I Think Women Are Beautiful
....which is nothing to do with militant feminism, which is ugly and senseless!!!!
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Anon066 · 31-35, M
Quixotic idk if you'll see this or not since I can't respond above but sure, do you have a point?
Statements stand or fall based on their merit. What do similarities in response mean at all? You think comparing pushback half a century ago to pushback now is valid?
And no, they aren't less extreme than we pretend them to be. They're more extreme if anything. I'm talking the sarkeesian's (sp) of the world. They're a very small minority of those that call themselves feminists, most who say they're that believe in first wave equality based feminism. But the leaders of the "movement" are very extreme. They've fought against men's groups on campuses. They completely ignore all male issues and insult those, male and female, that discuss them. They're fighting against science regarding things like the biological differences between the sexes. They fight for sexist policies like diversity quotas. And they're not even about feminism anymore, they're almost all entrenched in intersectionality. Look at how they treat people like Christina Hoff sommers, heather mcdonald, Janice fiamengo etc.
Statements stand or fall based on their merit. What do similarities in response mean at all? You think comparing pushback half a century ago to pushback now is valid?
And no, they aren't less extreme than we pretend them to be. They're more extreme if anything. I'm talking the sarkeesian's (sp) of the world. They're a very small minority of those that call themselves feminists, most who say they're that believe in first wave equality based feminism. But the leaders of the "movement" are very extreme. They've fought against men's groups on campuses. They completely ignore all male issues and insult those, male and female, that discuss them. They're fighting against science regarding things like the biological differences between the sexes. They fight for sexist policies like diversity quotas. And they're not even about feminism anymore, they're almost all entrenched in intersectionality. Look at how they treat people like Christina Hoff sommers, heather mcdonald, Janice fiamengo etc.
QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M
@Anon066 Sarkeesian is your idea of an extreme feminist? Dude.
[quote]They're a very small minority of those that call themselves feminists[/quote] Well, yeah.
[quote]They're a very small minority of those that call themselves feminists[/quote] Well, yeah.
Anon066 · 31-35, M
@QuixoticSoul she's an example of how ridiculous notions dominate the movement, there are much worse than her but her name has recognition. Really I don't pay attention to specific people much, moreso ideas, and I just watched sargon on jre so her name came to mind.
QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M
@Anon066 She does like, mild-mannered critiques of video games from a feminist perspective. Pretty harmless stuff in the grand scheme of things, and to posit her as some kind of an extremist is a really weird take on the whole thing.
Sargon is a terrible source btw. For anything.
He's a goddamn truther for crying out loud.
Sargon is a terrible source btw. For anything.
He's a goddamn truther for crying out loud.
Anon066 · 31-35, M
@QuixoticSoul I'm sure a lot of her content is fine, I've seen her make points I agree with but she's said a lot of ridiculous shit in line with the current intersectional nonsense.
I'm not a fan of sargon, I don't really have an opinion on him because his style has never appealed to me so I don't think I've ever watched any of his content, but I liked him for the most part on jre. But if you feel confident saying he's a terrible source for everything I think you have some ideological biases to work out. Apart from the most extreme there's very few people on any side of the spectrum that's a valid statement for.
I'm not a fan of sargon, I don't really have an opinion on him because his style has never appealed to me so I don't think I've ever watched any of his content, but I liked him for the most part on jre. But if you feel confident saying he's a terrible source for everything I think you have some ideological biases to work out. Apart from the most extreme there's very few people on any side of the spectrum that's a valid statement for.
QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M
@Anon066 He literally blamed 9/11 on the juice at some point.
Anon066 · 31-35, M
@QuixoticSoul and that's stupid as fuck, but you can't say nothing anyone says is valid because they say other stupid things.
Eric weinstein was talking about this recently but I can't remember what talk it was in. But his basic point was it's really concerning the way people are trying to invalidate people's work and everything they say based on certain "taboo" things, even if those things are legitimately deplorable. He mentioned a lot of the most innovative and influential people in history were horrible people, and that that kind of genius often does come in people who hold disgusting views in other areas. And it's well beyond that now, people have been ostracized over completely innocuous or even positive things, like bret weinstein and James damore. It's mostly been in journalism and politics and shit but if it gets into hard sciences we're in trouble, and that's already starting to happen, it's already signifying prevalent in the "soft sciences."
Eric weinstein was talking about this recently but I can't remember what talk it was in. But his basic point was it's really concerning the way people are trying to invalidate people's work and everything they say based on certain "taboo" things, even if those things are legitimately deplorable. He mentioned a lot of the most innovative and influential people in history were horrible people, and that that kind of genius often does come in people who hold disgusting views in other areas. And it's well beyond that now, people have been ostracized over completely innocuous or even positive things, like bret weinstein and James damore. It's mostly been in journalism and politics and shit but if it gets into hard sciences we're in trouble, and that's already starting to happen, it's already signifying prevalent in the "soft sciences."
QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M
@Anon066 Nobody expects perfection or impossible consistency, but when it comes to a pundit/talking head/politics guru etc - their ability to think critically is kind of a central attribute - they have no scientific genius or contributions to fall back on. And it's far from the only conspiracy theory he promoted, it's just arguably the stupidest. Plus his memerson-level obsession with "cultural marxism" lmao.
Bwahaha Damore 😂
Bwahaha Damore 😂
Anon066 · 31-35, M
@QuixoticSoul again, I've never even watched his content. I'm just against saying anyone is a terrible source on everything.
If you laugh at damore though you're either one of the millions of people that read articles about him and never read the memo, or someone that read the memo and is so deeply entrenched in ideology you don't believe in objective science.
If you laugh at damore though you're either one of the millions of people that read articles about him and never read the memo, or someone that read the memo and is so deeply entrenched in ideology you don't believe in objective science.
QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M
@Anon066 Nah. I just know this job and the field a hell of a lot better than he does. Let's just say I was not at all surprised to see him punted, and then later claim autism. Dude obviously doesn't understand people very well. Most junior engineers still finding their feet have a period of self-righteous arrogance, but generally people tend to keep under control before they grow out of it.
His manifesto was nowhere nearly as solidly supported as people like to pretend, by the way, and not at all a solid representation of objective science on the topic.
His manifesto was nowhere nearly as solidly supported as people like to pretend, by the way, and not at all a solid representation of objective science on the topic.
Anon066 · 31-35, M
@QuixoticSoul I stongly disagree, nothing he said is even remotely questionable in the literature. It's incredibly basic.
Listen to heather heying and bret weinstein talk on it.
Listen to heather heying and bret weinstein talk on it.
