Not watching videos.I bet you're not able to refute it. It's primary evidence.
Can you explain this?
Cliffs please.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: St Kilda v Western Bulldogs - 7:30PM Thu
Squiggle tips Saints at 51% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
Not watching videos.I bet you're not able to refute it. It's primary evidence.
Can you explain this?
Wipe away the smart arse veneer, and there's nothing there.Not watching videos.
Cliffs please.
Well that's no reason to keep him out of the country.Wipe away the smart arse veneer, and there's nothing there.
Do you think people should not be imprisoned if they break the law?Where is the state power in locking her up?
In this case, absolutely not.Do you think people should not be imprisoned if they break the law?
The comment about feminists being ugly as being true, I have a theory surrounding that.Are you seriously suggesting Milo is far right?
A gay jew who is married to a black man is far right in the minds of you and antifa protesters.
You violently protested a s**t stirrer because he said feminists are ugly (which they are lets face it) and Islam is a s**t religion because muslims kill homosexuals (which they do in some countries).
You protested against that. Violently! With posters that read **** Off Nazis.
Milo is not a nazi, yet was treated like he was one.
Think about that for a minute.
All overseen by the Ministry of Silly Walks....
So you think that we should have a Protester's Motive Tribunal (PMT) where a government panel adjudicates (for a fee, because bureaucracy isn't cheap) over the new legislation written to define exactly what 'Ideological" protest is, what "Point scoring" is, and "unjust use of police resources" is, and to seek a permit for a non-ideological, non-using up of police funds, non-point scoring protest?
That is genuinely one of the silliest things I've ever heard; it'd belong in a Terry Pratchett/Douglas Adams novel. I'd be stoked to hear about how it went, for the full month it took before the system promptly shut down as people ignored the s**t out of it.
Agree. It's a vicious cycle of rejection and anger that drives the modern feminist.The comment about feminists being ugly as being true, I have a theory surrounding that.
Attractive either physically or by personality , intelligent either intellectually or emotionally, those are the women that do not feel they are discriminated in life. Infact they realise the power they do have and use it to their advantage to succeed in society.
I have not seen a serious 3rd wave feminist that isn't angry and is emotionally intelligent.
The way they conduct themselves personally puts them always on the bottom of the social pecking order. Creating further angst and resentment.
Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
Agree. It's a vicious cycle of rejection and anger that drives the modern feminist.
We are all encumbered by this horrible thing called genetics, which stops us from all becoming marathon running reality drama Oscar winners who sup champagne and bang supermodels all day.
Feminists have a hard time hitting that competence ceiling, when we are all confronted with the terrible realisation we are neither gifted nor special, and it's no ones damn fault but the universe.
Unfortunately, ugly also comes with a whole bunch of roadblocks that are neither fair nor easy to overcome, especially for the modern day progressive female.
And then the stark realisation hits them in the face like a tsunami.
It's not the patriarchy getting in the road of their success. It is beautiful, intelligent, well adjusted women the world gives all the lucky breaks to. It is other women.
It used to be a dog eat dog survival of the fittest jungle out there. Natural selection, only the best and brightest survive.
These days even the weak and the stupid get to procreate and flourish. For example, I always did wonder why the abc keeps getting funding. Maybe god was right, and the meek do in fact inherit the earth.
Kind of weird that the keys to life are relationships and development of self.Agree. It's a vicious cycle of rejection and anger that drives the modern feminist.
We are all encumbered by this horrible thing called genetics, which stops us from all becoming marathon running reality drama Oscar winners who sup champagne and bang supermodels all day.
Feminists have a hard time hitting that competence ceiling, when we are all confronted with the terrible realisation we are neither gifted nor special, and it's no ones damn fault but the universe.
Unfortunately, ugly also comes with a whole bunch of roadblocks that are neither fair nor easy to overcome, especially for the modern day progressive female.
And then the stark realisation hits them in the face like a tsunami.
It's not the patriarchy getting in the road of their success. It is beautiful, intelligent, well adjusted women the world gives all the lucky breaks to. It is other women.
It used to be a dog eat dog survival of the fittest jungle out there. Natural selection, only the best and brightest survive.
These days even the weak and the stupid get to procreate and flourish. For example, I always did wonder why the abc keeps getting funding. Maybe god was right, and the meek do in fact inherit the earth.
You're having a discussion about people being ugly.If BAs contained less bullshit and more substance in personal accountability then it would be doing what its intention is, to create better equipped people to face Life
NahJesus...
I have my own problems with Third Wave Feminism (mainly, their rampant sex-negativity and their desire to shut down debate via verbal debate traps) but that is just about the most ridiculous thing I've read in a long time. For what you say to be correct, women en masse would have to be more stupid, less accepting, and far more destructive than men are; do you legitimately believe that to be the case?
Aren't we all just people, not demons?
Re read what I said.You're having a discussion about people being ugly.
You're hardly at the pointy end of the intellectual debate here.
Hmm...Nah
It's pretty obvious.
Like hateful disenfranchised young men join hooligan groups
So do the disenfranchised young hateful women, they join the 3rd wave feminist movement.
The similarities are striking.
They validate their own misconceptions and anger with a common enemy.
Feminist=hooligan
Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
Not here in Germany, although 18c etc you would think so, but the left wing generally here is too anti Semitic taking the lead from CorbynIsn't Holocaust denial a crime?
We've been harping on about the importance of personal responsibility, in many threads across this board, especially the Jordan Peterson one.Kind of weird that the keys to life are relationships and development of self.
Yet our education system tends to follow bullshit social trends.
If BAs contained less bullshit and more substance in personal accountability then it would be doing what its intention is, to create better equipped people to face Life
Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
How has 18c stopped freedom of speech?Not here in Germany, although 18c etc you would think so, but the left wing generally here is too anti Semitic taking the lead from Corbyn
It limits the potential for racists to be publicly racist.How has 18c stopped freedom of speech?
I agree with you on repealing it, but I think it's had no impact.It limits the potential for racists to be publicly racist.
For what it's worth, I think 18c should be repealed, if only so that those who want to be publicly racist can get publicly humiliated when people don't accept their nonsense. You cannot disprove an unspoken concept, and you cannot argue with silence.
I agree with you that it is absurd that the protests are cited as a reason to reject a speaker's entry to the country, but I still think you're extrapolating US violent protests across an Australian context, the same way Milo did. We don't have the same protest culture, we don't do mass violence the way they do and have. Most of the time, even the protesters don't want to rock the boat. You're also relying on media reports of violence at the protests, the same media who viciously exaggerate the level of violence in society at large, and are looking to sell advertising space using people's fear.
If you want to feel afraid of university students too bored to be in another lecture, that's perfectly up to you, but why would you allow them to limit your freedom?
Hmm...
So it's a tit for tat thing? They (modern feminists) refer to the men they disagree with as manchild, undesirables, virgins, 'in their mother's basements', incels; men who don't like feminists call them ugly, manhaters, 'couldn't get a root in a brothel'.
See, this is what I don't get about it. If the ideas are what's repugnant/illogical, why don't you argue with those instead of resorting to a lazy ad hominem? Sure, they could be ugly, and their ugliness could be a part of why they became a feminist, but that alone does not mean that they are wrong at all. Their ugliness is as irrelevant to their ideas as grapefruit is.
In no way am I disagreeing with you, aside from the actual violence aspect. You'll get a few arrests at these protests, but beyond that not a great deal happens; the protesters yell slogans, those going to the events go inside with their noses in the air.200 'university students' physically blocking your path and shouting in your face would be quite intimidating.
We would not tolerate this kind of behaviour amongst footy crowds.
View attachment 631960
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-08/nigel-farage-protests-break-out-at-melbourne-event/10215804
I don't think they're a hate group. They're lobbyists, plain and simple, in pursuit of power and influence; they're not even true social reformers, because there is no backbone, no leadership, no real influence. They're unworthy successors of 'feminism', because it's less about ideals than it is power and shame.You missed what I wrote.
The third wave are just a hate group.
Pure and simple.
They do not seek to debate, nor do they want to...there is nothing rational or truthfull about their movement. hence manspalining.
Ad hominem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies) is very specifically attacking the character from which an argument originates instead of their argument/ideas. It's a fallacy because the character of the person stating something isn't relevant to what they're saying, not from a logical standpoint; a person can be blind, and have no conception of what colour is beyond descriptions they read from a description of a Van Gough painting (from one of his more psychedelic works) yet be absolutely correct when they say that the sky is blue; responding with, "How would you know, you're blind!" is ad hominem.I have not written a lazy ad hominem about them.
Re read my description. And feel free to quote word for word where you believe I have been ad hominem.
An angry irrational person is an ugly trait.
Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
I don't even know what ad hominem is but I get the drift