"A sea of pink-hatted protesters"

[vla1ne]

oh, of course i'm scum, but i don't much care, i tell everybody upfront that i'm an ass, and i don't hang with those who can't fire back with the same rude enthusiasm  it's called fun.

while i'm sure nonconsensual pussygrabbing is scum, you and your friend have forgotten to listen to the tape apparently. unless i've been transported to a point in time where "they let you" does not entail consent, your friend is on track for a 100% misunderstanding. non consensual sexual activities are assault, which is why i suggest cotton swabs, you may have tuned out in your rage, but he clearly said it was consensual. why do you think he was bragging? anybody's who's ever gotten kinky can call themselves a sexual predator, so you and your friend would do well to up your bedplay games, genital grabbing's pretty tame as far as sex goes. 

 

i await her detailed response though. 

[Dad]

Keep it civil.  These one word, snapback, shitposts are not contributing.  And only quotes will not suffice.  

[Wahrheit]

She's on the plane now. I sent her your reply.

[vla1ne]

She's on the plane now. I sent her your reply.

thank you. i hope to clear up her understanding of trump if possible. i don't mind if she hates him from the bottom of her heart, but i gotta make sure that there's no misunderstandings in that hate.

 

also, would you yourself happen to have anything further to say on the topic? opinions are not illegal, and whether or not you disagree with me, i'd enjoy having an actual discussion with you instead of you being merely a proxy for your currently flying friend.

[Wahrheit]

I'll let her speak first.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

The suspense is killing me.

 

Keep it civil.  These one word, snapback, shitposts are not contributing.  And only quotes will not suffice.  

 

"I hate quotations." ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

 

 

Also trump said "they let you" there's the consent you need

[Halubaris Maphotika]

Does it matter if it's grandstanding though?

 

Even if change is hard to come by, which it usually is given that the institutions that govern change are often run by the people with the least incentive to advocate for it, and institutuonal change is often hard to achieve, nothing is done by doing nothing. Overly optimistic liberals campaigning for issues they have barely form of resonance with thinking they change the world? Or bitter hardened old cynics who've seen some s***? Which does it matter?

 

Apathy, whilst understandable when you are in a s*** situation living paycheck to paycheck, is the bane of progress and of change. If one is simply resigned to the way things are, one becomes part of the problem. I know it's hypocritical of me, a middle class white guy whose worked maybe 5 days of labour in his life, to talk about s*** as if it is easy, but I truly believe that change is driven by the desire to change things. I will say I make an effort to try and understand where these issues arise from, even if I can't understand what it feels like .

 

It's why I hate the complaint about 'Oh they have no idea how the world works' - That's not the point. They want to change the world, to make it a better place, to push it to better places. Why the f*** do we want to beat that s*** out of people and create another generation of people ground down by insitutions and such? Why isn't the desire to change the world something we should praise, even if it's only fixing things that are minor on the scale of things?

 

Especially in the US, a nation founded by a bunch of people telling the powerful to f*** off, and having a strong enough conviction in those ideals to stand by it inspite of the difficulties around it.

 

Even if it's about s*** that we find despicable, or insane, passion in ones convictions is a trait to be admired, not deflated. Who cares if liberals are pushing for some crazy 'safe space' or outlawing swear words on the ground of being , or the tea party's convictions are about stoning the gays, if they truly believe in the cause it's admirable. And that's what I think this march is, 2.5 million people around the globe, marching for there convictions in an issue.

 

I just hate that idealism is viewed as a negative relative to pragmatism. Pragmatism is certaintly more realistic, but life would be boring if we only ever seek to live in the realms of reality.

I get what you're saying, but I also don't attribute this all to apathy. A lot of these poor people are parents who are trying their best to keep their kid fed. Sure the system might be rigged, but fighting it could make things worse for his/her child. It's about weighing your wants and the responsibilities you already have on your plate. As I said, it isn't they don't want to, they are legitimately incapable of doing so.

[vla1ne]

I get what you're saying, but I also don't attribute this all to apathy. A lot of these poor people are parents who are trying their best to keep their kid fed. Sure the system might be rigged, but fighting it could make things worse for his/her child. It's about weighing your wants and the responsibilities you already have on your plate. As I said, it isn't they don't want to, they are legitimately incapable of doing so.

can confirm. been waiting a year just to get three days vacation (and not be broke on those days), i am still waiting.

 

not that they wouldn't attemp itt, and i don't doubt that some of them did manage to get there, but literally everybody i know whos broke (including me) is of the same mindset, when you're broke, politics takes a backseat to better jobs and feeding yourself/ your kids.

[VCR_CAT]

Out of my own confusion over what the dealeo with this whole thing was, I did some extremely light research:

http://www.vox.com/2017/1/21/14342942/womens-march-inauguration-trump-protest-goals-feminism-demands

 

Basically put, it's about a lot of things.

 

Anyways, other things to point out, this is has been the largest protest in US history, and the surprising news is that there were no arrests.

 

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Women-Descend-on-Washington-for-Womens-March-411397085.html?_osource=SocialFlowTwt_DCBrand

 

Overall, it doesn't seem like this whole protest is -just- a feminist protest, and a lot of it is against Trump, or at least what Trump could/might do. My bigger concerns have more to do with Trump's overall reactions to negative coverage from the media about him. Which like, I get that someone's going to be upset about that, but anyways. That's not exactly related to the protest entirely. I'll save these rants for a different thread.

 

Hopefully this clears up some confusion, or rather, hopefully it doesn't create more.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Actually no, I'm not letting that one go;

 

 

I don't think this is an actual counter argument. I think it's an attempted guilt trip based upon logic fallacy instead, and that is just lazy.

 

Is it trying to say that belief in a cause makes one comparable to the Nazi's and thus similar levels of awful? I hope not, because that's too vague, and too general to be valid. It would imply anyone whose ever belived in a political cause (Which I'd say is applicable to everyone here) is comparable to the Nazi's.

 

Does it talk about why apathy isn't bane to change? Why having a desire to bring about change is a bad thing? Does it gloss over the fact that the initial post even talks about 'Even if it's a cause we find stupid or disgusting conviction is admirable'. I'll take a guess that every 'evil' person or group has had conviction in there belief because people generally don't do sheet knowingly aware that they are wrong.

 

It doesn't explain the issue as to why pragmatism is better than idealism, because the genocide and actions of the Nazi's can arise from both schools of thought.

 

I don't think it addresses anything, or does anything that actually works as an argument. I think it just goes;

Nazi's were bad

Nazi's believed in what they were doing

Ergo believing in what you are doing is bad.

 

Which remains as much a logical fallacy as last time I pointed it out.

 

If that wasn't the point you tried to make, then please elaborate and provide clarity, as you should have done at the start instead of making a low effort generic reponse that I don't feel actually made a meaningful point. I apologise for being direct about this, but those sorts of posts irritate me, and I'd love to see you improve upon them.

No Tom, it's unfortunate you didn't understand but that's not the message at all

 

Nazis were bad

Nazi's believed in what they were doing

That didn't make it any more good

 

Sometimes believing in a cause alone isn't good enough. I'm more commenting on the wide net you threw in you to the mob rule

 

Even if it's about s*** that we find despicable, or insane, passion in ones convictions is a trait to be admired, not deflated. Who cares if liberals are pushing for some crazy 'safe space' or outlawing swear words on the ground of being , or the tea party's convictions are about stoning the gays, if they truly believe in the cause it's admirable. 

This is not a fair, ok, or accurate statement in my opinion

 

Again, the Nazis truly believed in their cause, were they admirable?

[VCR_CAT]

 

No Tom, it's unfortunate you didn't understand but that's not the message at all

 

Nazis were bad

Nazi's believed in what they were doing

That didn't make it any more good

 

Sometimes believing in a cause alone isn't good enough. I'm more commenting on the wide net you threw in you to the mob rule

 

This is not a fair, ok, or accurate statement in my opinion

 

Again, the Nazis truly believed in their cause, were they admirable?

 

 

Please describe the situation and why it calls for any sort of comparison to nazis and why that seems valid to you.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

 

No Tom, it's unfortunate you didn't understand but that's not the message at all

 

Nazis were bad

Nazi's believed in what they were doing

That didn't make it any more good

 

Sometimes believing in a cause alone isn't good enough. I'm more commenting on the wide net you threw in you to the mob rule

 

This is not a fair, ok, or accurate statement in my opinion

 

Again, the Nazis truly believed in their cause, were they admirable?

 

 

VCR I already answered why it was a valid comparison. The fervor of the mob either with or in stead of size of the mob does not in, and of itself, constitute validity 

 

Case in point, Nazi Germany 

[Aerion Brightflame]

I get what you're saying, but I also don't attribute this all to apathy. A lot of these poor people are parents who are trying their best to keep their kid fed. Sure the system might be rigged, but fighting it could make things worse for his/her child. It's about weighing your wants and the responsibilities you already have on your plate. As I said, it isn't they don't want to, they are legitimately incapable of doing so.

 

I understand that, which is why I spoke about 'does it matter if it's the unexpierced liberal or the cynics' - One doesn't have to expierence the suffering to march or advocate for it. If the group suffering most are incapable of doing it, then duty falls to rest of society to advocate in there place.

 

 

No Tom, it's unfortunate you didn't understand but that's not the message at all

 

Nazis were bad

Nazi's believed in what they were doing

That didn't make it any more good

 

Sometimes believing in a cause alone isn't good enough. I'm more commenting on the wide net you threw in you to the mob rule

 

But that's still not a counter argument to anything I talked about. It's a non sequter that with a lack of elabortation appeared to be an attempt at a simple 'Oh snap' put down based in logical fallacy. If you do not elaborate on a point you are making, and express with it as much clarity as possible then one can never be sure that the otherside understands what you are trying to argue.

 

It was never my intention either (Although I admited I was probably unclear) to say that conviction in a cause makes that cause good, but rather that the conviction itself is a good quality. That people should have things they believe in, and are willing to fight for say. Even if they are opinions that I, or others, find despicable, apathy remains less preferable to conviction.

 

 

This is not a fair, ok, or accurate statement in my opinion

 

Again, the Nazis truly believed in their cause, were they admirable?

 

Whilst I know that Dad has called for a lack of snap replies and such, but jesus christ please can you read my posts before you ask me the same question twice:

 

They did, and in acting upon it they were in the wrong because they resorted to genocide to achieve there ideals.

 

But if they had strength in their convictions good for them. It remains an admirable trait regardless of the f***ed up cause it may be for.

 

And yes, I did just say a favourable thing about the Nazi's. Because hilariously even terrible people and regimes can have admirable qualities. Whilst I hate to invoke Godwin's Law, even if you despise the things Hitler did one can admire his skills as an orator say.

 

I apologise for any initial lack of clarity in my first post which may have lead to you thinking I condone of the Nazi's actions; I do not. But if they, or anyone has real strength in conviction, then that is an admirable quality.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

FYI, women are protesting a guy who proposed a $680 billion federally funded paid maternity plan because he isn’t liberal enough.

 

 

I understand that, which is why I spoke about 'does it matter if it's the unexpierced liberal or the cynics' - One doesn't have to expierence the suffering to march or advocate for it. If the group suffering most are incapable of doing it, then duty falls to rest of society to advocate in there place.

 

 

 

But that's still not a counter argument to anything I talked about. It's a non sequter that with a lack of elabortation appeared to be an attempt at a simple 'Oh snap' put down based in logical fallacy. If you do not elaborate on a point you are making, and express with it as much clarity as possible then one can never be sure that the otherside understands what you are trying to argue.

 

It was never my intention either (Although I admited I was probably unclear) to say that conviction in a cause makes that cause good, but rather that the conviction itself is a good quality. That people should have things they believe in, and are willing to fight for say. Even if they are opinions that I, or others, find despicable, apathy remains less preferable to conviction.

 

 

 

Whilst I know that Dad has called for a lack of snap replies and such, but jesus christ please can you read my posts before you ask me the same question twice:

 

 

I apologise for any initial lack of clarity in my first post which may have lead to you thinking I condone of the Nazi's actions; I do not. But if they, or anyone has real strength in conviction, then that is an admirable quality.

 

I was not attempting to accuse you of being a Nazi sympathizer; I was merely taking issue with the idea that strength in conviction alone can be considered admirable. For me, there's a high bar a movement has to clear. 

 

That being said, you can believe what you wish. It might not matter to you, but I'm with Jack. Experience augments one's views on reality. A reason maybe that people tend to get conservative as they get older  

 

---

 

Will now indisputably prove this viral picture spread by media is not the full crowd, and I use CNN as my source

 

 

I zoomed to the back of CNN's interactive map, compared viral pic (same building), and to confirm, use the side tents as point of reference.

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel/

 

This shows the viral photo used by MSM is a hoax. Do the same thing I did here

 

TL:DR

 

CNN lied, Trump def beat Obama 13' and maybe '09

 

---

 

 

 

Holy sheet, they're losing their god damn minds in Chicago 

 

---

 

 

Meanwhile this guy puts out the fires that the lefties started

[Phantom Roxas]

Also trump said "they let you" there's the consent you need

 

Him claiming that people let him do it does not actually prove that he was given consent. If anything, that could just as easily be a brag about getting away with sexual assault.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Him claiming that people let him do it does not actually prove that he was given consent. If anything, that could just as easily be a brag about getting away with sexual assault.

He also claimed he could grab them by the pussy. If the first is hypothetical, I don't see why the latter couldn't be. It was in poor taste eitherway

 

---

 

 

It's rare that someone admits to wanting to be banned from many places

 

---

[Fusion X. Denver]

I'm proud of the Women's March and all the people I know that rallied yesterday; they were a part of modern history. Even if people disagree on some of the fundamental issues they marched for, it is undeniable that there is a global sentiment that women feel their rights are in danger and in need of serious improvement. And that shouldn't be ignored.

[Wahrheit]

thank you. i hope to clear up her understanding of trump if possible. i don't mind if she hates him from the bottom of her heart, but i gotta make sure that there's no misunderstandings in that hate.

 

also, would you yourself happen to have anything further to say on the topic? opinions are not illegal, and whether or not you disagree with me, i'd enjoy having an actual discussion with you instead of you being merely a proxy for your currently flying friend.

 

She was too tired to finish after the plane ride yesterday and is writing her thoughts out now.

[Phantom Roxas]

He also claimed he could grab them by the pussy. If the first is hypothetical, I don't see why the latter couldn't be. It was in poor taste eitherway

 

Not "also", that's what we were already discussing. He didn't have consent, only further illustrates why his comments were in poor taste. His excuse that it was just "locker room talk" is an attempt to normalize what he was saying, or that it's okay because "Well everyone does it!" He's making up a precedent for why it's acceptable in order to pretend that his own behavior isn't unusual.

[Resident Fascist]

 

She was too tired to finish after the plane ride yesterday and is writing her thoughts out now.

 

I'll just add my 10 cents and say that you don't have to be a woman to talk about women's rights, the only thing I can actually knock you on in this thread. Honestly, anything that Winter posts is just almost blatant bait and guilt-tripping if you try to actually appeal to reason. Also, shutting down a protest never helped anybody. It doesn't get issues actually solved, it only intensifies the feelings of hatred of the government and the feeling the people's voice doesn't actually matter (If it ever even did in the Banker's States of America).

[Wahrheit]

I'll just add my 10 cents and say that you don't have to be a woman to talk about women's rights, the only thing I can actually knock you on in this thread. Honestly, anything that Winter posts is just almost blatant bait and guilt-tripping if you try to actually appeal to reason. Also, shutting down a protest never helped anybody. It doesn't get issues actually solved, it only intensifies the feelings of hatred of the government and the feeling the people's voice doesn't actually matter (If it ever even did in the Banker's States of America).

I agree, but Winter and co. are adamant that if I'm going to point out that they're mansplaining, surely I must be too. This is obviously a bullshit argument, but my friends are happy to chew them up, so whatever.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I'll just add my 10 cents and say that you don't have to be a woman to talk about women's rights, the only thing I can actually knock you on in this thread. Honestly, anything that Winter posts is just almost blatant bait and guilt-tripping if you try to actually appeal to reason. Also, shutting down a protest never helped anybody. It doesn't get issues actually solved, it only intensifies the feelings of hatred of the government and the feeling the people's voice doesn't actually matter (If it ever even did in the Banker's States of America).

Bump that up to 20 cents to adjust for inflation and explain to me how I'm trying to guilt trip

 

You're meant to laugh at some of the funny protesters, not get all teary and upset

[Resident Fascist]

I agree, but Winter and co. are adamant that if I'm going to point out that they're mansplaining, surely I must be too. This is obviously a bullshit argument, but my friends are happy to chew them up, so whatever.

 

Well part of the problem is that a march for Women's rights is being misconstrued as a march against Men. Like yeah, some of the people involved probably do hate men, but the overwhelming majority of the movement just want better women's rights. It's like saying a protest to pay Apple Farmers more is an attack on Orange Farmers.

[ENMaker]

I'm proud of the Women's March and all the people I know that rallied yesterday; they were a part of modern history. Even if people disagree on some of the fundamental issues they marched for, it is undeniable that there is a global sentiment that women feel their rights are in danger and in need of serious improvement. And that shouldn't be ignored.

 

What rights need improving? Also, for that matter, what ones specifically are in danger?