Racism, Bigotry and Misogyny at TOL

[WizardofOz]

OK doser: - the consequences - no matter how disproportional, unjust, inequitable, whatever - are earned by my actions.

This needs to sink in.

Then "earn" is not an accurate term to use. Otherwise we are simply talking about cause and effect sans any responsibility or expectation by the victim for a possible negative outcome.

 

[ok doser]

You're talking to a guy who called the victims of a school shooting cowards -

not all of them, only the ones who acted cowardly


i know, i know - a nuance that is lost on you, due to your inability to view the situation dispassionately

if you ever find yourself able, the thread awaits: http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4519398#post4519398

He's a psychopath.

rather, i was never exposed to the emotional manipulation from the media coverage of the situation - whereas you were bombarded by it

 

[Crucible]

In other words, you'd "deebo" her to the floor.

Oh, that's right... you deebo'd her.


​

^
It never ends with these few. I'm no longer 'Sum1sgruj', now I'm 'Skybringr'..

Those posts are hilariously well put, though. A woman beating up on a man does derserve to be *deebo'd* so that she learns not to BEAT UP ON A MAN.

But, that's just crazy talk, huh
:rotfl:

 

[WizardofOz]

And in a society with feminism, men are more likely to be assaulted. Funny how that works, huh :think:

That doesn't follow. Explain how feminism leads to men being assaulted?

They don't have to take accountability the same way men do.

Sure they do. See how bald assertions work?

You just established that you believe women need more protection than men, but offer nothing in the way of women doing anything for themselves- it's all on men to make it happen.

Another non-sequitur. You agreed that a woman should be assisted first in the scenario I gave. That doesn't mean that women cannot do anything for themselves or that it's all on men to make it happen.

Maybe the assisting officer is a female :idunno:

And that's called treating someone as a child- it's preposterous to tell a child to protect themselves, and if it's the same for women, then....

Why can't women protect themselves? You go to outlandish conclusions based on fairly grounded hypotheticals.

 

[annabenedetti]

Those posts are hilariously well put, though.

Of course you'd think so. ~You wrote them.~

A woman beating up on a man does derserve to be *deebo'd* so that she learns not to BEAT UP ON A MAN.

Keep your story straight:

There's men who hit their wife because they project their insecurities on them... If she's the source of those insecurities...

There it is.

But, that's just crazy talk, huh

Yes.

 

[ok doser]

In other words, you'd "deebo" her to the floor.

Oh, that's right... you deebo'd her.


​

should a woman be allowed to beat up on a man anna?

 

[truthjourney]

^
It never ends with these few. I'm no longer 'Sum1sgruj', now I'm 'Skybringr'..

Those posts are hilariously well put, though. A woman beating up on a man does derserve to be *deebo'd* so that she learns not to BEAT UP ON A MAN.

But, that's just crazy talk, huh
:rotfl:

If that really happened would it occur to you to walk away or did she overpower you to prevent that? You probably wouldn't want to do that though but instead knock her to the floor to teach her a lesson.

 

[WizardofOz]

No one should ever use physical violence against their partner unless they sincerely feel the need to defend themselves from physical peril.

No one has ever chosen to be raped, in the history of humankind.

I think everything else this debate is hinged upon is semantics and nothing more.

 

[Crucible]

If that really happened would it occur to you to walk away or did she overpower you to prevent that? You probably wouldn't want to do that though but instead knock her to the floor to teach her a lesson.

'Walk away'. Why should a man walk away, so that she gets her way and feels obliged to do it again?

There's virtually no video on Youtube where there is no cursing involved in incidents where a woman hit a man and the man reacts, but to make the point clear- to make reality clear- here's at least a link to one. These women act the way they do and are out of control because they think that men should be expected to 'walk away' from assault or humiliation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Czb4rImsph0

And if you want to see the bias of the law and society against men that you all deny exists, here's another one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_tmc9dNTRM

 

[PureX]

I have to wonder if any of them would say the things they've said here to their sister, daughter or wife if she was raped.

... Oh wait. Depends if it was a husband who raped a wife. In that case, according to several here, there's no such thing as spousal rape.

To be honest, I don't think the folks who say those things are thinking all that much about it, period. I think they just 'auto-defend', both in their minds and in their words. They aren't really considering what they're saying beyond their need to establish blame, so that they don't get stuck in the realm of 'not knowing'. In the realm of chance, and fate, where no gods or selves control the things that happen to us, and to those we love. Where there is no purpose to our suffering, or our success.

 

[annabenedetti]

To be honest, I don't think the folks who say those things are thinking all that much about it, period. I think they just 'auto-defend', both in their minds and in their words. They aren't really considering what they're saying beyond their need to establish blame, so that they don't get stuck in the 'not knowing' realm. In the realm of chance, and fate, where no gods or selves control the things that happen to us, and to those we love.

Oh, they've thought it through, PureX, and based in in scripture.

According to the time honored definition of rape, if a husband and wife have sex, it is not rape and according to the Bible there is no sin, either.

 

[annabenedetti]

If that really happened would it occur to you to walk away or did she overpower you to prevent that? You probably wouldn't want to do that though but instead knock her to the floor to teach her a lesson.

All she probably did was make him feel "insecure."

That's why he likes the mods.

I really just think the mods are standing up for the underdogs so that we don't feel insecure on here.

It's all about his insecurities. Taking it out on women (particularly online) is the modus operandi of the red pill manosphere that he's a part of.


(... For the record, I don't have to look to the mods to feel secure in what I believe to be true. Good thing, too.)

 

[ok doser]

Oh, they've thought it through, PureX, and based in in scripture.

what do you care?

you don't believe in scripture

 

[annabenedetti]

what do you care?

you don't believe in scripture

By your actions every day, you show that you don't believe in scripture.

 

[ok doser]

coming from you, that means nothing :idunno:

 

[PureX]

Oh, they've thought it through, PureX, and based it in scripture.

That's not thoughtfulness. That's just obfuscation. Scripture is their "go-to" platform for an unquestioned auto-defense. The whole point of having "inerrant" scripture is for them not to have to think for themselves by having to develop a reasoned defense. "The book says it, so I say it, and that's all there is to it." Done. No thought or reasoning required. Absolute righteousness acquired in one thoughtless swoop!

 

[Rusha]

All she probably did was make him feel "insecure."

That's why he likes the mods.

It's all about his insecurities. Taking it out on women (particularly online) is the modus operandi of the red pill manosphere that he's a part of.


(... For the record, I don't have to look to the mods to feel secure in what I believe to be true. Good thing, too.)

Indeed ... I am secure in my beliefs and don't need anyone to hide behind or agree with me. I already know my values (which includes protecting others from those who wish to do them harm) are superior.

 

[Lon]

Use your words.

As far as Asperger's/autism, there should be greater understanding. Though you are very high functioning, this is not out of character with the symptom with my limited exposure (had a few students, was coached how to address the need). From what I understand, "this is not appropriate" is the response to the one with the condition and "try to understand the condition" to others who are unfamiliar with it. Still, it is a bit of a shock to see, but I have heard similar from others with your condition. I think the problem with the condition is that you are isolated to right/wrong in your condition. It isn't as socially conscious, if at all. This particular malady doesn't understand social expectation and interaction. It is hard to say what is true for one with this condition is true of all with the condition though.

As far as the thread, I'd remind people to try to understand this condition rather than making it a spiritual problem, however. I've no idea how to actually address the need in this light, but it is important for all of us to remember your condition and balance our response appropriately. I'd suggest you are doing rather well with it, and even able to integrate socially but I've no idea how much you are under the influence of the condition. The ones I've had in class were severe.

In a nutshell: Infidelity isn't a death penalty crime or sin. It wasn't at the time of Christ either.

 

[Crucible]

All she probably did was make him feel "insecure."

That's why he likes the mods.



It's all about his insecurities. Taking it out on women (particularly online) is the modus operandi of the red pill manosphere that he's a part of.

'Insecure', as in feeling confident on the forums and not having to be consistently worried that they are going to get in some sort of trouble for stating their beliefs.

Artie, for example, was talking about how he's going to report posts because they allegedly 'endorse illegal acts' and how that's against the *roolz*.
And then you and your troupe constantly try to misrepresent what people say, (like what you are doing now, but to a higher degree) to make people appear to be some sort of problem to the site.
Like with Tambora, for example, or Ktoyou- they did just that with a couple of pictures I put up.

Mix that with making someone unpopular or having them demonized, and you might have someone feeling insecure in their status.

It's ridiculous. And apparently I'm not the only one who felt that way because I have yet to be banned for any length of time during the three months I've been here.

I generally do not cause trouble on here, I just don't pull punches or water down the truth of how I feel on certain things.

Also, the 'red pill' is 'the real world'. Have you ever seen The Matrix? Maybe that should signal something to you about how a lot of men feel about the feminized mindset

 

[truthjourney]

All she probably did was make him feel "insecure."

That's why he likes the mods.



It's all about his insecurities. Taking it out on women (particularly online) is the modus operandi of the red pill manosphere that he's a part of.


(... For the record, I don't have to look to the mods to feel secure in what I believe to be true. Good thing, too.)

Yes I'm very aware of men who beat women because of insecurities. It started with my father then my stepfather who beat my mother so much that she lost three unborn babies. Then there are two brother in-laws who beat my sisters. One of them threatened me with a screwdriver when I was sitting in my car with my sister and then he spat in her face while calling her every name in the book. We had brought the kids for visitation. ...I have no tolerance for men who beat women.