bohm

Joined

• started 191 topics
• posted 7,847 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by bohm

• 
  401

  So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  it seems like mobilizing after the election, which seems pointless.

  i keep hearing demands for equal rights but don't understand what rights they are missing exactly.. normally a march is to show the support (and potential votes) for a cause, but ... votes for what?

  ... and the election happened already.. is anyone else confused?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Those doggone females and races oughtta be glad for what they got. "The left" as if it is one big homogenous entity.

  x 1000.
• 
  401

  So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  it seems like mobilizing after the election, which seems pointless.

  i keep hearing demands for equal rights but don't understand what rights they are missing exactly.. normally a march is to show the support (and potential votes) for a cause, but ... votes for what?

  ... and the election happened already.. is anyone else confused?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Did lots of women just have non-refundable flight and hotel bookings for what they expected was going to be Clinton's inauguration? LOL

  I saw that on twitter too, it is a little funny..
  But I also got one: For all the women who attended the march because they had booked flights and felt they had to, let's remember the women who wanted to attend the march but had other obligations:

  https://twitter.com/Marv_Vien/status/823621167621619713
• 
  401

  So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  it seems like mobilizing after the election, which seems pointless.

  i keep hearing demands for equal rights but don't understand what rights they are missing exactly.. normally a march is to show the support (and potential votes) for a cause, but ... votes for what?

  ... and the election happened already.. is anyone else confused?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  OK, so that is what you are going with now as the reason for the march ... is that your final answer? It only took 20 pages ...

  No. I think the people in the march had different reasons for going but that is probably a reason many shared.

  Other reasons are his position on global warming (and the environment in general), his idea of building a border wall, pulling out of TPP, limiting access to birth control, his various sayings about minority groups including the idea of a national registry (a republican concerned about the constitution could easily get upset about that idea), that everything about him seems to have to do with Russia, that he is a fraud and conman, that he is the posterchild of a war against truth and honesty in public discourse and that three intelligence agencies believe the Russians were involved in the election campaign and selected him as a preferred candidate. Do you have any idea about how livid the (pretty damn conservative) ex-intelligence community is about that?

  ...but you are right: There are also people who were in the march for reasons I cannot support, or which makes no sense.

  If you are really interested in the question why not go to social media and ask around? Or read about the march from people who supported it, as opposed to the people selected by the alt-right media?
• 
  401

  So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  it seems like mobilizing after the election, which seems pointless.

  i keep hearing demands for equal rights but don't understand what rights they are missing exactly.. normally a march is to show the support (and potential votes) for a cause, but ... votes for what?

  ... and the election happened already.. is anyone else confused?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  You know it is not simply about certain cuss words. It's the hypocrisy that the march was to protest Trump's language, language that was apparently so objectionable but suddenly OK

  Quite frankly, I don't know that. I don't think the march was to protest the use of the word "fuck" or similar. Just to make it clear: Your claim is that the march was about protesting swear words like "fuck", etc.? That brought 4M men and women to the streets?

  What I think many objected to (I certainly do) is a president who brags about grabbing women in the crotch, asides all the other Trump crap. What he describe is sexual harassment. It is not the word "pussy", but that he feels he can go up to woman and grab them by their genitals.
• 
  20

  SJW thinking on the right: The lack of agency

  by bohm in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the nut-left got a dilemma with islamic terrorism: on one hand their natural instinct is to defend muslims from any (perceived) attack on islam and on the other hand radical islam is shock full of values that are 100% opposed to everything they believe: the nut-left would simply be stoned to death in a country which properly followed sharia law.. how do you fix the cognitive dissonance?

  well, the standard script includes the following items:.

  first, you don't really defend sharia, at least not in its entirety, but spend time talking about the evils of the west, in particular, israel.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Jesus H Christ, you can't see that he's acting as a parody? that it's ridicule? You genuinely believe he was "triggered" and having a leftist-style meltdown?

  I think part of it was acting, yes, because it is not reasonable to expect him to have the meltdown when he knows what is in the tweet before making the video. But I think the emotions he show are based on real anger. As you said yourself two days ago the march (or I assume, the views of people in the march) also made you angry.
• 
  401

  So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  it seems like mobilizing after the election, which seems pointless.

  i keep hearing demands for equal rights but don't understand what rights they are missing exactly.. normally a march is to show the support (and potential votes) for a cause, but ... votes for what?

  ... and the election happened already.. is anyone else confused?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Wasn't that the point of the march? To object to that kind of language? Will there be another march to protest them now?

  No, I don't think the point of the march was to object to swear words... I certainly don't care. I don't understand (well I understand but don't agree) with the use of pop stars as "spokespeople". But you know, consistency: Breitbart made the angle swear words and pop stars. I think that is pretty dumb too.

  Maybe you can explain the video. It is a video of women from the left who are swearing. Your point is that these same women, who are swearing, have said that swearing is bad and now they are doing it themselves?

  I agree that would be hypocritical. I also think the language about menstruation, etc. is yucky. I don't understand why some forms of feminism has adopted it, but then again, I am an equity feminist...
• 
  401

  So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  it seems like mobilizing after the election, which seems pointless.

  i keep hearing demands for equal rights but don't understand what rights they are missing exactly.. normally a march is to show the support (and potential votes) for a cause, but ... votes for what?

  ... and the election happened already.. is anyone else confused?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Well she does, clearly, you obviously can't search for shit. She also tries to de-platform muslim apostates / liberals.

  Well obviously I can't but I trust you have!. I oppose that view and think it is a serious mistake to have her speak at these marches. New evidence --> new opinions. For my own sake, can you give a link to a place where she says she support Sharia? (not the tweet. I already looked at her history. no I do not think that tweet was appropriate at all and it raises very serious concerns).

  yes, it is valid because the set of speeches by all those women apparently there to protest Trump's rude and obnoxious comments were themselves rude and obnoxious.

  Well, we are again discussing and contrasting divergent views of many, different people.

  Let's take madonna. If trump had said "fuck", and madonna opposed trump for saying "fuck", but she herself said "fuck" in her speech, that's hypocritical. If she opposes Trump for saying the thing about grabbing women by the pussy and being an idiot, then saying "fuck" in her speech is not hypocritical.

  I agree you can't say that others should not say fuck (or use rude words) and use rude words yourself. That IS hypocritical. But sure you can swear like a sailor and oppose Trump for the pussy-grabbing comment, I don't see the contradiction. Do you?
• 
  20

  SJW thinking on the right: The lack of agency

  by bohm in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the nut-left got a dilemma with islamic terrorism: on one hand their natural instinct is to defend muslims from any (perceived) attack on islam and on the other hand radical islam is shock full of values that are 100% opposed to everything they believe: the nut-left would simply be stoned to death in a country which properly followed sharia law.. how do you fix the cognitive dissonance?

  well, the standard script includes the following items:.

  first, you don't really defend sharia, at least not in its entirety, but spend time talking about the evils of the west, in particular, israel.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  I honestly don't think you are capable of viewing things rationally, you have decided your viewpoint and are now doggedly determined to view everything through the spectacles you'd been given.

  Well okay, thank you for stating your view clearly I guess. What can I say? I am sorry you see things that way.

  The hurt feelings / safe spaces / triggered expressions used by many of these commentators is not appropriating it, it's ridiculing it, showing how utterly stupid much of it is.

  Yes of course I know it was meant to be ironic, but the fact is that he did say he was triggered and then acted as if he was triggered completely with shouting and slamming the table --- and I don't think that bit was an act, I think he really was angry.

  So, he got triggered, and had an emotional reaction to a tweet. Poor man! Bernie should issue Trigger warnings before posting such foul tweets!

  Once again, if a SJW had had such a meltdown over a tweet, he would have been the one laughing! Please tell me that you believe that ain't so!

  I mean come on, he thought it was HILLARIOUS that his creepy tweets about rape to a woman (haw-haw, I wrote about rape but technically not a rape threat, haw haw) made her report him (see the interview with Gaad Saad): He OBVIOUSLY think other people's emotional reactions are amazingly funny and then he has a meltdown on his own ;-).
• 
  401

  So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  it seems like mobilizing after the election, which seems pointless.

  i keep hearing demands for equal rights but don't understand what rights they are missing exactly.. normally a march is to show the support (and potential votes) for a cause, but ... votes for what?

  ... and the election happened already.. is anyone else confused?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Simon: False and you likely know it.

  No I don't. I went back and read the tweet in context on twitter and tried to read a bit about her. Did you knew there is a muslim hate site on her? I don't know if she really want Sharia law. If she does I 100% oppose that view as you know.

  The alt-right media is hilarious. Breitbart ran a front-page story because Madonna had said "fuck"! Can you believe it? A swear word! The journalist had never heard such crude and foul language and was reaching for the smelling salt! The ensuing comment thread was of course entirely civil.

  No,

  Well yes breitbart totally did!

  Then there was a nazi who got half-punched on camera. The alt-right media went into a frenzy because that obviously demonstrate the entire demonstration is shock-full of violent protesters who were running rampant through the streets, running over nazis with their baby strollers.

  No, there have been many attacks on people, regular Trump supporters, than that. The insidious thing is suggesting that it's OK to physically attack people in the street just because you label them a nazi ... by a group who seems to label everyone who disagrees with them a nazi.

  I do not doubt there has been other attacks (can you give some sources though? and not the anarchists), but now it happened that the nazi was the one who got the news and as far as I know these were remarkably peaceful protests.

  I do not think it is okay to attack someone in the streets but why is that relevant? the point is this was actually a serious talking point, see again the Sargon video.

  Yes, it does. They are thugs! Violence to silence people they disagree with politically? What do they have to do for you to say its wrong?!?

  well I did say that was wrong :-).

  It it OK for the other side to beat people then? Can you not see that supporting or excusing this crap makes it OK when others do it too?

  No I don't think it is okay to punch someone, even someone as creepy as that nazi guy (sorry, white supremacist with nazi leanings and followers, whatever)

  This is the problem I have with the left, the utter and appalling hypocrisy, feigning outrage about things and then turning round and applauding when their side do it.

  Do you see me applauding?

  I don't think madonna is taken seriously, even when she was promising to give a crowd of people blow-jobs (oops, lets "respect women!").

  well just follow breitbart! she got plenty of coverage in multi-thousand comment threads.

  But the insidious creep of Islam and Sharia into western society should be fought tooth and nail because it is a cancer.

  I agree! I agree that all anti-democratic, anti-speech, anti-rationality based groups should be fought.
• 
  20

  SJW thinking on the right: The lack of agency

  by bohm in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the nut-left got a dilemma with islamic terrorism: on one hand their natural instinct is to defend muslims from any (perceived) attack on islam and on the other hand radical islam is shock full of values that are 100% opposed to everything they believe: the nut-left would simply be stoned to death in a country which properly followed sharia law.. how do you fix the cognitive dissonance?

  well, the standard script includes the following items:.

  first, you don't really defend sharia, at least not in its entirety, but spend time talking about the evils of the west, in particular, israel.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Trump is off in his own alternative universe and it just leading the media in circles, he's not really an example of either side IMO.

  Oh come on! The alt-right, nut-right is nuts about Trump! I mean, Bannon, who started Breitbart, is pretty much in a symbiotic relationship with Trump! (and TALK about an unhealthy relationship with the press right there!). Sargon of Akkad simply loves him!

  But all the "hurt feelings", "safe spaces" and "trigger word" nonsense? It's overwhelmingly coming from the "left".

  Yes, I 100% agree. I also agree it is bullshit. But watch as it gets appropriated by the right and (in particular) how it gets tolerated by the right when it comes from those considered ideologically pure.

  Don't tell me that if the HRC campaign had told the press that HRC was upset because of what people were saying about her that would not IMMEDIATELY be ridiculed as "safe space" "feelz" "snowflake" nonsense!

  That Sargon of Akkad can scream and shout as a moron on his videos (he even said he was "triggered") over a pretty bland tweet is an example of how the "hurt feelings" idea of injecting your emotions into a debate is leaking into the right.