deactivated-5a853424245e3's forum posts

Avatar image for deactivated-5a853424245e3
Avatar image for deactivated-5a853424245e3
#2 Edited by deactivated-5a853424245e3 (4168 posts) - - Show Bio

erdftgy

Avatar image for deactivated-5a853424245e3
#3 Edited by deactivated-5a853424245e3 (4168 posts) - - Show Bio

rftgyhujiko

Avatar image for deactivated-5a853424245e3
#4 Edited by deactivated-5a853424245e3 (4168 posts) - - Show Bio

rdftgyhu

Avatar image for deactivated-5a853424245e3
#5 Edited by deactivated-5a853424245e3 (4168 posts) - - Show Bio

@necronn-:

All because you picked your "evidence" quickly, doesn't change that it's cherry picking.

You haven't proven it as cherry picking--you're asserting it as so because you dislike the findings.

And my claim doesn't require evidence.

Yes it does.

My claim is what you said was sexist and baseless.

A separate claim you've also failed to evidence.

And nor do I require any more of your anecdotes.

You haven't the foggiest idea what an anecdote is.

. If I provided anecdotes of feminists being sexist assholes

Some feminists are sexist. You would have to refer to partciular niche demographics however. I can name two right off the bat: radfems and current swfems.

does that mean that all feminists are sexist? Of course not.

It would mean those respected demographics are by majority sexist.

And I oppose you to keep your senses sharp. Gods doing a whole bunch of nothing can get rusty.

Implying my senses ever decay.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a853424245e3
#6 Edited by deactivated-5a853424245e3 (4168 posts) - - Show Bio

@necronn-: I didn't cherry pick anything, because my search was cursory and swift. It's ironic you claim that though, when your claim has no evidence itself. Would you like another compilation? Links to misogynistic blogs, subs, and so forth?

And I've changed religions. I now worship lord Ashley.

And you expect me to believe you--when you oppose me?

Avatar image for deactivated-5a853424245e3
#7 Posted by deactivated-5a853424245e3 (4168 posts) - - Show Bio

@necronn-:

That is empirical data. Do you even understand what an anecdote is?

And I repent to lord Renchamp of course. The mods are the actual Gods.

Then rot.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a853424245e3
#8 Posted by deactivated-5a853424245e3 (4168 posts) - - Show Bio

@agent41: Thanks. It just goes to show he knows nothing about the character and came here to troll. Ironically, he would probably like mid-60s Diana, given how she was written to pander to chauvinistic males.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a853424245e3
#9 Edited by deactivated-5a853424245e3 (4168 posts) - - Show Bio

@necronn-:

There's tons of evidence for this particular demographic being the way they are. These took all of ten minutes to find and copy/paste together off a cursory search. One might argue that YouTube in general is a hive of scum, and while that is demonstrably true, the same can be said about most social media, and that these degrees of scum are often dependent on this sort of thing, and serve as a pillar for why these places are so awful. Furthermore, the platform would not invalidate the demographic's behavior based on selective sampling, given that it translates across social media as a whole, to varying degrees. Beyond this, women are targeted by these groups--there are subredits (trp, mtgow, etc.), movements (such as more manosphere gobbledygook, anti-feminist counterculture, etc., albeit going nowhere in the real world), a ridiculous amount of blogs--all dedicated to being adverse to women. And let's also not forget controversies such as GamerGate that practically ran on misogyny as fuel during its e-crusades.

Also, did you ever make that lesbian PM? Are you still going to not add me? I repent for my sins.

And to whom do you repent, my child?

@theonewhoknows:

Mhm. They're pretty predictable.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a853424245e3
#10 Posted by deactivated-5a853424245e3 (4168 posts) - - Show Bio

@venomousdragon:

your ilk are women incapable of having an actual thoughtful discussion on gender equaility because you have a chip on you shoulder, people who automatically assume that just because I do not subscribe to your ideas on gender equaility that I am against gender equality in general,

You have stated that as a woman, I am not allowed to observe or analyze male social behaviors (that affect women no less) and the like, this is sexist, and frankly, disgusting. It doesn't matter if you tack on the antithesis, it just makes it worse for you on both ends. I also find it even more disconcerting that you justify yourself, justify social inequality, by use of a nature fallacy, one that does not even support your claims. "Nice and even handed" all right. Then you take it a step further and comment on female empowerment--so you as a male can do that? That's not a ridiculous double standard? Female empowerment will continue to be a thing, so long is there is adversity, so long as people like you continually try tell us we should be lesser, unequal, the like. No amount of insatiable whining over women's rights is going to change that or stop us from putting down bad ideas and uplifting good ones.

you in your last statement alone accuse me of seeing women as inferior which is absolute hogwash,

You tried to justify women being inferior by using the Olympics as a way to downplay female empowerment. Don't try and backpedal/curve the narrative--you knew exactly what you were implying.

i believe they are different that does not mean I believe either gender is superior.

"Don't tell me you agree with me, when I saw you kicking dirt in my eye."

I do not care to discuss your distate for people's behaviour on the internet

And yet, here you are, replying to me.

or the laughable idea that women are particularly targeted on the internet

It's laughable, despite there being insurmountable evidence of it. Right.

Humans are both polymorphic and dimorphic these aspects are not mutually exclusive.

That wasn't the point--it was about confounding variables.

At any rate I have never denied people have been mean on the internet my main point is and always has been that you as a woman have no place in making assertions about the male condition just as men have no place doing the opposite.

Which is completely arbitrary. You aren't a dog, don't you dare make observations about dogs. The irony here is, you've been making assertions about women and what female empowerment should entail. It's a pathetic double standard.

@necronn- said:

@agent41: Refer to post #3.

Acknowledging reality isn't sexist. This is a problem with a certain male demographic.