Pretty white sorority girls make recruitment video, internet explodes
- Thread starter Splinty
- Start date
Not at all. Why would I? There is nothing inherently wrong with any color.
Who is asking for silence? I think these discussions are healthy, as long as we stick to facts and logic. Your sarcasm and ad hominems don't help.
If you're passionate about the well being of Americans, surely you should focus on the ones that are less well off, not just the black people.
This thread was about race. I am an intersectional advocate. In other contexts you'd see me arguing for protection from religious nuts, pro-feminist arguments, pro LGBT arguments, anti-transphobia, anti-wage theft, anti-crony capitalism etc.
This thread was about race specifically so the arguments focused on that. Do not mistake that for other things.
Sure, I may argue aggressively but lets not pretend I am the only one who used ad hom.
This thread was about race specifically so the arguments focused on that. Do not mistake that for other things.
Sure, I may argue aggressively but lets not pretend I am the only one who used ad hom.
Thread was about THE BEST recrutiment video production I've ever seen
Would you ever bring yourself to worry about the discrimination of men, even white men, in sectors where they definitely exist -- family court, criminal court penalties? Or do the benefits of being in this social group in other areas mean that these individuals simply are in the wrong time of history?
If there is nothing inherently wrong with any color, why should someone be given advantages based solely on color? Seems racist to me.
They have numerous disadvantages. Which is why this is a corrective measure and not a racist one. If we we had equity, we wouldn't need these policies.
Kind of, yea. Wrong time in history to worry about the hardships of being a man.Thread was about THE BEST recrutiment video production I've ever seen
Would you ever bring yourself to worry about the discrimination of men, even white men, in sectors where they definitely exist -- family court, criminal court penalties? Or do the benefits of being in this social group in other areas mean that these individuals simply are in the wrong time of history?
For a time I had custody of my step daughter from my first marriage. My first wife, who I will not disparage despite many bad feelings, isn't "cut out" for motherhood. But because she is the biological mother and very unpredictable, I can't even see my daughter at this time and there is nothing I can do about it. Thanks to these laws and bias. So I get it. Ive gone through more than most over this.
I despise when MRAs try and take issues with family courts and make them a "mens rights" issue. Fathers rights is entirely different than mens rights imo. I do see why the courts she be weighted for the mother though. Kids do come out of their bodies and feed off of them, and it is almost always males who beat children to death or use them as power control tools over women. This also has to be accounted for.
That is a complicated issue and it is hard to breakdown in a few paragraphs. A lot of issues males face in family courts would resolve themselves if the issues females face were addressed first. Lets save that for another shit storm, k?
You're the only one who has used ad hominems with me. You can trivialise it with, "sure, I may argue aggressively" but it undermines your argument.
Regarding your posts on other threads/forums, that is yet again irrelevant.
This thread wasn't initially about race but even if it was, that doesn't make your opinions any more valid.
Last edited:
The discussion went down the racial road when people asked how this video could be seen as racist. You're asking me why I am not discussing the price of tea in northern chinese provinces or why nafta is bad for the steel industry or why we haven't caught joseph kony yet or whatever, but that isn't how the conversation evolved. We were discussing one thing here. This doesn't mean I cannot have opinions on other things.
Leigh, I understand you're invested in this and you keep bringing up the personal nature of the argument, but are you so invested that all you do is look for reasons to disagree or try to argue points at this stage? If that is where we are, and this cannot get back to being a discussion, lets walk away. Like I said a page ago, weve ground this topic to meal, we won't agree. That is OK.
Leigh, I understand you're invested in this and you keep bringing up the personal nature of the argument, but are you so invested that all you do is look for reasons to disagree or try to argue points at this stage? If that is where we are, and this cannot get back to being a discussion, lets walk away. Like I said a page ago, weve ground this topic to meal, we won't agree. That is OK.
Race based affirmative action can put the big guy on the tall box and the little guy on the short box.They have numerous disadvantages. Which is why this is a corrective measure and not a racist one. If we we had equity, we wouldn't need these policies.
Reading your post on MRA and race based AA, you seem to favour generalising based on group averages. Eg give black people more opportunities because some are disadvantaged, giving mothers custody because men are statistically more likely to commit abuse.
I think generalising a group of people based on the circumstances of a few is morally wrong.
So someone being a woman trumps them of being responsible, in terms of child care? Dude, you are turning into a SJW meme.
No. As stated (more than once), I agree with you on a number of things regarding race. What I disagree with is race based affirmative action and your arguments in support of it are not compelling.
Regarding personal investment, you've been more emotive than I have.
Last edited:
I just posted this
But you're misunderstanding me. In general, the courts need to favor women because of the reasons stated. But not to the point it trumps all responsibility. Again, without delving into another shit storm I cannot discuss the issue in a way which irons out everything I think on it. It is complicated and has to account for a network of factors.
Looks like this is one of those differences of opinions ive been hearing all about. You think that affirmative action is morally wrong, I think it is required, unfortunately, for the immediate future to help correct morally wrong things which are already in place. That is where we started and that is where we are now. We don't have to agree. Like I have said three times, that is ok.
Sorry, but I'm calling bullshit. The court shouldn't favor anyone due to that person's sex. The judge should be making decisions based on what is presented to them, not ruling in favor of women because they were born with a vagina.I just posted this
But you're misunderstanding me. In general, the courts need to favor women because of the reasons stated. But not to the point it trumps all responsibility. Again, without delving into another shit storm I cannot discuss the issue in a way which irons out everything I think on it. It is complicated and has to account for a network of factors.
I just posted this
But you're misunderstanding me. In general, the courts need to favor women because of the reasons stated. But not to the point it trumps all responsibility. Again, without delving into another shit storm I cannot discuss the issue in a way which irons out everything I think on it. It is complicated and has to account for a network of factors.
Why do you keep posting that meme?
Yes it is fine to have different opinions. I'm not angry and I'm not insulting you, I'm simply addressing your comments that I disagree with.
I also disagree with your opinions on family court rulings against men (the only factor that needs to be considered is who is best able to provide for the child - gender statistics have no relevance in an individual case) but as you say, that is a different topic.
Right, but evidence needs to be contextualized against dynamics which may not be immediately ascertainable in the evidence. Usually its he said she said. I don't want to discuss this though. At all. Its way too complex for the discussion dynamic right here.
To annoy you specifically obviously.
He said I was resembling a meme like 12 seconds after I press enter on a SJW meme dude.
Last edited:
And last one....
Settle down, everything isn't an attack on you. I was asking why you posted it, I don't understand that point it's trying to make.
Can you see how someone could use this same argument that abortion is not a women's rights issues, but a mother issue.
Isn't the access and daily context enough to subjugate someone even if they aren't in that scenario yet/ever? (divorce proceedings, pregnant).
If your concern that more males beat their children, should heterosexual couples get advantage of over gay men in adopting, since gay men expose the child to twice the male violence threat?