PARDON ME
The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
PARDON ME
>reposting this
/sage
>>713380578
Good.
what the hell?
>>713380578
that's nuts
>>713380578
>britbongs
>freedom
Pick one
It's not even signed.
>Sage
>>713380578
ball shit
I call ball shit
fake and gay
>>713380578
do the police even know what 4chan is and how did they find out ?
fuck if 4chan becomes PC i'll be so pissed
> the absolute state of americans who are actually stupid enough to save this to use later
>>713380578
kek
glad this shit doesn't happen in america, although if it ever did it would be pretty easy to defend myself, considering all my racism and slander posts on this board are ironic shitposts and i'm actually a sjw and have plenty of essays to show it
>>713380578
>4chan
>user name
>under the username
4chan doesnt have usernames
>>713380578
thats what you get for being a tripfag
>>713380578
I guess that's what happens when the government gives the executives too much money.
>>713381509
under the user name anonymous
>>713380578
just go and say: Im a racist guy, I can say what I want. and then leave
>>713380578
This thread was up last week. CopyPasta and bait. Kill yourself OP. You tremendous faggot.
>>713381474
>i'm actually a sjw
the wage gap is a myth
>>713381509
i take it you've never been banned
Aaaaaaawwwwwww SNAP! shit got real for you, son! :))
>>713381651
no it ain't
>>713381444
Too late dickweed. Thats the joke.
>>713380578
Seems legit.
>>713381474
Only americans are stupid enough to think it's real
> summoned to court by police (lol)
> not signed
> "under the user name"
> making a statement at a magistrates court (???)
>>713380578
>"Mrs Holly Knightley" yep..totally fake
can't believe someone actually photoshopped this
>>713380578
What is THIS douchebaggery?
>>713381696
they are only 2 genders
>>713381444
not being PC is the only reason 4chan is funny
that being said anyone who posts racist shit here and actually means it is an asshole
(samefag from >>713381474 )
>>713381444
Dude there's been movies recently that have made notions about 4chan, Pixels even said the very name and went on rampages like they do in /pol/.
>>713380578
19 nov on reddit
nice copypasta faggot
oh and post template
>>713380578
Whoever the fuck centered that "Working together" line should be shot.
>>713381966
pixels?
that shitty video game movie?
why was 4chan in there?
>these faggots think it's fake and don't realize that's how batshit retarded it is in derbyshire
>>713382165
>faggots that reply to obvious bait because people who have been here for longer than 5 mins have seen this at least 332 times.
>>713380578
Just use the "artistic falsehood scape goat and all will end well"
>>713381696
>>713380578
Just scream, "FUCK YOU! I VOTED FOR TRUMP!" and then pee your pants.
*valid in murka only
>>713381444
>>713380578
>>713381474
Wage gap doesn't exist(at least like they say)
There's only 2 genders
Police aren't racist and 99.999% of the time they're right in killing blacks
Institutionalized racism doesn't exist anymore
Trump isn't racist
Illegal immigrants are criminals
The DAPL is ok
Guns don't kill people
Muslims are bad
Hillary would've made a terrible president
Free college/healthcare will never work here.
You're gonna have to pay back your student loans
>>713382872
>you're gonna have to pay back your student loans
Ha, got eem
>>713382872
>Free healthcare will never work here.
why wouldn't it? please explain
>>713381474
Dude, in the US you have the right to free speech which means that even offensive language you make is protected.
Your essays and shit don't matter a fucking bit. It's either you A: Broke a low, or B. did not break a law. They don't give a shit if you're racist or a nazi or anything like that. It's not like in some shitskin country where you can get arrested for posting that a nigger is a nigger.
>>713381878
i count considerably more
which of these do you not regard as (a) gender(s) and why? (note: "because there are only 2 genders" is an invalid reason because that's what you're trying to convince me of and using your conclusion as a premise in reaching it is circular logic)
list of genders (not necessarily exhaustive) and definitions:
>"cis male": born with dick, feel male
>"trans male": born with pussy, feel male
>"demi male": born with pussy, feel male but not enough to bother changing
>"cis female": born with pussy, feel female
>"trans female": born with dick, feel female
>"demi female": born with dick, feel female but not enough to bother changing
>"third gender": born into a foreign social institution whose understanding of gender is predicated on more than just genitals, formally assigned a nonbinary gender role at birth accordingly, feel comfortable in that role and don't want to give it up just to blend in with the locals in a new home
>"nonbinary": feel gendered but not specifically one way or the other
>"demi nonbinary": feel nonbinary (see above) but not enough to bother saying anything about it
>"agender": don't feel gendered
>"genderfluid": experience of gender changes with respect to context
>"genderfuck": pissed that everyone cares about gender so much and choosing to identify as obscurely as possible so as to make a statement about how stupid it all is
>>713382165
>dissing derbyshire one of the only De-criminalised weed counties in the country.
kys
>>713380578
Yeah. That's not how you get cited for court in the UK.
Fuck off
>>713383160
Because no hard working American would be willing to pay for jayquons crack overdose. And that being said if there's one case of that kinda thing happening it isn't worth it. Part of our society is(well at least used to be) being allowed to, and having the right to, fail.
>>713380578
lol suck a dick nigger
>>713380578
So much for free speech
>>713383326
I know youre trolling but holy fuck, why put so much effort?
>>713383465
what do you think about a healthcare system like the one in europe? do you think it could work in america?
>>713383160
Because the countries that do have had a fuck ton longer to gather enough money to support that shit or they are being propped up by counties that have old money. The US is only 250 years old
Also in this country motherfuckers hate taxes. This shouldn't surprise you, the whole founding of the country is built on hating taxes.
>>713383326
MALE OR FEMALE PICK ONE
>>713383160
The best theories I've seen explaining the demise of "free healthcare" is the simple observation that it subsidies the sick, which only grow in numbers as they are helped to survive and breed further sick people.
It pretends people are equal, so you have the place swarmed by everyone with a snotty nose to pregnant women and severe trauma cases, so the wait times are huge, and the quality of service the lowest possible to meet the needs of the teeming masses.
The idea that everyone is equal is complete bullshit, and frankly, we only need the best, not the entire lowerclass of literal parasites who benefit (to the detriment of their host societies) from those programs.
>>713383465
>>713383615
>>713383646
thank you guys.
>>713383326
Real actual humans are laughing at your make believe bullshit.
>>713380578
you know it's real easy to look up court dates online, the exact time and everything. Takes 2min, This is the stupidest fakest thing I've ever seen, Next time cover the town name or exact date dipshit, Too easily snooped
>>713382872
>Student loans.
I loaned this lamborgheebi and totally crashed bro. Its not mine tho. Student loans bro.
>>713383326
djagjkwek fuckk u es jay doubleu
>>713383326
I believe most people are what you describe as agender and don't get any other genders
>>713383610
Nope. It would be flooded with gibsmedats and would crumble under its own uselessness. You should incentivize work so that you can afford it and only give free shit to the truly disabled. Not shaniqua and her 12 kids.
>>713383838
Triple 38. Now you have to make a 38 thread commanded by kek.
>>713382872
>>713383484
It's in the UK, they don't have free speech, and hate speech is not free speech anyway.
>>713383996
>You should incentivize work so that you can afford it and only give free shit to the truly disabled.
Well that's how it works in my (european) country, so I am not sure what you're getting at. Anyways thanks for the other posts, it was interesting.
>>713381298
Sadly true
>>713384343
It is in America
>>713380578
This is 100% fake. Bringing your ID is optional? Attending the court date is optional? Bye.
>>713381474
>>713381659
bans don't work right anyway
>>713384343
>and hate speech is not free speech anyway.
allowing government to decide what is and isn't free speech isn't free speech
>>713382872
>Wage gap doesn't exist(at least like they say)
yea it do
>There's only 2 genders
see: >>713383326
>Police aren't racist and 99.999% of the time they're right in killing blacks
your statistic is off but i agree they're usually (but nowhere near 90%) right about killing anyone they choose to kill regardless of race because they just doing their job but also yes they are racist
>Institutionalized racism doesn't exist anymore
you're mostly right, now it's cultural racism that's the bigger problem, and this website and others like it are proof there's plenty of that that needs to be eradicated
>Trump isn't racist
ye he are
>Illegal immigrants are criminals
you misunderstand the meaning of "illegal" in this instance. consider that in some country (lol i don't fucking remember which) weed is illegal but not criminal. same deal with entering countries you're not cleared to enter
>The DAPL is ok
the wut
>Guns don't kill people
people kill people but guns breed people who will kill people and also it's not gun control we need but total and permanent annihilation of all weapons
>Muslims are bad
islam is bad, extremists are bad, radicals are okay but religious radicals in particular are bad, therefore it naturally follows that radical islamic extremists are bad; however, not all muslims are radical islamic extremists, and those who aren't aren't islam, they're just muslims, and they must be recognized as a potential danger, but until they can be proved as such, the caution taken with letting them into our country must be taken with respect for their humanity
>Hillary would've made a terrible president
not gonna argue with that
>Free college/healthcare will never work here.
it will but the process of implementing it will involve the total rearrangement of our legal, social, and economic structure
>You're gonna have to pay back your student loans
didn't take any out, i know a trap when i see it
>>713384461
No I mean like give citizens that purchase private insurance a tax break or something. And then tighten up on who can and can't get benefits for free.
fake.
>>713384515
1776. Come over here if you have that mentality for real.
>>713384675
> Attending the court date is optional?
NOT optional. Read carefully.
> Bringing your ID is optional?
In civilized countries, yes, absolutely.
>>713383505
i'm not trolling this is my genuine belief
>>713383641
why should i though
>>713383789
that's nice
>>713383928
i don't doubt it
>>713384959
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States
>>713384992
your stance on "illegal" is laughable. Go to Mexico. Go to Panama. Go to Russia. Go anywhere you cuck fuck.
They lock you up, and throw away the key. Or... wait for it.... SEND YOU BACK
you stupid fuckong liberals
>>713385470
yeah but they have the right to do that whether I've committed a crime or not because i'm not a citizen
similarly because i'm not a citizen i'm not bound by their laws
so, i do something they don't like, they lock me up, we were both acting within our rights
>>713385300
Exactly my point. In any case, the only way they could get away with this (within one year at least one justice was sorry about it) was to tie it directly to another power granted, by the people, to the Congress, the power to raise armies.
>>713381444
>do the police even know what 4chan is
Yes we do and we monitor it for postings in our jurisdiction. Getting a warrant for PC related hate crimes is quite easy in 2016
>>713384992
Nice opinions you got there on genders. A biology book would like to have a word with you.
Do agree with the cultural racism. But that's a two way street. Demonizing white people isn't going to fix anything.
Complete magic wand zapping away of guns is the only way to get rid of them. Until you can do that I'll keep mine thank you.
Police aren't inherently racist. Some might have prejudices but the training involves treating everyone the exact same(mandated in GA not a cop).
Trump never said anything racist.
Muslims:agree
Hillary:agree
We're not changing our country to pander to the failing. As I said before. You have(had) the right to fail as much as succeed. It's your choices in life and only those choices that determine how you turn out. Obama is a great example of this.
The DAPL is that pipeline that has all the injuns in an uproar.
>>713385470
(continued from >>713385738 ) but the point is, if something is a crime, the executive branch is obligated to fight it. the executive branch should not be obligated to deport illegals because illegals have committed no crime. however, the executive branch should be FREE to deport illegals IF THEY SEE FIT, because illegals aren't citizens and have no rights
m e m e p o l i c e
>>713386196
Entering our country is a crime. It's just not enforced because of the feefee administration.
>>713380578
We did this last week - get new b8 m8
>>713386196
States' attempts to round up illegals outside federal permissions has been thwarted by the courts who rule federal law trumps states with respect to immigration. So yes, the federal government does indeed have an obligation to do this, because somebody does and the feds demand they be the only game in town.
>>713381696
Yes it is. There is no wage gap, only an earnings gap, and that arises due to different choices made by men and women, not discrimination.
@topic: I call bait. There is no way british police would bother to retrieve information on 4chan because of some racist statements. Furthermore, they would have to carry the burden of evidence that it was in fact you writing those comments, and not someone on the same network as you. Had you posted in a newspaper, it might be a different story.
>>713380578
>>713383326
>Male: born with dick
>Female: born with pussy
>Anything else: Mental illness
Gtfo /b/ you sjw faggot
>>713381481
/thread
Sage
>>713386193
>Nice opinions you got there on genders. A biology book would like to have a word with you.
its disagreement with me would be purely semantic. i'm not claiming there are more than two biological sexes (at least not among human beings) i'm claiming the word "gender" no longer refers to biological sex. it has been appropriated to legitimize the existence and humanity of sufferers of gender dysphoria. language changes all the time as things come up
>Do agree with the cultural racism. But that's a two way street. Demonizing white people isn't going to fix anything.
agree but if you think demonizing white people is currently a real and serious issue then you overestimate the prevalence and authority of hateful and uneducated extremists among liberals such as myself
>Complete magic wand zapping away of guns is the only way to get rid of them. Until you can do that I'll keep mine thank you.
agreed but please only kill in self defense and try to recognize the difference between people you're afraid of who pose no threat and actual criminals
>Police aren't inherently racist. Some might have prejudices but the training involves treating everyone the exact same(mandated in GA not a cop).
agreed but they're still racist. no one is inherently racist and anyone who thinks anyone is inherently racist is racist. but people can become racist (which is truly tragic and not necessarily their own fault although it becomes their fault when they act on it) and there seems to be a disturbing correlation and its origins must be identified and addressed to curtail discrimination in law enforcement
>Trump never said anything racist.
it seems to me that trump said some things that were racist and i maintain that those things were racist whether he said them or not but because my objection is to the things and not to the man (at least not intrinsically) i do accept the possibility that he may not have said them
>>713387025
I want to expand on this a little to avoid some of the pitfalls:
Man: XY
Woman: XX
Anything else: Genetic defect and not a gender.
>>713386596
oh you meant a wage gap across gender
i still disagree but regardless of whether there's an overall wage gap between the genders there are underlying cultural issues around gender which must be addressed
i concern myself with problems not symptoms so at the end of the day i don't really care
>>713387025
i agree but labeling something as a mental illness doesn't automatically make it illegitimate. people who are mentally ill, but whose mental illness does not affect their behavior in a dangerous or totally debilitating way -- such as transgender folk, among others -- should not be ostracized or excluded from society
>>713387644
>its disagreement with me would be purely semantic. i'm not claiming there are more than two biological sexes (at least not among human beings) i'm claiming the word "gender" no longer refers to biological sex. it has been appropriated to legitimize the existence and humanity of sufferers of gender dysphoria. language changes all the time as things come up
If there is such a thing as gender dysphoria, you imply that there is also a set male and female gender.You cannot have 60.000+ genders and still have the term "gender dysphoria".
Either gender is only a social construct, and there's a near infinite number to choose from, as you argue, and then gender dysphoria makes no sense.
Else there are two genders, and people who don't feel the fit in the one there are biologically, suffer from gender dysphoria. You can't have it both ways.
>>713388116
you're confusing gender with sex. there are only two sexes, gender is a social construct, and deviations from cisgenderism can reasonably be considered mental illnesses because they're cognitive-behavioral variations that reduce overall quality of life IN THIS SOCIETY and this society is the one we're in and therefore the one that concerns us. i am of the opinion that society should change so that less things need be classified as mental illnesses (insofar as it can do so without sacrifice to the economy) but in the meantime they are still mental illnesses
>>713387903
But you haven't established that there is a problem? You have only established a symptom: "Women earn less than men". You then assume that sexism is somehow to blame. It's that assumption the rest of the thinking world challenges, because there is no evidence that this is the case.
Men and women in the same field, working the same hours at the same productivity, earn the same.
And let's say that in our culture it is more common for women to work shorter hours than men, due to family or whatever. Who's to say that such a culture is not informed by biology? In fact it probably is, as this is a cross-cultural occurrence, and has good evolutionary reasons.
So the reason women earn less than men is that women have free will, and they don't make the choices feminists want them to.
>>713388563
you misunderstand. I'm not saying women earn less than men because of sexism, i'm saying two things:
1) there's sexism
2) who gives a shit about the other thing, if it was never a problem then whatever and if it is a problem it'll go away if we fix sexism
>>713387644
Ok. I see where you're coming from and while I disagree I understand what you're saying.
My guns are for fun and if the need ever arises to stop a threat of deadly force on myself or any third person(s). Thankfully I'm kinda a snowflake in this argument as I have had state mandated firearms and deadly force training yet I am a civilian. Hopefully I will be able to tell if I should if the need ever arises. And I think you feel that policing in general is racist. I can see how you would believe that. But then again when 6.5% of the population is responsible for 45-50% of all murder and violent crime it sure would look like the ones trying to stop it are simply racist. The reality of it is in training you're taught that everyone poses a threat because you never know what's gonna happen once you are about to put cuffs on someone. White people have their crazies that don't trust the govt so they shoot cops instead of "being detained". Blacks are raised to resist against authority and more recently have taken to ambushing and killing cops. Little old lady's have been found in the backseat clicking away at the cop with a faulty revolver to try and kill them. And the hardest fight you'll ever have will be with a 90lb crackwhore because while you're trying to subdue them, they're trying to kill you. Real life, especially that life, isn't white and black. And it's not racist to know who in your community is going to give you the most problems. Your best bet is to treat everyone the same and go home every night at all costs.
>>713388474
I perfectly understand the destinction you make between gender and sex, and my logic applied to that distinction.
HOWEVER, I don't agree with that definition. Gender and sex are synonyms, as far as I'm concerned, and the new "social construct" definition is a new one made to fit a political narrative. It is not something that has developed organicly, but is something certain social justice "academics" are trying to push down on us. Luckily my native language doesn't have two words for gender and the distinction is impossible to make.
If someone suffers from a mental illness it's because something in their brain isn't working as intended, whether or not society is accepting of it or not. I would argue that society is very accepting of autism, however it's still a mental illness.
If I told you that my right leg wasn't part of my body and I wanted it cut off, you would (rightly) say I was mentally ill. The same logic should apply when I said this about my penis.
>>713388758
Ah, so you are now saying that the gender pay gap does not exist, or at least isn't important, and certainly doesn't establish the existance of sexism?
Perfect. Then you just need to establish your claim no. 1. Where is this sexism? And would you say that women are the only, or even primary victims of this sexism?
I've heard plenty of people use the gender pay gap as argument that there is sexism, but I'm glad you don't use that pitfall.
>>713389321
nothing in the brain ever works as intended because the brain was not designed with intention, it was designed by random trial and error for the purpose of survival in an environment that no longer exists
mental illness is the inability, by intrinsic cause of one's neurology or psychological state, to function in society
this can be addressed from the perspective of treating the mental illness or from that of modifying the society so the mental illness is no longer a mental illness by said definition
if the mentally ill person doesn't want to be sane, and isn't dangerous, then the latter is the more ethical option because it causes less suffering
(if they are dangerous though then the prior is obviously the more ethical option because many people might otherwise die)
>>713389669
>1. Where is this sexism?
finally absent from our law but still deeply ingrained in our culture
>And would you say that women are the only, or even primary victims of this sexism?
primary yes, only, certainly not. almost every individual is a victim of cultural sexism. it endangers women more than it endangers men, but it humiliates and brainwashes all genders just about equally. whether it's for our bodies or for our feelings, we're all taught to either hate ourselves for failure to live up to unreasonable gender ideals, or repress and damage facets of our bodies and personalities to force ourselves to live up to them at all costs.
>>713390475
>being this fragile
>>713386193
>You have(had) the right to fail as much as succeed. It's your choices in life and only those choices that determine how you turn out
this is so blatantly untrue i don't even know where to begin
have you ever heard of something called a circumstance
>>713390021
Not the guy you're having THIS discussion with, I'm the "not a cop". I am all good with allowing the behavior caused by the mental illness and I'm sure everyone else is fine with letting a dude wear a dress and all that. Where I personally have an issue is forcing that lifestyle onto everyone else and forcing regular society to accept it. Sure they might get their feelings hurt(suffering), but it his society certain things are and are not publicly acceptable. One of those things being a grown man in a dress going into the bathroom behind a 9yo girl. 99% of society shouldn't be bent to the will of less than 1% of the population. The only problem with that logic is that there's normal people with their Jim jams in a twist over even one person being told "no".
>>713390021
>nothing in the brain ever works as intended because the brain was not designed with intention, it was designed by random trial and error for the purpose of survival in an environment that no longer exists
Let me stop you right there! Yes, our brain has a way it's supposed to work, it's just complicated so I'll use the eye as an analogy: If you have colour blindness, you do not have a "new and unique perspective" on the world, and your vision is not equal in quality of anyone else's eye. Claiming this, would be hamfisting relativism where it doesn't belong. Your eye is supposed to see all the colours between ~400 and ~700 nm, and when some of them are missing, it's a defect of some sort.
The same is true for the brain. Something other than the strict biological process selected for by evolution has happened.
And no, we shouldn't change the definition of "mental illness" to cuddle to certain interest groups. Changing the meaning of words to shape human thinking is a bit too 1984 for my taste. Language should develop naturally the other way around: Human thinking should inform language. I'm open to discussing what the best treatment (if any) is. But not to play with semantics.
>>713390744
How'd you wind up in that circumstance? Did god pick you up and drop you in a bad situation?
>>713390744
>have you ever heard of taking yourself out of said circumstance.
>>713381444
No, no police knows about 4chan. Only edgy 14 years old know about this place.
looks fake
>>713390475
>finally absent from our law but still deeply ingrained in our culture
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough, but I want specifics. The moment you can point to an individual that has been discriminated against, I will be with you to argue on behalf of that individual. But this "sexism works in mysterious ways" argument isn't very convincing, and the examples I hear of manifestations of the omnipresent sexism, are usually complete non-issues with explanations not rooted in sexism at all.
When someone (you, in this case) claims that there is sexism all around, the burden of evidence is on you to show me. Because we both agree that the wage gap wasn't one such issue.
>>713383615
dude, in costa rica there is free healthcare and free education for all your life ... wtf are you talking about?
>>713391127
have you ever heard of a catch 22
>>713391064
that depends on what your philosophy is about how fetuses achieve consciousness
>>713390965
disagree, the only reason your example applies is because color blindness is a degenerative adaptation, it takes away a functionality and offers no other functionality in return. not all mental illnesses are degenerative adaptations, some replace functionality lost with functionality that would not be otherwise present, for example gender dysphoria replaces a person's natural ability to feel like the gender assigned to their sex with the relatively rare ability to feel like the opposite gender or another gender, and while this adaptation may not appear to have any conceivable use that is merely due to the structure of society
>And no, we shouldn't change the definition of "mental illness" to cuddle to certain interest groups. Changing the meaning of words to shape human thinking is a bit too 1984 for my taste. Language should develop naturally the other way around: Human thinking should inform language. I'm open to discussing what the best treatment (if any) is. But not to play with semantics.
that is what has occurred, human thinking has informed language, the meaning of the word "gender" has changed because awareness about the existence and harmlessness of gender dysphoria was spread
fucking niggers are destroying this country
>>713383615
The old money argument makes no sense. 70 years ago America was about the only country on the planet with an economy not in shambles (the war, and all).
If you wanted to make education free, you could, and it would likely be profitable for your country in the long run. I don't think it'll happen any time soon either, because, as you say, Americans hate taxes.
Nice b8 m8
>>713391907
Fetus guy here. Was born poor. Made poor choices. Leading up to smoking weed through college. Made myself lazy. Thought I was gonna make it big in a band. The only thing that kept me slightly above water in early adulthood was work ethic as far as keeping a job and bare minimums. FF 8years to meeting current wife. Start wanting more. Stop smoking weed. Get better jobs. Get experience. Put myself through police academy(yes that guy from earlier). Guess what? Agencies don't want a guy that spent a good 6 years ripped out of his gourd so that didn't pan out(bad choice came back to haunt me). Didn't let that phase me tho. Used prior work experience to land a sweet gig in a lab for LG. now I make good money, have a great family, never been locked up, and I'll be debt free by 35. All of this, the bad and the good, can be attributed to the good and bad choices I made in life. And once I started realizing what good choices and bad choices are I stopped making so many bad choices and my life got exponentially better. And as I said earlier Obama is a great example. Grew up not necessarily rich. Set a path in life and followed it and now he's the first black president. Gotta hand it to him. Now all that being said I have one bad choice that will probably kill me before I'm ready. And that's smoking. And I have only myself to blame.
>>713391444
A) if a man has a lot of sex it's an achievement but if a woman has a lot of sex it's a mark of shame
B) if a woman is a virgin she's more desirable but if a man is a virgin he's a loser
C) if a man stands up for himself he's strong but if a woman stands up for herself she's a bitch
D) if a woman doesn't stand up for herself she's a victim but if a man doesn't stand up for himself he's a pussy
E) if you hear someone got raped your first thought is automatically that a man raped a woman; this attitude propagates both sexism against women, in that it exposes and legitimizes the prevalence of sexual violence against women, AND sexism against men, in that it prevents the equal seriousness of sexual violence against men from coming to light when it occurs
all of these are basically symptoms of the same core problem of the sort of subconscious opinion people hold that men are to women as adults are to children -- that men are strong, responsible, possessing of agency, guardians, doers -- while women are innocent, peaceful, possessing of value, treasures, "be-ers"
try to imagine a woman who fits the prior description, and whom you could find attractive. you'll likely find it hard
try to imagine a man who fits the latter description, and whom you don't instinctively despise. you'll likely find it even harder
that's the cultural sexism, that's the core of it, that's the attitude that's drilled into all our brains and has to be dug back out and done away with. masculine women and feminine men do exist and we need to stop seeing them as lesser just because they fail to affirm this belief system we've been forced to absorb since birth
>>713391907
>disagree, the only reason your example applies is because color blindness is a degenerative adaptation, it takes away a functionality and offers no other functionality in return
Then use deafness instead! I can think of a myriad of other examples. Deafness can heighten your other senses, but it is NOT what is supposed to happen. Humans have eyes because they are meant to be able to see. And so it is with our brain functions. Although other functions might highten or even be "unlocked" to compensate, it is not what's supposed to happen. Under you definition, NOTHING can be said to be a mental illness, or even an illness at all, because there's always some sort of silver lining to everything if you look hard enough: being bedridden with malaria makes you less likely to develop arthritis.
I suspect that you are making the exception in this particular case because it has to do with identity. And "Identity", at the moment, functions like a magic word to elevate any experience to normality and equally valid. You do realise that this is pure relativism, right?
>>713392694
congratulations you're strong and resilient
not everyone is strong and resilient and if we can make any use of people who aren't then we should because god knows we need the money
by the way i'm on the path to success as well but have had relatively few tough circumstances, the worst thing that ever happened to me was being raped by my dad as a toddler who then left my life forever and was never brought to justice and left me and my mother in mild poverty -- you know, the kind that sucks but is basically livable -- and also my mother was sick and couldn't work and we had to mooch off my grandparents until she was well
point being when i say i dream of a future where education is free i'm not dreaming on my own behalf
>>713384992
>>713393256
>Deafness can heighten your other senses, but it is NOT what is supposed to happen. Humans have eyes because they are meant to be able to see.
nope wrong
there's nothing wrong with being deaf but having exceptional sight if you happen to have been born in, or migrated to, an environment where things happen very quickly and very quietly, because you're unlikely to hear them anyway and need to be able to see them
the point is, all functions of every part of the human body, including the brain, really are wholly relative to the environment they developed in. because we now have control over the environment, preserving certain structures of the human body and brain over others has become optional, as we can just as well manipulate the environment to make said preservation unnecessary
>>713393203
>A) if a man has a lot of sex it's an achievement but if a woman has a lot of sex it's a mark of shame
Evolutionary. A man needs to trust that his partners kids are his. A woman always knows which kids are hers. Thus men will have a preference for women less on the slutty side for partners.
>B) if a woman is a virgin she's more desirable but if a man is a virgin he's a loser
See A. Also, women will tend to go after the "alphas" because evolutionary speaking they could provide better security and stable food supply. If a man is unable to find any mate, it is likely tied to him being low on the social pecking order.
>C) if a man stands up for himself he's strong but if a woman stands up for herself she's a bitch
No. If a woman bitches she's a bitch. If a man bitches, he's a bitch. Whether or not your standing up for yourself or bitching, is whether the thing your complaining about is a big deal, and how your complaining. Not gender.
>D) if a woman doesn't stand up for herself she's a victim but if a man doesn't stand up for himself he's a pussy
Evolutionary. Men are supposed to protect the women in their pack/tribe, because evolutionarily speaking they are more important (for offspring). It is biology, and not just culture, telling men to protect women.
>E) if you hear someone got raped your first thought is automatically that a man raped a woman
Not if I hear it took place in a prison. Regardsless, this is simply based on statistics.
Every example you have come up with have very plausible biological explanations. You haven't demonstrated any causality whatsoever.
So why do you assume it's sexism?
>>713381209
No, that's bait
>>713394361
yes, you're right, all of these can be explained by things other than sexism
but they can also be explained by sexism
and there's a reason i would think it would be sexism, and that reason is the undeniable prevalence of this sentiment:
>the sort of subconscious opinion people hold that men are to women as adults are to children -- that men are strong, responsible, possessing of agency, guardians, doers -- while women are innocent, peaceful, possessing of value, treasures, "be-ers"
>try to imagine a woman who fits the prior description, and whom you could find attractive. you'll likely find it hard
>try to imagine a man who fits the latter description, and whom you don't instinctively despise. you'll likely find it even harder
>that's the cultural sexism, that's the core of it, that's the attitude that's drilled into all our brains and has to be dug back out and done away with. masculine women and feminine men do exist and we need to stop seeing them as lesser just because they fail to affirm this belief system we've been forced to absorb since birth
>>713394258
Never claimed the hamun brain isn't malible. But with mental illness we are not just talking about an adaption to environment. Loosing your hearing isn't an adaption, it's a defect, whether brought on by environment or not.
Also, don't know if you realise this or not, but you are dangerously close to rehashing the old conservative "X is making our kids gay". But I am sure that you wouldn't argue that sexuality is an adaption. I think you reserve it for cases where it doesn't conflict with your political leaning. But relativism ISN'T particularly liberal...
>>713391799
>free education
So does the United States
>>713382142
bumping for interest
lmao, too close to home for comfort
>>713395107
sexuality is indeed an adaptation
(by which i think it's important to note i mean an evolutionary adaptation, as i have throughout this entire discussion -- NOT an adaptation that occurs within one's own lifetime)
and so is transgenderism, transgenderism is an adaptation misplaced in our current society that may have been beneficial for our ancestors of some other species in some other circumstances
>>713394801
OK, so you agree that there already exists perfectly adequate biological explanations for every example you can come up with that should demonstrate sexism, but you still insist sexism is at play?
I suggest you apply Occam's razor, or to quote Laplace "I had no need for that hypothesis". Analogy time:
I hypothesise that waves on the sea form because large seaturtles bounce up and down under the ocean.
Now you could demonstrate to me that the wind is enough to explain the waves, but I would insist that "yeah, but the turtles help".
Do you see how futile this is? You name phenomenon that are already explained, and propose a new model that makes no further predictions. It's completely illogical. I still cannot find your sexism...
>>713395763
my sexism is right here:
>the sort of subconscious opinion people hold that men are to women as adults are to children -- that men are strong, responsible, possessing of agency, guardians, doers -- while women are innocent, peaceful, possessing of value, treasures, "be-ers"
>try to imagine a woman who fits the prior description, and whom you could find attractive. you'll likely find it hard
>try to imagine a man who fits the latter description, and whom you don't instinctively despise. you'll likely find it even harder
>that's the cultural sexism, that's the core of it, that's the attitude that's drilled into all our brains and has to be dug back out and done away with. masculine women and feminine men do exist and we need to stop seeing them as lesser just because they fail to affirm this belief system we've been forced to absorb since birth
the existence of this sentiment is a problem. its status as a problem is independent of the examples provided, of which i proposed it as a cause. whether it causes them or not, it's still bad that it's a thing
>>713395409
We were talking about adaptations during a lifetime. otherwise our conversation makes no sense. Every human trait is an adaptation of evolution.
And it depends on your definition of "transgenderism" If you mean people with anything other than XX or XY, I would say no, because people with these defects suffer negative consequences and are sterile.
If you mean, people who feel like they belong in the body of the other sex, I am more open but still very skeptical. I cannot see what benefit a personal existential crisis has on a group, and they are likely not to reproduce. It could, however, be the unfortunate result of the mixing that genes that, individually, were selected for. The same can explain homosexuality.
>>713393746
See but that's a special case and it needs to be dealt with internally still. I never knew my father. And while our situations are different mylife wasn't exactly rainbows and sunshine either. I feel for you I really do. And if this situation affects you then I suggest seeking professional help if you need it. But take those kind of extremes out and your left with choices. All I was saying is being born poor or black isn't an excuse.
>>713395763
and besides, all of the examples I've provided are problems as well, regardless of their cause, whether we choose to call them sexism or not
it's wrong that being a "slut" is considered bad, it's wrong that being a "pussy" or a "loser" is considered bad, it's wrong that rape happens disproportionately to women (to be fair, it's wrong that it happens to anyone)
more generally, biological explanations or no, it's altogether wrong that statistically supported expectations about the behaviors of people of a given sex should be forcefully imposed and pressured onto those to whom they happen not to naturally apply. such people should be allowed to be who they are without fear of harm or widespread ridicule
Gr8 b8 m8
>>713396077
None of that is sexism. You have pointed out that there are gender roles, but that in itself is not sexist. As demonstrated, there are several very good evolutionary reasons why our gender roles are the way they are. And in general, if a phenomenon is cross-cultural, it probably isn't only the culture informing it.
In short, you don't need sexism to explain our gender roles.
Sexism is when someone is unfairly discriminated against only due to their sex. You haven't shown a single example of this (although it does happen from time to time, of course, there's always someone). And who I'm attracted to is determined in large parts, by my biology, and thus it isn't weird that I would prefer a feminine woman to a masculine one. I would be sexist if you didn't tolerate the masculine woman, but I do. I would be happy to have them as colleagues and friends. I just wouldn't fuck them. Not sexism.
>>713396263
>We were talking about adaptations during a lifetime. otherwise our conversation makes no sense.
that's not what i was talking about. i was talking about evolutionary adaptations. mental illnesses possessed from birth are evolutionary adaptations misplaced within our society and so is being born deaf or color blind. and indeed our conversation made little sense to me, and i suspect it was for that reason
>Every human trait is an adaptation of evolution.
so we agree
>And it depends on your definition of "transgenderism" If you mean people with anything other than XX or XY, I would say no, because people with these defects suffer negative consequences and are sterile.
indeed those adaptations in particular would not have been helpful to anyone but i suggest they should nonetheless be tolerated today and not met with ostracism
>I cannot see what benefit a personal existential crisis has on a group, and they are likely not to reproduce. It could, however, be the unfortunate result of the mixing that genes that, individually, were selected for. The same can explain homosexuality.
now this is not even within our evolutionary line at all but did you know beta male cuttlefish can be transgender and bisexual? and for a good evolutionary reason. when an alpha male cuttlefish finds a female cuttlefish, the beta male cuttlefish, if it has this cognitive-behavioral mutation, will become attracted to the alpha male cuttlefish, and doll itself up so the alpha male will think it's a female. shortly afterward, once the alpha male is distracted, the beta male will lose interest, happen to notice the female, and have a go at her. the beta male intends no deception; it's a cuttlefish, and probably doesn't intend much at all. it's just acting on its mutated primal desires. the cunning mind that has deceived the alpha male is not that of the beta male, but that of evolution itself.
was it cuttlefish? i can't remember
>>713396263
(ran out of characters) furthermore being transgender or homosexual doesn't have to be a personal existential crisis. in fact i would like us to foster a culture in which coming out feels natural and non-threatening and i have a vision of how this can be done without negatively impacting straight and cisgender people
>>713396715
Of course people should be allowed to be whoever they want to be without fearing ridicule.
But the argument that we live in a patriachal or sexist society, as a whole, does not hold any water. We are beings informed by our biology, however, and we will have personal preferences in accordance with this. And that's OK.
It's OK for a man to think of a "loose" woman as less attractive as a partner than a more innocent flower of a woman. Because such is our biology. However preferences are vast, and there's someone out there for the "slutty" ones as well. What not OK, is to ridicule a woman for how she chooses to live her life, but it is also not OK to lambast men for preferring something else, and call us sexist or even "misogynists".
So what I'm saying is: There is no systematic sexism against women. People just have different preferences, and our society reflects this. Regardless, people shouldn't be dicks to one another and our personal preferences should be respected. By conservatives and SJW's alike.
>>713398108
patriarchal, no, i agree, that's pretty much BS. sexist, yes.
i absolutely agree that different preferences are always okay but what's not okay is that the natural prevalence of some preferences over others has allowed those preferences to ascend to the status of an overarching culture which is passed down through generations and across peer groups and has thereby evolved in strength and complexity to the point that it influences our attitudes and behaviors toward friends and strangers, not just plausible potential mates
the preferences must be respected and openly shared but also kept in check in terms of growth so that preferences which contradict each other can respect each other as equals despite the greater prevalence of one or the other and also so that neither females NOR males are objectified or held to ideals that are sexually legitimate but not relevant to the context in which we're interacting with them
Got any Derbyshire nudes?
>>713399069
kekkerino
>>713397787
I think it's clown fish, but no matter. Humans can't do this, so it doesn't really explain transgenderism in us, but a nice fun-fact nonetheless.
And colour blindness is not an adaptation. It's a defect with little upside. A small genetic accident. When your computer screen looses a colour it's not a new feature either. It's broken (or likely the cable is loose). I don't think you would apply this level of relativism to anything else, so why to humans?
The value of a human being is intrinsic as far as I'm concerned, so to me there is nothing wrong with pointing out defects as you see them. Colour blindness, deafness, or believing that part of you shouldn't be there, are all examples of something gone wrong somewhere, likely with no-one to blame.
Again, image you computer refusing to recognise the DVD drive, even though you know it's plugged in. Would you say "My computer does not identify as a mediacenter" or would you say "something's wrong with my computer"?
>>713399312
>I don't think you would apply this level of relativism to anything else, so why to humans?
not just humans. living things in general. and i apply this level of relativism because it's applicable to living things and not to much else -- this in turn because living things are emergent, not designed. they come into being in particular situations, and are best suited to those situations. few of the situations that informed the way we work still exist. if all the water on earth dried up, and you had to climb a ledge, and decided to use the remains of a raft to build a ramp, would you call it a broken raft? no, you'd call it a functioning ramp, because that's what you've made, and though you did make it out of a raft, that information is not very relevant to any conceivable context, because there is no more water. (granted if all the water in earth dried up we'd have bigger problems on our hands)
the same situation is present here. we did not evolve in civilization. yet here we are, in civilization. some people are different. perhaps in such ways that they wouldn't survive in the wild -- that they wouldn't function as "intended." but that doesn't matter, because if we examine them as tools, as machines that serve some purpose, then we must admit that purpose is gone forever, and so they are obsolete anyway. it seems inappropriate for one obsolete machine to call another obsolete machine broken. whether it's true or not, i believe that's what's known as the pot calling the kettle black.
>>713398864
Your belief in a sexist culture seems completely unfounded.
It is a culture in which gender roles exist, but there's not necessarily anything wrong with that. Only if you are somehow punished for not living up to said roles. And by punished I don't mean "Guys/girls won't fuck me" but actually shunned by society for no other reason.
And no, given that we in our individual behaviours do not directly opress others, our cultural expressions should not be kept in check by anyone. Attempting to make everything seem equally normal, when it clearly isn't, is hardly fooling anyone.
Transgenderism is unusual, and will always remain unusual. People will always think it's weird because of this. And that's fine, because normality is not a prerequisite for tolerance and acceptance.
So you don't need to alter our culture in any way to make the very unusual "normal". We just need to learn the base liberal value: "You might think some people are weird, but they have a right to be, as do you".
Trying to fix is culture is a very authoritarian thing to do. Protecting the rights of the individual is both easier and the more fair solution.
>>713400289
>Only if you are somehow punished for not living up to said roles. And by punished I don't mean "Guys/girls won't fuck me" but actually shunned by society for no other reason.
but that happens tho
>normality is not a prerequisite for tolerance and acceptance.
do you literally live in heaven
>So you don't need to alter our culture in any way to make the very unusual "normal". We just need to learn the base liberal value: "You might think some people are weird, but they have a right to be, as do you".
that's what I'm trying to say, we need to alter our culture in such a way that unusual things can be accepted
currently they can't
>Trying to fix is culture is a very authoritarian thing to do. Protecting the rights of the individual is both easier and the more fair solution.
in this particular discussion they seem to be the same thing
i don't want to change culture so that people believe these things are normal
i want to change culture so that people believe these things are okay
>>713386101
>wasting resources monitoring online message board instead of solving real crimes
It's fking fake dammit!
>>713381659
That's an IP ban, genius.
>>713380578
TROLL
