Live Event Am I Oppressed?

[Wahooti Fandango]

I haven't sledged anybody. Others have sledged me for my race and my supposed celibacy. And for the newspapers I supposedly read (although that is probably slightly less immutable).

But I have asked the question. Would Rankine have been suspended for 5 weeks if he criticised a player for not having a girlfriend? Or having too many girlfriends? Or having a girlfriend that is more/less attractive than Sydney Sweeney? Or having a sexually desirable mother?

Your take is entirely ahistorical. It's like when white people equate a non-white person dressing up in white face as equally abhorrent as a white person dressing up in black face. Harry Connick Jnr gets it, but it's apparently a stretch too far for you.

 

[ant555]

As an oppressed person how does it feel to never be criticised about anything?

Slightly unsatisfying. I like to be treated equally.

 

[ant555]

I haven't sledged anybody. Others have sledged me for my race and my supposed celibacy. And for the newspapers I supposedly read (although that is probably slightly less immutable).

But I have asked the question. Would Rankine have been suspended for 5 weeks if he criticised a player for not having a girlfriend? Or having too many girlfriends? Or having a girlfriend that is more/less attractive than Sydney Sweeney? Or having a sexually desirable mother?

 

[IHurley]

So let's go slow.

Which group of people is being marginalised if Rankine were to criticise a player for not having a girlfriend?

If we continue the logic, people without girlfriends.

 

[IHurley]

Given part of my family dates back to before colonisation what do you think I would feel about it ?

Do you want me to lend you a bigger shovel ?

I have no idea how you would feel. Was the "progress" that came with colonisation a good thing? I assume you believe it was because you seem to believe that any previous era is morally inferior. But I don't want to put words in your mouth.

 

[IHurley]

Your take is entirely ahistorical. It's like when white people equate a non-white person dressing up in white face as equally abhorrent as a white person dressing up in black face. Harry Connick Jnr gets it, but it's apparently a stretch too far for you.

So if you're part of an oppressed group you can criticise people but if you're not part of this special oppressed group you can't criticise people.

Can people from one oppressed group criticise people from a different oppressed group?

 

[ant555]

I have no idea how you would feel. Was the "progress" that came with colonisation a good thing? I assume you believe it was because you seem to believe that any previous era is morally inferior. But I don't want to put words in your mouth.

Maybe a back hoe .

 

[dank420_]

If we continue the logic, people without girlfriends.

Ten points.

So it’s not derogatory to any particular race, sex or people with a certain sexual orientation right?

 

[faible]

Maybe a back hoe .

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

So if you're part of an oppressed group you can criticise people but if you're not part of this special oppressed group you can't criticise people.

Can people from one oppressed group criticise people from a different oppressed group?

If you're asking me whether oppression is relational or absolute; it's the former.

 

[IHurley]

Ten points.

So it’s not derogatory to any particular race, sex or people with a certain sexual orientation right?

Assuming that it's targeted at a male, doesn't it imply that heterosexual relationships are more highly valued?

 

[IHurley]

If you're asking me whether oppression is relational or absolute; it's the former.

Pretty sure I asked what I asked.

Can you answer that question instead please?

And if it's relational, is that on an individual level or group level?

Also, is a gay man who is a senior public servant on $800k more or less oppressed than a 15 year old white straight boy from a working class background who regularly gets told by his teachers, the media and politicians that he's "toxic" and all the world's problems are solely his fault?

 

[dank420_]

Assuming that it's targeted at a male, doesn't it imply that heterosexual relationships are more highly valued?

No one was assuming that. It’s not a thing exclusive to males. Almost got there…

 

[dank420_]

Also, is a gay man who is a senior public servant on $800k more or less oppressed than a 15 year old white straight boy from a working class background who regularly gets told by his teachers, the media and politicians that he's "toxic" and all the world's problems are solely his fault?

How is socioeconomic background anything to do with being gay or straight?

 

[IHurley]

No one was assuming that. It’s not a thing exclusive to males. Almost got there…

Well I explicitly was when I brought the example up.

I said what if Rankine insulted another player...? Pretty sure being a male player was reasonably baked into the question.

 

[IHurley]

How is socioeconomic background anything to do with being gay or straight?

How did you think such a ridiculous level of obtuseness would help your cause?

Can you please answer the question?

 

[dank420_]

Well I explicitly was when I brought the example up.

I said what if Rankine insulted another player...? Pretty sure being a male player was reasonably baked into the question.

And we arrived at the conclusion that “people without girlfriends” were being marginalised. Something not exclusive to males.

How did you think such a ridiculous level of obtuseness would help your cause?

Can you please answer the question?

You could say the straight boy is, but it would be nothing to do with his sexual orientation. You could also say he isn’t because he may hold actual toxic views. Still nothing to do with his sexual preference.

Are you trying to say that he would be labeled as toxic just for being straight? That’s you wishing for oppression again. Can’t help yourself can you.


No compare all that with someone who gets called a f*****?

 

[ant555]

**** me.
This is so simple.
The word used originated as a way to make a derogatory comment against someone.

 

[jannissary]

**** me.
This is so simple.
The word used originated as a way to make a derogatory comment against someone.

really isn’t difficult to wrap your head around, you’d think

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

Pretty sure I asked what I asked.

Can you answer that question instead please?

And if it's relational, is that on an individual level or group level?

Also, is a gay man who is a senior public servant on $800k more or less oppressed than a 15 year old white straight boy from a working class background who regularly gets told by his teachers, the media and politicians that he's "toxic" and all the world's problems are solely his fault?

 

[IHurley]

And we arrived at the conclusion that “people without girlfriends” were being marginalised. Something not exclusive to males.

So? Is being homosexual exclusive to males?

You could say the straight boy is, but it would be nothing to do with his sexual orientation. You could also say he isn’t because he may hold actual toxic views. Still nothing to do with his sexual preference.

Boys are regularly called "toxic" by the government, journalists and academics for no reason other than their genitalia.

They are regularly forced to apologise for the crimes of other men as we saw in that school in Victoria.

I submit that in the Western world, for every 1 article in "mainstream" media criticising homosexuality, there are around one gazillion criticising masculinity.

In fact, many AFL players themselves are only too happy to describe men as being "toxic" just for existing.

And of course, the legal system is astonishingly oppressive against men. Men receive nearly 50% more of the prison time for the same crimes as women - an absolutely incredible act of oppression. And not only that, they are more likely to receive jail for offenses that women only see non-custodial punishments for.

Are you trying to say that he would be labeled as toxic just for being straight? That’s you wishing for oppression again. Can’t help yourself can you.

Yes. Men absolutely are labelled as toxic just for being straight. That is why the term "toxic masculinity" (always referring to heterosexual males) gets bandied around constantly by politicians, journalists and academia but the term "toxic femininity" will rarely, if ever, be used by any of those groups.

No compare all that with someone who gets called a f*****?

Nearly 50% longer prison sentences for the same crime than women is definitive proof that men are vastly vastly vastly more oppressed compared to women than homosexuals are compared to heterosexuals.

And that's before we get to every other form of oppression that boys and men face such as legal discrimination in hiring, education privileges for girls despite them doing much better than boys.

As the front cover of the Western Australian a couple of years ago proved, even 10 year old boys are regularly called monsters for the crime of having male genitalia.

 

[IHurley]

**** me.
This is so simple.
The word used originated as a way to make a derogatory comment against someone.

That sounds homophobic to me. Are you saying there is something wrong with having said sexual orientation?

 

[dank420_]

Boys are regularly called "toxic" by the government, journalists and academics for no reason other than their genitalia.

Prove it

They are regularly forced to apologise for the crimes of other men as we saw in that school in Victoria.

Prove it

I submit that in the Western world, for every 1 article in "mainstream" media criticising homosexuality, there are around one gazillion criticising masculinity.

Prove it

In fact, many AFL players themselves are only too happy to describe men as being "toxic" just for existing.

Prove it

 

[jannissary]

So? Is being homosexual exclusive to males?

Boys are regularly called "toxic" by the government, journalists and academics for no reason other than their genitalia.

They are regularly forced to apologise for the crimes of other men as we saw in that school in Victoria.

I submit that in the Western world, for every 1 article in "mainstream" media criticising homosexuality, there are around one gazillion criticising masculinity.

In fact, many AFL players themselves are only too happy to describe men as being "toxic" just for existing.

And of course, the legal system is astonishingly oppressive against men. Men receive nearly 50% more of the prison time for the same crimes as women - an absolutely incredible act of oppression. And not only that, they are more likely to receive jail for offenses that women only see non-custodial punishments for.


Yes. Men absolutely are labelled as toxic just for being straight. That is why the term "toxic masculinity" (always referring to heterosexual males) gets bandied around constantly by politicians, journalists and academia but the term "toxic femininity" will rarely, if ever, be used by any of those groups.

Nearly 50% longer prison sentences for the same crime than women is definitive proof that men are vastly vastly vastly more oppressed compared to women than homosexuals are compared to heterosexuals.

And that's before we get to every other form of oppression that boys and men face such as legal discrimination in hiring, education privileges for girls despite them doing much better than boys.

As the front cover of the Western Australian a couple of years ago proved, even 10 year old boys are regularly called monsters for the crime of having male genitalia.

do you feel this strongly about everything or just perceived attacks on "masculinity"

 

[IHurley]

Prove it

Prove that homosexuals are oppressed and in need of special privilege and protection. That is, after all, what you are claiming as the basis for the massive punishment of Rankine.