Posts: 8711
Threads: 128
Joined: March 1, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: So did Atheism + bite the dust?
February 8, 2015 at 10:34 pm
(February 8, 2015 at 7:14 pm)Dystopia Wrote: You do realize that's completely irrelevant if individuals start form an unequal position, right? ...Social justice ...it's simply to provide people a common starting point that gives no one advantages or disadvantages. It seems fair. It seems fair until people put it into practice. Justice, properly understood, means applying the law equally to everyone without favor. The poor deserve just as much protection from the criminal and civil justice system as the rich. By all means fight for justice.
'Social' justice is about doling out political and economic favors to social groups. It has nothing to do with justice.
Posts: 9147
Threads: 83
Joined: May 22, 2013
Reputation:
46
RE: So did Atheism + bite the dust?
February 8, 2015 at 11:12 pm
(February 8, 2015 at 9:34 pm)Beccs Wrote: No, "feminazi" is a term invented by weak little "men" who use it to degrade women they see as a threat to their domination of society and culture, of any woman who is brave enough to stand up against their bullshit.
There's is another word that perfectly describes women who are men haters and think they're better than 50% of the population because of their gender. That word is "bitch".
Why did you put the word "men" in quotes, bitch? 
Posts: 4659
Threads: 123
Joined: June 27, 2014
Reputation:
40
RE: So did Atheism + bite the dust?
February 8, 2015 at 11:14 pm
It's probably because those men are not representative of all men in the world. Real men think sexism is lame.
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you
Posts: 9147
Threads: 83
Joined: May 22, 2013
Reputation:
46
RE: So did Atheism + bite the dust?
February 8, 2015 at 11:47 pm
(This post was last modified: February 8, 2015 at 11:49 pm by bennyboy.)
(February 8, 2015 at 11:14 pm)Dystopia Wrote: It's probably because those men are not representative of all men in the world. Real men think sexism is lame.
What's this "real men" shit? I disagree with this whole line of thinking.
Also, it's usually bullshit: "Real men pay child support. Real men drive minivans. Real men wear a dress if they want to." The fact is that many men are misogynist assholes-- and they are still real men.
As for feminazis: I think the usage of "nazi" is pretty obvious-- it's about the level of vehemence, hostility, and implied aggression that comes with some kinds of feminism.
Posts: 3395
Threads: 43
Joined: February 8, 2015
Reputation:
33
RE: So did Atheism + bite the dust?
February 9, 2015 at 12:11 am
(February 8, 2015 at 11:47 pm)bennyboy Wrote: (February 8, 2015 at 11:14 pm)Dystopia Wrote: It's probably because those men are not representative of all men in the world. Real men think sexism is lame.
What's this "real men" shit? I disagree with this whole line of thinking.
Also, it's usually bullshit: "Real men pay child support. Real men drive minivans. Real men wear a dress if they want to." The fact is that many men are misogynist assholes-- and they are still real men.
As for feminazis: I think the usage of "nazi" is pretty obvious-- it's about the level of vehemence, hostility, and implied aggression that comes with some kinds of feminism.
You have it exactly backwards. The vehemence, hostility, and aggression are in those who are calling others "nazis." That is not something that decent people apply haphazardly to others. It is childish name-calling, rather than seriously addressing the issues. It is a substitute for reasoning, and an attempt to poison the well.
Really, it should be obvious that calling people "feminazis" is probably not a good idea, given the origin of its popular use. If you wish to associate yourself with Rush Limbaugh, you may continue to do so. But if you do, don't expect people of sense to take you seriously.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
Posts: 15755
Threads: 194
Joined: May 15, 2009
Reputation:
145
RE: So did Atheism + bite the dust?
February 9, 2015 at 12:22 am
(This post was last modified: February 9, 2015 at 12:23 am by Violet.)
(February 8, 2015 at 10:02 pm)Dystopia Wrote: This is more common than people think, and get lots of excuses before and after, like "I really didn't want to do this but..... You left me no choice"
"Look what you made me do." Etc etc ad infinitum.
Vast majority of rape is from someone the victim knows; trusts. Easier to 'keep a good thing going' by shifting everything to the victim, letting them think the problem is themselves, that they deserved it.
Good control mechanism. Lots of longterm applications; extremely common in such.
Quote:Rape fantasies are my favourites (Damn I'm soooo satanic)
Don't know about satanism, but if you would like to talk about them, my preference is that it be done in Area 69.... no reason it can't happen here, of course.
Quote:Victims feel guilt quite frequently.
Usually shame before guilt, but yes... obviously a raped-person got the bone-end of a bad deal...
But that doesn't mean that the act is not a ball of suffering that often strikes myriad targets, including the one committing the act.
Quote:Yeah we are also told that. There's also cases of "you are not attractive enough to be rapeable" or "it's your husband, are you sure it was rape?". A curious thing - Rapes against men are mostly committed by straight men and not gay (stereotypes).
Still... there are usually people who will stand by a raped person. It's not everyone, and the ones who don't show support are 'louder' to the victim... but there are certainly supportive people out there.
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
Posts: 9147
Threads: 83
Joined: May 22, 2013
Reputation:
46
RE: So did Atheism + bite the dust?
February 9, 2015 at 12:25 am
(February 9, 2015 at 12:11 am)Pyrrho Wrote: (February 8, 2015 at 11:47 pm)bennyboy Wrote: What's this "real men" shit? I disagree with this whole line of thinking.
Also, it's usually bullshit: "Real men pay child support. Real men drive minivans. Real men wear a dress if they want to." The fact is that many men are misogynist assholes-- and they are still real men.
As for feminazis: I think the usage of "nazi" is pretty obvious-- it's about the level of vehemence, hostility, and implied aggression that comes with some kinds of feminism.
You have it exactly backwards. The vehemence, hostility, and aggression are in those who are calling others "nazis." That is not something that decent people apply haphazardly to others. It is childish name-calling, rather than seriously addressing the issues. It is a substitute for reasoning, and an attempt to poison the well.
Really, it should be obvious that calling people "feminazis" is probably not a good idea, given the origin of its popular use. If you wish to associate yourself with Rush Limbaugh, you may continue to do so. But if you do, don't expect people of sense to take you seriously. I'm not commenting on the "feminazis," or the people who call them that. I'm commenting on the linguistic use of the term "nazi." Clearly, it is a meaningful linguistic term, with an intent of drawing analogy.
Posts: 23009
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: So did Atheism + bite the dust?
February 9, 2015 at 12:57 am
(February 8, 2015 at 11:26 am)AFTT47 Wrote: I had never heard of them. Good for me, it seems.
Reading Cato's link brought back painful memories of the events of 2007 on the old Internet Infidels Discussion Board. I was so demoralized by that event, I gave up on the internet atheist community until now.
You were there too?
I watched that meltdown/blowup with dismay, until I realized it was bringing the lesson home that anyone -- anyone, "rational", "atheist", "freethinker" -- anyone can succumb to groupthink, lockstep conformity pressures, and excluded-middle dispshittery.
Posts: 3395
Threads: 43
Joined: February 8, 2015
Reputation:
33
RE: So did Atheism + bite the dust?
February 9, 2015 at 1:35 am
(February 9, 2015 at 12:25 am)bennyboy Wrote: (February 9, 2015 at 12:11 am)Pyrrho Wrote: You have it exactly backwards. The vehemence, hostility, and aggression are in those who are calling others "nazis." That is not something that decent people apply haphazardly to others. It is childish name-calling, rather than seriously addressing the issues. It is a substitute for reasoning, and an attempt to poison the well.
Really, it should be obvious that calling people "feminazis" is probably not a good idea, given the origin of its popular use. If you wish to associate yourself with Rush Limbaugh, you may continue to do so. But if you do, don't expect people of sense to take you seriously. I'm not commenting on the "feminazis," or the people who call them that. I'm commenting on the linguistic use of the term "nazi." Clearly, it is a meaningful linguistic term, with an intent of drawing analogy.
Yes, "nazi" is a meaningful linguistic term, as is the term "feminazi." "Feminazi" has been used by Rush Limbaugh, who "popularized" the term, for women who wanted equality with men, and had the temerity to not quietly accept second-class status. You know, like those uppity blacks who did not quietly accept their place in "separate but equal" bits of America. The term "feminazi" is used against those who do not quietly accept being mistreated. It is, in fact, a misuse of the term " nazi," as it has no relevance at all to what is being described. It would be like calling black civil rights activists (like Martin Luther King, Jr.), who did not quietly accept "separate but equal" accommodations, as "blacknazis" or "nigganazis." Neither of these groups have any connection whatsoever to nazis. Limbaugh has much more in common with Nazis than feminists do. But it is, as you say, used to try to draw an analogy. Since the analogy is not appropriate, it is really an example of the fallacy known as poisoning the well. Its purpose is to prejudice the audience into disregarding whatever the accused has to say, and to ridicule the accused, all without bothering with dealing with any actual facts relevant to what the accused has stated, nor with discussing the real objectives of the accused. It is an effective device with many people; otherwise, the fallacy would not be so common, and would not have a name.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
Posts: 341
Threads: 26
Joined: February 6, 2015
Reputation:
4
RE: So did Atheism + bite the dust?
February 9, 2015 at 4:18 am
(This post was last modified: February 9, 2015 at 4:19 am by TheMessiah.)
(February 8, 2015 at 10:34 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: (February 8, 2015 at 7:14 pm)Dystopia Wrote: You do realize that's completely irrelevant if individuals start form an unequal position, right? ...Social justice ...it's simply to provide people a common starting point that gives no one advantages or disadvantages. It seems fair. It seems fair until people put it into practice. Justice, properly understood, means applying the law equally to everyone without favor. The poor deserve just as much protection from the criminal and civil justice system as the rich. By all means fight for justice.
'Social' justice is about doling out political and economic favors to social groups. It has nothing to do with justice.
Agreed. I'm glad you worded this better than I.
I'm also fine with still using the term 'feminazi'
(February 8, 2015 at 11:47 pm)bennyboy Wrote: (February 8, 2015 at 11:14 pm)Dystopia Wrote: It's probably because those men are not representative of all men in the world. Real men think sexism is lame.
What's this "real men" shit? I disagree with this whole line of thinking.
Also, it's usually bullshit: "Real men pay child support. Real men drive minivans. Real men wear a dress if they want to." The fact is that many men are misogynist assholes-- and they are still real men.
As for feminazis: I think the usage of "nazi" is pretty obvious-- it's about the level of vehemence, hostility, and implied aggression that comes with some kinds of feminism.
*claps*
|
