Jump to content

Womens tears are making politics - and society - more feminine.


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

It's a real word when it's used in good faith.

No it's just a real word.  Period. You don't seem to understand how words work.

3 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

So you're lying when you say the drag queens are in sexy outfits.

Nope. Tonnes of pictures out there. Sorry sweetie - another swing and a miss for you.

3 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

 

As for the rest, nobody is denying there is an agenda here.

Oh  MANY do.  And even when they admit to it, their actions suggest there's other agendas. For example - you just claimed they don't wear sexy outfits. But - by and large they actually do. So... why did you lie? what is your actual agenda here? 

See - you lie constantly, so when you claim there's one agenda people are forced to ask themselves if you're lying about that too, and if there isn't ANOTHER agenda. That's the problem with being a chronic liar.

If this is ONLY about accepting there's other genders - why do they need to dress in a sexual fashion? Teachers dont, doctors don't, other professionals don't, hell other children's performers don't.  But these people do.

3 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

No, I said that Disney depicts straight couples all the time.

Yes you did - trying to change the channel :)  What's your favorite lie  again? Ahh yes - 'get back here with those goalposts!" lol

What we ACTUALLY were talking about is lead parent roles in families. And i was very specific. And i was quite right.  And realizing i was right you tried to change it up. And utterly failed. :)

That's the problem with being a chronic liar - sooner or later you slip up.

3 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

The point is, children's media regularly depicts heterosexuality and it's never an issue. It's only an issue for the fascists when it's gay people represented in any way.

So you're claiming disney is fascist? I see....

3 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

 

But this isn't really about age, it's about censoring ideas that the government doesn't like.

Of course it's about age.  The left is the only group that censors things just because they don't like them.

3 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

Why can't you just admit that you're fascist? Do you not think you can make good arguments for fascism being a better system than democracy? We can argue fascism vs socialism if you weren't such a sissy-ass beta.

ROFLMAO!!! Man i love those salty leftist tears! :)   WAAAAAAHHHHH - THE NASTY PERSON IS MAKING ME LOOK BAD WITH FACTS! AND LOGIC!!! IT"S SO MEAN - WHY CAN"T THEY JUST ACCEPT THAT EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS A FASCIST!!!!!!!!!!!!! WAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!! :)  
 

LOL -  it's precious to see you break down like that :)  Sorry kiddo - you've made it quite clear that you're the only fascist here.  You're all about hatred and lies and cancelling other people and denying simple truths.

Plus the whole racism thing and the bigotry and the weird anti-jew 'jews are nazis' thing.

You're not coming across as a very good person, and all i have to do to show the world that is stand here and speak the truth. I realize that must be very frustrating for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Americana Antifa said:

It depends. Do you mean we should normalize mental health the same way we normalize physical health? I think we should teach kids to treat mentally ill people with the same compassion we treat paraplegic people. And we should definitely destigmatize mental illness so people are more willing to go to therapy if they need it. 

As for sexual behavior, that's more of a high school thing. With grade school, we should just have LGBT representation.

Though high school sex ed does need to expand too. One of the reasons gay and bi people have more STDs is because sex ed is heterocentric and super vanilla.

It doesn't depend at all. Grade school children do not deserve to have their innocence assaulted with abnormal sexual or mental issues. They need to learn to read, write, calculate and develop basic social skills.!

Beyond that, I think attempts to elevate the visibility of Trans people is...nonsense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, CdnFox said:

this is typical of you. In fact it's being shown you were wrong - as you often are becuase you attempt to learn topics as you go on google. When you realize you're wrong you just start lashing out like a child.

My God, look at this sad little man projecting his angst.  ?

Watch the faceplant here:

CDNRETARD1.thumb.png.bd109de5788f39da32a043e4af1fc6ca.png

First you tell us that Rome didn't have standing armies, which was a painfully stupid thing to say, and easily proven wrong, so you pivoted to:

CDNRETARD.thumb.png.e749641c55690de69ed934e1a5e25f0b.png

which was also demonstrably wrong, and so you moved your goalposts again to:

13 hours ago, CdnFox said:

But it would be 100 years after marius before they kept any real standing forces.

Which is also entirely false, because there were already standing legions well before Augustus became emperor (~60 years after Marius' reforms).  Regardless, the dates don't even matter, because the fact that you'd confidently argue that Rome didn't have standing armies outs you for the aggressive buffoon that you are.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

It doesn't depend at all. Grade school children do not deserve to have their innocence assaulted with abnormal sexual or mental issues. They need to learn to read, write, calculate and develop basic social skills.!

Beyond that, I think attempts to elevate the visibility of Trans people is...nonsense. 

Unfortunately the slogan “Trans rights are human rights” will be the mantra used to usher in the takeover of A.I. and transhumanism, because if biological reality no longer matters, women and men as categories are erased, and the melding of technological enhancements with humans is normalized, there’s actually no longer a protected category for humans.  We’ve essentially given unlimited license to biotech to alter and add with the blessings and protection of the state.   What’s more, trans rights are being elevated beyond other rights, including women’s rights and religious rights.  Parental discretion is also superseded by “gender affirmation” in many states.  A new state cult?  Feeling more and more like fin de siècle Weimar every day.

 

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

My God, look at this sad little man projecting his angst.  ?

Awww muffin ;)  Sounds like we're projecting just a little aren't we :)

13 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Watch the faceplant here:

CDNRETARD1.thumb.png.bd109de5788f39da32a043e4af1fc6ca.png

First you tell us that Rome didn't have standing armies, which was a painfully stupid thing to say, and easily proven wrong,

Rome didn't hav standing armies at the time you were referencing. Your own quotes proved that :)

13 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

 

so you pivoted to:

CDNRETARD.thumb.png.e749641c55690de69ed934e1a5e25f0b.png

which was also demonstrably wrong, and so you moved your goalposts again to:

No it's demonstrably correct. As your own source said - it wasn't until the time of agustus, some 100 plus years after maruus, that rome even began to have standing armies and even THEN they still relied very heavily on creating legions and disbanding them as needed.

 

13 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Which is also entirely false, because there were already standing legions well before Augustus became emperor

ROFLMAO  - Now you're arguing with YOUR OWN SOURCE!! :) 

See what happens when you try to google-educate yourself on the fly? :)
 

In fact i mentioned there were a very small number of legions that weren't disbanded regularly, including the pretorians.  But they weren't the 'standing army'.  They were just to have a small force avaialbe without having to actually raise one if needed.  Closer to a national guard than an army.  If they actually had to go fight someone, they would use conscription and raise the legions they need :)

Much later as the empire expanded they would raise permanent legions to go occupy those areas, and then when there was actual war they would raise additional legions as necessary.

But - when the empire came to an end it was NOT the "germans"  or germanic tribes that lead to the downfall as you and antifa clamied nor was it the celts as was also claimed. That was not the problem.

Border wars and skermishes happened for the entire time of the empire. It didn't stop the rise of the empire, it didn't cause the downfall. It was like crime in modern cities - it's a pain and it sucks resources but it's not going to bring a country down.  At all.

You pee and moan about how the germans cost rome 3 legions - but tha'ts NOTHING. Look at what hannibal did, he cost them dozens - and they still managed to survive and thrive after that. The 'germans' were at best a petty annoyance and a money suck.

What brought rome down was increasingly poor leadership based on 'strength' rather than skill combined with ever increasing bureaucracy which sucked resources till the empire bsically collapsed under it's own weight.

You're wrong, historians know you're wrong, history shows you're wrong, the ONLY reason you took that point  of view is you hoped that I'd be wrong because you're sick of being wrong around me.


But - unfortunately - you were wrong :)  Sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

It depends. Do you mean we should normalize mental health the same way we normalize physical health? I think we should teach kids to treat mentally ill people with the same compassion we treat paraplegic people.

We had a dog when i was younger that just couldn't stay away from skunks. It was a working dog on the prairies, you couldn't just keep him locked up all day. In the end he got rabies.

We loved the dog. It wasn't the dog's fault it got rabies. It's an illness.  The dog was a treasured member of the family. We killed the dog after it got rabies.

Having compassion does not mean you don't have to do the right thing. "Compassion" doesn't mean it's somehow ok to do something wrong.

Dealing with complex issues involving sex is too advanced for young kids to deal with safely.

But - the left wing wants to teach about sex and sex acts and gender in elementary school. That's been a problem. Then when called on it they cry "no no no - we didn't MEAN that, we just want to show gender is ok". 

Sorry - nobody believes you. We've had this problem in canada recently, elementary school kids being exposed to very advanced sexual issues.

It should stay out of school entirely till highschool at least, and parents should be able to decide if the school's 'version' of education is appropriate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Unfortunately the slogan “Trans rights are human rights” will be the mantra used to usher in the takeover of A.I. and transhumanism, because if biological reality no longer matters, women and men as categories are erased, and the melding of technological enhancements with humans is normalized, there’s actually no longer a protected category for humans.  We’ve essentially given unlimited license to biotech to alter and add with the blessings and protection of the state.   What’s more, trans rights are being elevated beyond other rights, including women’s rights and religious rights.  Parental discretion is also superseded by “gender affirmation” in many states.  A new state cult?  Feeling more and more like fin de siècle Weimar every day.

 

Well that all just sucks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Unfortunately the slogan “Trans rights are human rights” will be the mantra used to usher in the takeover of A.I. and transhumanism, because if biological reality no longer matters, women and men as categories are erased, and the melding of technological enhancements with humans is normalized, there’s actually no longer a protected category for humans.  We’ve essentially given unlimited license to biotech to alter and add with the blessings and protection of the state.   What’s more, trans rights are being elevated beyond other rights, including women’s rights and religious rights.  Parental discretion is also superseded by “gender affirmation” in many states.  A new state cult?  Feeling more and more like fin de siècle Weimar every day.

 

You know you’re  getting your facts from a tv network that claims, in court, that people shouldn’t expect what Tucker says to be true, don’t you?   FOX says viewers should know that this is for entertainment and will be exaggeration, and for entertainment purposes and that viewers know that they should take him with a dose of skepticism.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Nationalist said:

It doesn't depend at all. Grade school children do not deserve to have their innocence assaulted with abnormal sexual or mental issues. They need to learn to read, write, calculate and develop basic social skills.!

On the children's TV show, Sesame Street, there's a character with autism. The point is to teach children about how some of the kids in their classes may have autism. The show explains that kids with autism may come off as rude, but they're not trying to be. 

Is any of that wrong?

Quote

Beyond that, I think attempts to elevate the visibility of Trans people is...nonsense. 

Why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Sorry - nobody believes you. We've had this problem in canada recently, elementary school kids being exposed to very advanced sexual issues.

You know that scene in the Dark Knight where Batman is like "What were you trying to prove? That deep down, everyone's as ugly as you? You're alone!"

Fascists are kinda like the Joker here. You keep saying "nobody believes you" but the majority of Americans support kids beings taught that LGBT people exist. They don't think it's a "very advanced sexual issue" when you tell kids that some children have two mothers or two fathers.

You guys didn't want to free the slaves. You lost. You didn't want women voting. You lost. You didn't want religious minorities in the country. You lost. You didn't want gay people getting married. You lost. You're not the majority. Most people aren't as ugly as you.

 

the pain!Untitled.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

On the children's TV show, Sesame Street, there's a character with autism. The point is to teach children about how some of the kids in their classes may have autism. The show explains that kids with autism may come off as rude, but they're not trying to be. 

Is any of that wrong?

Why?

I agree with you about the value of having the autistic child on the show. That’s not a good comparison though.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

You know you’re  getting your facts from a tv network that claims, in court, that people shouldn’t expect what Tucker says to be true, don’t you?   FOX says viewers should know that this is for entertainment and will be exaggeration, and for entertainment purposes and that viewers know that they should take him with a dose of skepticism.  

He’s calling out very real concerns. I don’t think you understand that it’s not about making people feel badly about having dysphoria and I’ve always been kind to trans people.  That’s not what’s at issue.  It’s about being able to state your views and recognize that there are many rights to consider.  Ignoring biology isn’t for everyone, nor should someone be compelled to pretend that they believe otherwise.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

Why not? The question was about teaching kids about abnormal mental conditions.

This would be like teaching kids about how some people need a wheelchair or glasses.

But you know that there’s a complicated spin on gender that many people don’t agree with, and there’s certainly no way of explaining some of these differences without referring to sexuality.  It’s fine for older students to discuss these ideas.  Leave it out of primary school, at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

But you know that there’s a complicated spin on gender that many people don’t agree with, and there’s certainly no way of explaining some of these differences without referring to sexuality.  It’s fine for older students to discuss these ideas.  Leave it out of primary school, at least.

But we already teach kids about heterosexuality and have been doing so for as long as humans have existed. Like I said before, almost every Disney movie depicts heterosexuality in some form. Why can't we do the same thing with homosexuality? Would it be wrong to have a movie where the princess is rescued by another princess and marries her?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

On the children's TV show, Sesame Street, there's a character with autism. The point is to teach children about how some of the kids in their classes may have autism. The show explains that kids with autism may come off as rude, but they're not trying to be. 

Is any of that wrong?

Why?

What's an autistic child doing in mainstream class?

Why? Because they constitute a very tiny percent of the population and don't warrent the attention they're getting. Kids certainly don't need it and nor do women's sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

What's an autistic child doing in mainstream class?

Public schools don't have the funding they need to give them their own classes. Plus, autistic kids do need to spend time around non-autists in order to learn how to function in society. So even if that funding was there, most kids would still come into contact with autists at some point.

1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

Why? Because they constitute a very tiny percent of the population and don't warrent the attention they're getting. Kids certainly don't need it and nor do women's sports.

Well by teaching kids about autism, we're teaching them about tolerance for people with disabilities, whether mental or physical. Most people are not in a wheelchair, but children's media has had shows like Pelswick in order to teach kids about tolerance as well as give representation to kids with physical disabilities.

I gotta say, this really just sounds like contrarianism. Like, what is the issue here? We're destigmatizing having a disability while also teaching compassion? Is this bad?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

But we already teach kids about heterosexuality and have been doing so for as long as humans have existed. Like I said before, almost every Disney movie depicts heterosexuality in some form. Why can't we do the same thing with homosexuality? Would it be wrong to have a movie where the princess is rescued by another princess and marries her?

According to my faith, the marriage part would be wrong.  It doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t be able to make such movies, but don’t expect that everyone will watch them or like that aspect.  I understand that Hollywood plays a big role in normalizing behaviour, but views can differ and we have the right to our beliefs.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

According to my faith, the marriage part would be wrong.  It doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t be able to make such movies, but don’t expect that everyone will watch them or like that aspect.  I understand that Hollywood plays a big role in normalizing behaviour, but views can differ and we have the right to our beliefs.  

Yes, I understand there will be homophobes who don't like seeing gay people. There will also be sexists who don't like that some of the Avengers are women. This is just another argument for representation. We want homosexuality and feminism to be normalized to the point where homophobia and sexism are as uncommon as possible. And it's been working, as every generation has been less bigoted than the last.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

Your argument suggests that progress towards the elimination of bigotry is inevitable, as each generation becomes less bigoted than the last. While it is true that progress has been made on many fronts, progress is not linear or guaranteed.

There have been periods of regression and backlash throughout history, and the gains that have been made can be easily undone if one is not careful at the speed that they want push progress in their idealism. 

Yes, it's not enough to just sit back and let progress happen. People have to continue fighting. This is why your enlightened centrism is so harmful. 

But people generally do want justice and if we can hold on to our democracy, we will continue moving towards a more fair society. Especially now that younger people are more politically engaged than they have been in previous decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Americana Antifa said:

Yes, I understand there will be homophobes who don't like seeing gay people. There will also be sexists who don't like that some of the Avengers are women. This is just another argument for representation. We want homosexuality and feminism to be normalized to the point where homophobia and sexism are as uncommon as possible. And it's been working, as every generation has been less bigoted than the last.

These sorts of comments explain why you can’t get any traction with most people here.  You make assumptions about people who don’t see the world according to your radical perspective. Women have always been represented.  Their roles have changed somewhat.  Gays are much more represented than they used to be, and representation itself is supported by most people.  The issue arises when implausible situations or over representation of homosexuality occurs.  I wouldn’t split hairs over it, but if roughly 10 percent of the population is gay then one would expect roughly that amount of representation.  It became blatant over-representation when, for example, suddenly half of the ads had black actors when far less than half of the population is black.  It starts to look like a push is happening.  I don’t really care about gay couples in movies, but I wouldn’t be able to relate to a film with heavily homosexual themes.  That’s fine.  I wouldn’t watch such films.  I’m sure there’s a niche market for such films and I’m not into censorship.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

You seem to misunderstand the essence of radical centrism. It's not about sitting back and letting progress happen; it's about finding common ground and working towards solutions that benefit everyone, rather than just one side or the other. In fact, it's precisely this approach that has allowed for many successful advancements in the past."

 

You can't do that with people who are fundamentally opposed to basic principles like democracy, freedom, unity, and justice. Liberals have always tried to compromise with Fascists, it does not work.

9 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

Labeling someone's political stance as 'harmful' without attempting to understand it first is a form of close-mindedness that goes against the principles of your progressivism. 

I agree. We should seek to understand why the West is experiencing authoritarian movements and what role material conditions play in this rejection of democracy. However, that's not what you do. You just equate the Republicans with the Democrats no matter how extreme the Republicans become.

 

nT_y7kt750fa6526i3ufnybujd4.jpg

Edited by Americana Antifa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

You can't do that with people who are fundamentally opposed to basic principles like democracy, freedom, unity, and justice. Liberals have always tried to compromise with Fascists, it does not work.

I agree. We should seek to understand why the West is experiencing authoritarian movements and what role material conditions play in this rejection of democracy. However, that's not what you do. You just equate the Republicans with the Democrats no matter how extreme the Republicans become.

You don’t see the authoritarian tendencies of today’s left.  It’s why many people like me who were left of centre are abandoning the Liberals in Canada, because that party pushes some radical perspectives to the extent of trying to censor media and compel speech.  There’s more of this coming from the left today than the right, by far, and some of the agendas being pushed are twisted and destructive, such as MAID for the mentally ill or state-funded gender transition for kids, etc. 

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,695
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Linda Teskey
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Yakuda went up a rank
      Experienced
    • QuebecOverCanada went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • Jeary went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Gator earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Jeary earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...