2017-02-12 13:14:30
Even after all this crap, society has learned nothing about political hero worship. It’s sad.Truer words were never spoken. I'd like to see BD do a post on why this is. I have a couple of reasons, but I'm sure they would be the same as BD's. Political hero worship is not only SP, but its also peer pressure as well (if you are an anarchist, you "aren't a good person" according to pretty much anyone). That's why we have learned nothing about political hero worship, because not worshiping a political hero is "bad."
buzz 2017-02-12 17:39:58
You have to understand why the Democrats are so upset. They have cheated in every election since JFK and they cheated more in this last election than they ever have before AND THEY STILL LOST AND THEY JUST CAN'T FUCKING BELIEVE IT. There's one number you will almost never hear: More than1035 seats. That's the number of spots in state legislatures, governor's mansions and Congress lost by Democrats during Obama's presidency. It's a statistic that reveals an unexpected twist of the Obama years: The leadership of the one-time community organizer and champion of ground-up politics was rough on the grassroots of his own party. When Obama exits the White House, he'll leave behind a Democratic Party that languished in his shadow for years and is searching for itself. After this year's elections, Democrats hold the governor's office and both legislative chambers in just five coastal states: Oregon, California, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Delaware. Republicans have the trifecta in 25, giving them control of a broad swath of the middle of the country. The defeats have all but wiped out a generation of young Democrats, leaving the party with limited power in statehouses and a thin bench to challenge an ascendant GOP majority eager to undo many of the president's policies. To be sure, the president's party almost always loses seats in midterm elections. But, say experts, Obama's tenure has marked the greatest number of losses under any president in decades. "The backlash to the Obama presidency was perhaps bigger than any of us really realized," said Simon Rosenberg, president of the New Democratic Network, a Democratic think tank. "A lot of the story of this election was people feeling like the culture was evolving in a way that made it feel like they were no longer living in the country they grew up in." MAGA!
joelsuf 2017-02-12 18:25:19
You have to understand why the Statists don't care. They have cheated in every election since Lincoln. and they cheated more in this last election than they ever have beforeFixed. Taxation is Theft, War is Murder, Voting is a microaggression of the state. Anarcho-Capitalism! 😉
Blackdragon 2017-02-13 17:35:16
Talk about stirring the pot. This will have a million replies by August.Cool with me. 🙂
Trump will manage the economy better than Hillary, and I doubt the government can behave any worse than it has been anyway.That is more or less my opinion; that in 2020 or 2024 when he leaves office, the economy will be more or less the same, i.e., headed for a slow collapse.
That’s because they have an authoritarian one party state that canes people for spitting their gum on the sidewalk and other crimes against the quality of life, and will give you a long prison sentence for assaulting anyone at any time. Law and Order governments do provide public safety.True.
MAGA!Not going to happen. I know slogans are fun, but the problems endemic to the USA are too big and too ingrained into the system for any one person or party to fix, and I would say the exact same thing if Ron Paul was president. A more achievable slogan for the alt-right would be, Slow America's Collapse For A While! SACFAW!
joe_blow 2017-02-13 18:13:29
Implying that I must make choices today that damage my happiness because some dead guy did something 100 years ago that benefited me is the height of stupidity and irrational Societal Programming.BlackDragon, I generally find your relationship/business advice quite interesting, but as someone who has studied politics all my life I generally find your perspective and approach in the realm of politics to be pretty simplistic. The problem with your libertarian taxation-is-theft mindset is that you are willfully choosing to ignore the fact that people are in wildly different levels of economic opportunity, and dare I say it... privilege (I know the alt-right loves to flinch when they hear these words). Privilege really does exist, even if the term gets abused on the SJW left. There's a great comic that gives perspective about how important it can be in determining how successful someone will become: http://thewireless.co.nz/articles/the-pencilsword-on-a-plate Ayn Rand famously argued that selfishness is a virtue... but most people would agree it just makes someone an asshole. IMO there is nothing Alpha2.0 about lacking consideration for the welfare of other people. Allowing someone starve to death.. or having the rug pulled out from under them.. because "it's not your responsibility", is not only callous and cold, but also anti-human behaviour that goes against the instincts of our own better nature. Our economic system is an arbitrary hierarchal system that throughout your life you have no doubt succeeded, in part through merit I will concede, to make lots of money (and thus power) within. But your current position of power is one that you hold with far less stability and security than you realize. Your power only exists thanks to the legal system itself existing to preserve that power and privilege for you. E.g. by having police forces use violence to prevent others from challenging the supremacy of our existing money system. This may be justified if current property ownership levels were fairly distributed, but they are not. At all. Just look at global levels of income wealth inequality for fuck sakes. 8 people have the combined wealth of HALF the world's population. Our international banking and money system uses onerous debt to extract interest payments out of 3rd world countries. Our international legal system is designed to help hedge funds extract profit off of other sovereign nations. Unbelievable amounts of illegitimate wealth is accrued this way -- giving extraordinary advantage and future privilege to the select few (primarily in finance) who benefitted from getting to be the vultures. Once massive wealth is accumulated, and winners have been chosen, that power remains -- to be spread, and perpetuated for future generations to also enjoy through no particular work, agency or merit of their own. This toxic financial system is far from a pure meritocracy. You support it only, I imagine, because it still gave a chance for a hard working person like yourself to eke out a reasonable life. But that doesn't mean we need to keep supporting it, or that the system itself is justified. This system, by increasing inequality is ruinously damaging most people and its only getting worse. Peter Thiel (a Trump sympathizer of all people) made an interesting observation: "The rapid rise in inequality has been an issue that the Right has not been willing to engage. It tends either to say it’s not true or that it doesn’t matter. That’s a very strange blind spot. Obviously if you extrapolate an exponential function it can go a lot further. We’re now at an extreme comparable to 1913 or 1928; on a worldwide basis we’ve probably surpassed the 1913 highs and are closer to 1789 levels. In the history of the modern world, inequality has only been ended through communist revolution, war or deflationary economic collapse. It’s a disturbing question which of these three is going to happen today, or if there’s a fourth way out." --------- Peter is a libertarian, but I don't think he's truly grappled with the implications of what he has just said here. Once you come to realize this inherent truth about the system you will increasingly find your position about the redistribution of wealth to be morally untenable. ---- If you'd like to develop more nuance to your morals and political worldview that goes beyond the usual frameworks of selfish libertarianism, jingoistic right wing nationalism or victimhood identity politics... I recommend you check out: - Foucault. Who argues government doesn't even matter because real power is exercised at the personal and institutional level. His work began the process of opening people's eyes to the reality that social norms hold far more power than any government law. These norms discipline us into following social conventions of behaviour, some that can advantage us and others that disadvantage us. You seem to recognize the truth of this a bit in your fight against monogamy. Foucault's work is not proscriptive, but gives a way of deeply appreciating just how fundamental this approach to the world is. E.g. his work makes the case for why just having "legal" equality misses the point about those who are concerned about discriminations: humans are social creatures, and our rights and abilities are greatly shaped just by the interactions and customs we choose to follow. Legal equality matters fuck all if people are still racist at a personal level. - John Ralston Saul: A Theory of Justice (reading this fundamentally changed how I thought about the world, by providing a moral framework for thinking about the ways in which inequality can and cannot be justified) Just some things to think about..
Blackdragon 2017-02-13 22:59:16
The problem with your libertarian taxation-is-theft mindset is that you are willfully choosing to ignore the fact that people are in wildly different levels of economic opportunity, and dare I say it… privilegeThe fact there are those born with less privilege doesn't mean it's not theft to take your money from you, by force, without your permission. It's still theft. If you've "studied politics your whole life," then you should be aware of the nonaggression principle that libertarians abide by. If I take something from you, forcibly and without your permission, it doesn't matter what I'm going to do with it, regardless of how noble. I have still aggressed against you, and that is wrong.
IMO there is nothing Alpha2.0 about lacking consideration for the welfare of other people.You are correct. That's why I send a large amount of my own money to charity every month, voluntarily. Do you do the same? Somehow I doubt it.
Your power only exists thanks to the legal system itself existing to preserve that power and privilege for you.Correct. That's why I believe in government-controlled police and courts, at least at the local level. I'm a libertarian, not an anarchist.
Just look at global levels of income wealth inequality for fuck sakes. 8 people have the combined wealth of HALF the world’s population.Correct, because of corporatism, not capitalism. In a true capitalist society (which we do not have), you would never see this insane level of income inequality. Read this.
You support it only, I imagine, because it still gave a chance for a hard working person like yourself to eke out a reasonable life.I don't support it. I hate it. I just have a different prescription than you do. I want less government making rich people richer. You want more.
Jack Outside the Box 2017-03-15 04:21:03
Political correctness detected: Employing red pill countermeasures now:
The problem with your libertarian taxation-is-theft mindset is that you are willfully choosing to ignore the fact that people are in wildly different levels of economic opportunity, and dare I say it… privilegeWhat does one have to do with the other? How does a lack of economic opportunity and certain starvation, when confronted with obscene wealth, justify stealing from the wealthy? This is my problem with social justice warriors: You don't believe in human rights. Only "circumstantial rights."
(I know the alt-right loves to flinch when they hear these words).First, we're not the alt right. Second, we "flinch" because that word is usually used only by either Communists or anti-white PC racists!
Privilege really does exist, even if the term gets abused on the SJW left.Good. I'm glad privilege exists. I want even more privilege. Why is privilege bad? And how does the existence of privilege justify robbing people of their privilege? We should precisely be protecting the privileged, not condemning them! Are you against happiness or something?
There’s a great comic that gives perspective about how important it can be in determining how successful someone will become:Fine. But what's your point?
Ayn Rand famously argued that selfishness is a virtue…It is. Selfishness is the only thing that protects you against slavery and tyranny. Take away a population's selfishness through religion or anything else, and you have a ready made population of slaves willing to make sacrifices for their "dear leader," as all totalitarian regimes would have it. This is why all of history's dictators have preached altruism and self-denial to the naïve masses!
but most people would agree it just makes someone an asshole.Explain why you believe being an asshole is a negative or bad thing.
IMO there is nothing Alpha2.0 about lacking consideration for the welfare of other people.What does "consideration for others" have to do with being forced to do things for others at gunpoint? You do know that there is a huge difference between charity and theft, right?
Allowing someone starve to death.. or having the rug pulled out from under them.. because “it’s not your responsibility”, is not only callous and cold, but also anti-human behaviour that goes against the instincts of our own better nature.First, I am in control of my own body. It's my body, not yours. You do not get to dictate how I occupy my time or who I choose to help or not help at the point of an IRS gun with your sanctimonious drivel. Second, a "good Samaritan law" was tried in multiple states and was always overturned by the courts as violating the 9th Amendment. Third, regardless of whether you approve or disapprove of letting someone starve, we should agree that, in a free country, you cannot compel someone to help a person whom they are not legally or morally responsible for. That is a violation of my bodily autonomy, time theft, and property theft without compensation in violation of the 13th Amendment, which prohibits slavery, or involuntary servitude. What you're promoting here is slavery for the rich just because they are rich, thus proving that you don't believe in human rights, but only circumstantial rights. And for this, you may go fuck yourself!
Our economic system is an arbitrary hierarchal system that throughout your life you have no doubt succeeded, in part through merit I will concede, to make lots of money (and thus power) within.How does any of this justify the slavery that you wish to legalize (and which, to a large extent, is already legal via government welfare) in violation of the 13th Amendment?
But your current position of power is one that you hold with far less stability and security than you realize. Your power only exists thanks to the legal system itself existing to preserve that power and privilege for you. E.g. by having police forces use violence to prevent others from challenging the supremacy of our existing money system.And you wish to abolish this very good thing? Why?
This may be justified if current property ownership levels were fairly distributed, but they are not.Distributed? There is no such thing as a fair distribution of income. If even one penny of my income is distributed to anyone against my will, it is, by definition, an unfair distribution, as all theft is unfair and a human rights violation. You're confusing charity with theft. There is no need for theft when there is charity. And there is no need for charity when there is theft. By promoting theft, you are replacing human gratitude and friendship with self-righteous entitlement and human kindness with resentment and hatred for the needy, thus seemingly justifying your encouragement of more theft and leading to an endless cycle of socialism which thrives on its own failures and dishes out endless self-fulfilling prophecies!
Just look at global levels of income wealth inequality for fuck sakes.What's your problem with income inequality? Income equality is called Marxism! The only place you see income equality is in third world countries where everyone's personalities are crushed into a sameness due to external circumstances dictating their choices for them. This forces everyone to make the same choices in order to survive, thus leading to income equality via the death of human freedom and individuality. The freer a country is, the more income inequality there will be, because the freer people are, the more choices they'll make based on their wildly different personalities, thus leading to more stupid choices and more poverty, not less. Freedom allows the chips to fall where they may resulting in people starving to death becoming a principle of justice. The more freedom for everyone there is, the more income inequality there will be. Income inequality is a positive sign, not a negative.
8 people have the combined wealth of HALF the world’s population.Right. And......that's......bad?
Our international banking and money system uses onerous debt to extract interest payments out of 3rd world countries.But fighting corporatism with socialism is fighting theft with more theft. In a capitalistic country, there cannot be a central bank, or any type of "international banking system." What we have now is socialism for the rich, which should be abolished, but you want to abolish it by giving socialism to the poor, which compounds the problem. I, on the other hand, want to solve the problem of fascism by forcing capitalism upon the rich.
Our international legal system is designed to help hedge funds extract profit off of other sovereign nations.Correct. And in a free country, we wouldn't have an "international legal system" any more than we would have an international banking system. How does any of this fascism justify you putting an IRS gun to my head and robbing me of my money without compensation?
Unbelievable amounts of illegitimate wealth is accrued this way — giving extraordinary advantage and future privilege to the select few (primarily in finance) who benefitted from getting to be the vultures.You're talking about the super class - the 10 percent of the 1 percent. I agree. They are fascist parasites who would be the first to experience homelessness in a true capitalist system. None of this justifies stealing from me though.
Once massive wealth is accumulated, and winners have been chosen, that power remains — to be spread, and perpetuated for future generations to also enjoy through no particular work, agency or merit of their own.See above.
This toxic financial system is far from a pure meritocracy.Right. It's called fascism. That is its literal name. But the solution to fascism is capitalism, not socialism.
You support it only, I imagine, because it still gave a chance for a hard working person like yourself to eke out a reasonable life. But that doesn’t mean we need to keep supporting it, or that the system itself is justified.Neither of us support this system. The problem is that you support a system that is far worse, in which both the rich and the poor steal from innocent people, instead of just the rich. In other words, you want to double the evil whereas I want to abolish it. I don't want anyone to steal from anyone, but my second choice is to have the rich be the thieves, since they at least tend to be smarter than the poor. But if everyone steals from each other, you have true chaos, which gives rise to a police state.
This system, by increasing inequality is ruinously damaging most people and its only getting worse.No, not by increasing inequality. By increasing theft. Increasing inequality is a non-sequitur.
Peter Thiel (a Trump sympathizer of all people) made an interesting observation: “The rapid rise in inequality has been an issue that the Right has not been willing to engage.That's because it's framed in fucked up ways by the left - in terms of racist white guilt, the promotion of socialism for the poor in order to balance the socialism of the rich. Frame it like that and no sane person with self esteem will want to engage with you.
In the history of the modern world, inequality has only been ended through communist revolution, war or deflationary economic collapse. It’s a disturbing question which of these three is going to happen today, or if there’s a fourth way out.”The fourth way out is capitalism. That's the only solution here.
Peter is a libertarian, but I don’t think he’s truly grappled with the implications of what he has just said here. Once you come to realize this inherent truth about the system you will increasingly find your position about the redistribution of wealth to be morally untenable.So a bunch of rich fascists made their money by stealing, so my position against stealing is morally untenable? Weird logic.
If you’d like to develop more nuance to your morals and political worldview that goes beyond the usual frameworks of selfish libertarianism,Why would I want to do that?
jingoistic right wing nationalismI thought you were against internationalism! If you're against nationalism too, what's left?
or victimhood identity politics…Isn't that what you just advocated?
I recommend you check out: – Foucault. Who argues government doesn’t even matter because real power is exercised at the personal and institutional level.Right. So why do you want the government to steal from me again?
His work began the process of opening people’s eyes to the reality that social norms hold far more power than any government law.Correct. So by that logic, we should culturally induce people to be voluntarily charitable as a superior solution. So why do you want the government to steal from me again?
E.g. his work makes the case for why just having “legal” equality misses the point about those who are concerned about discriminations:But only the government has the power of physical force. And psychiatry (which is insane). I'm all for cultural persuasion but using the government to legally force cultural norms to change (which is what SJWs want) violates Free Speech and a whole host of human rights.
humans are social creatures, and our rights and abilities are greatly shaped just by the interactions and customs we choose to follow. Legal equality matters fuck all if people are still racist at a personal level.Wrong. As private citizens don't have the legal power of force, a racist private citizen can't hurt you as much as a racist government armed with all the guns.
K 2017-03-15 14:08:07
you cannot compel someone to help a person whom they are not legally or morally responsible for.Doesn't the state make you legally responsible for those in need by imposing taxes through laws?
Jack Outside the Box 2017-03-15 14:23:12
@K - Yes! And that is called tyranny! That was my whole point. Forcing me to be legally responsible for others against my will, and without any compensation, is slavery! And I'm against slavery. It was also outlawed by the 13th Amendment of the Constitution, but the government doesn't care.
Gil Galad 2017-03-15 16:00:16
What you’re promoting here is slavery for the rich just because they are rich, thus proving that you don’t believe in human rights, but only circumstantial rights. And for this, you may go fuck yourself!I'm not sure what qualifies as name-calling here, but I remember someone receiving a "last warning" for calling another commenter a fool, so "you may go f*ck yourself" must be in that zone too. You seriously need to calm down Jack.
Jack Outside the Box 2017-03-15 16:05:50
I’m not sure what qualifies as name-calling here,What name did I call him? Only calling someone names qualifies as name calling. Get a dictionary.
but I remember someone receiving a “last warning” for calling another commenter a fool,Yes. Because calling someone a fool is indeed name-calling.
so “you may go f*ck yourself”Why are you censoring yourself?
must be in that zone too.How could something be in the zone of name calling when it doesn't call anyone any bad names?
You seriously need to calm down Jack.You seriously need to go fuck yourself.
Blackdragon 2017-03-15 16:52:21
You seriously need to calm down Jack. You seriously need to go fuck yourself.You haven't broken any rules, but you're right on the line, Jack. This is just a warning that you're on the line. If you go one millimeter over that line, you won't like what happens. And yes, you do need to calm down, but I've told you that many times and I don't expect you to start anytime soon.
Jack Outside the Box 2017-03-15 17:00:43
You haven’t broken any rules, but you’re right on the line, Jack.I know. Us lawyers enjoy being right on the line while knowing full well not to cross it. It's just how we are. Incidentally, that's also how lesbians try to pick up straight women, but that's neither here nor there.
This is just a warning that you’re on the line.We're good.
If you go one millimeter over that line, you won’t like what happens.No problem at all man.
And yes, you do need to calm down, but I’ve told you that many times and I don’t expect you to start anytime soon.I told him to go fuck himself in response because he's trying to play moderator and get me in trouble with you, or get you to give me a warning or ban me, despite him not understanding the words "name" and "calling" in the phrase "name-calling."
Blackdragon 2017-03-15 17:07:13
I told him to go fuck himself in response because he’s trying to play moderator and get me in trouble with you, or get you to give me a warning or ban me, despite him not understanding the words “name” and “calling” in the phrase “name-calling.”I know. Sometimes Gil Galad has trouble controlling his keyboard as well. He needs stop being a busy-body and you need to calm down. The point is if you go around here telling people to fuck themselves, you're going to raise eyebrows, and I'm going to have to keep a closer eye on you. I'm done with this conversation (unless you force me back in by violating the rules).
Jack Outside the Box 2017-03-15 17:35:08
I’m going to have to keep a closer eye on you.Do what you need to do. But I'm a capitalist. Even though I disagree with some of your rules, I respect your private property and will thus adhere to them. I'm not some SJW/feminist who thinks you obtained this space via "illegitimate privilege" which should allow me to break your rules with impunity in the interest of some bullshit "shared collective space" Marxism.
Gil Galad 2017-03-16 02:57:39
@Jack: actually the initial reason I commented was that I'm upset about the banning of Wolf from this blog, and wasn't enthusiastic about you being banned too; so pointing out that when you keep writing angry comments the likelihood of "accidental" real name calling was piling up seemed like the ("intolerably condescendent" you would say) thing to do. But after your reaction (which shouldv'e made me remember that any benefit of some of your smarter comments on this blog is far outweighed by how thin skinned and gratuitously mean you are), I went back and checked what rule 1 actually says:
No name-calling or personal attacks. Attack opinions or actions, not people. Comments containing personal attacks or name-calling against other posters/commenters will be deleted.So actually Jack, you did break that rule, twice: you personally attacked Joe_blow, and then you personally attacked me. Per the rule, both of those comments should be deleted. Back to what I said in the parenthesis above: equating your loss from this blog to a repeat of Wolf's was a mistake on my part; screw this, man, if one day you're banned I'll just eat popcorn.
Jack Outside the Box 2017-03-16 05:06:07
@Jack: actually the initial reason I commented was that I’m upset about the banning of Wolf from this blog,Seriously?
and wasn’t enthusiastic about you being banned too;I can take care of myself. You are displaying feminine thinking/group consciousness.
so pointing out that when you keep writing angry comments the likelihood of “accidental” real name calling was piling up seemed like the (“intolerably condescendent” you would say) thing to do.Yes, that is very condescending and patronizing. This is a frequent habit you employ, which might have something to do with you being born and raised in a hyper-collectivistic Muslim society? But dude, why not give me the space to be an adult and make my own choices without constantly insisting on holding my hand through these "dark times?" There are blogs and sites out there that follow the feminine imperative of "diminish your friend's free will and treat them like a baby for their own good because they'll thank you for it later and call it caring." Perhaps you'd be happier on one of those?
But after your reaction (which shouldv’e made me remember that any benefit of some of your smarter comments on this blog is far outweighed by how thin skinnedProjection.
and gratuitously mean you are),HAHAHAHA! I'm sorry, did you say something about someone being "thin skinned?" I'm beginning to think that social justice may be the right niche for you (you're already talking like one of them).
I went back and checked what rule 1 actually says: No name-calling or personal attacks.Okay, lawyer time: "Personal attacks" and "name calling" are synonymous. I suppose you can make the argument that they aren't completely one and the same, otherwise BD would have used the word "and" instead of "or" when he wrote the above. Fine. So if "personal attacks" are something that are in some way distinct from "name calling" than the statement "go fuck yourself" may indeed be characterized as a personal attack in certain contexts. But, that context would have to be in a vacuum, or at least, sufficiently separated from a criticism of an idea. Example: Someone makes an argument and wants me to respond to it. Instead, I ignore his arguments and respond with "go fuck yourself." In that context, "go fuck yourself" is indeed a personal attack, as distinguished from "name calling," which BD distinguished with an "or" instead of "and." However, my "go fuck yourself" to the other guy was perfectly in context and inseparable from my criticism of his idea that only circumstantial rights should exist instead of human rights (as evidenced by his approval of committing theft against the rich). So when I said, "go fuck yourself," it fell within the specific penumbra of content-based criticism, particularly as I explained exactly why I said it and tied it inseparably to his bad ideas. Likewise, when I said it to you, I was tying it to your bad idea that feminine hand holding and free will diminishment in the spirit of collectivistic friendship is the way to go (although that connection was less clear, which explains why BD said I'm right on the line).
Attack opinions or actions, not people.Yes, and I was attacking his opinion by saying "for this, you may go fuck yourself." It fell within the contextual penumbra emanating from my protected opinion. Again, "attacking people" has to be markedly separated from attacking their opinions or actions in order for me to cross the line into violating the rule of "attack opinions or actions, not people." Even if attacking people is a separate prohibition from name calling, the separation between "people" and "opinions or actions" must be blatant and unmistakable, which is why BD said I'm on the line, but haven't crossed it. BD's interpretations of his own rules are actually pretty sensible.
Comments containing personal attacks or name-calling against other posters/commenters will be deleted.See above.
So actually Jack, you did break that rule, twice: you personally attacked Joe_blow, and then you personally attacked me. Per the rule, both of those comments should be deleted.You are wrong due what I just said. And apparently, BD agrees, since he explicitly stated above that I didn't break any rules! I think he's the final arbiter here, not you, and my interpretation of his rules (in good faith) seem to match his perfectly. Again, please stop playing moderator and offering your own contrary interpretations when BD has already spoken and declared that I broke no rules!
Back to what I said in the parenthesis above: equating your loss from this blog to a repeat of Wolf’s was a mistake on my part;Does this mean I'm free from your incessant attempts at feminine hand holding? Huzzah!
screw this, man, if one day you’re banned I’ll just eat popcorn.I like mine heavily buttered (no sexual pun intended).
Gil Galad 2017-03-16 13:25:33
Projection.So, um... I told you you needed to calm down, and you replied I needed to go fuck myself, and I replied you were thin skinned (there must be north of a hundred examples in this blog's comments proving this)... and that means, of the two of us, it is I who was being more thin skinned ? LOL. I like your self awareness. If BD has remembered that the rule on name calling has a second bit about personal attacks, he knows that your comments qualified, twice. He may or may not act on it; I'm done here.
Freddy 2017-08-05 11:46:11
You are clueless as to why the deep state hates Trump so much and what the deep state wants for you. You have a lot to learn