Right Wing Grifters

Gynoid

[Deleted User] wrote: »

One of my closest friends is gay and has trans friends. I was at his housewarming and among the people there were his friends who are female to male trans.

Over the course of the night the whole issue regarding the tampons being made available in men's toilets was mentioned, (jokingly and lightheartedly it must be said) but then we ended up having a more serious chat about self ID'ing and they wanted to know my opinion on it. Gender neutral toilets were discussed and even the subject of sanitary products being made available to them even though they identified as men.

I never said I was stuck in a conversation.

I nearly wouldnt bother answering the sneers. They think we are buck toothed friendless yokels with hair growing out of our ears, and a shotgun under our arms.

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

One of my closest friends is gay and has trans friends. I was at his housewarming and among the people there were his friends who are female to male trans.

Over the course of the night the whole issue regarding the tampons being made available in men's toilets was mentioned, (jokingly and lightheartedly it must be said) but then we ended up having a more serious chat about self ID'ing and they wanted to know my opinion on it. Gender neutral toilets were discussed and even the subject of sanitary products being made available to them even though they identified as men.

I never said I was stuck in a conversation.

Did you tell them you thought they were wrong then?
Or just keep it to yourself?

Billy Mays

Mensch, Comey, Frum and Wallace left wing :pac::pac::pac:

I'm starting to think notobtuse is a parody account

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Issues being challenged by the left:
Racism, Fascism, Homophobia, Sexism, Discrimination, mass shooters, Poverty Climate Change.

Issues being encouraged to grow and develop into "sub"-categories by the left.

Racism. Against white males.
Sexism. Against males. Legal changes to make men marginalized in society.
Promoting feminism far past the case of equality.
Preferential treatment of females in many areas of society.
Social conditioning. Application of drugs and biased psychology in schools to "manage" male children.
Bigotry. Demanding the end of particular religious festivals
Discrimination. Against moderates, those on the right and far right.
Multiculturalism. A theory that has never proven successful in any nation long term.
Media monopolies.
Revisionism of history.
Poverty. Just look at any state in America where the left has gained power. (Bad budgeting and idiotic economic ideas aren't simply the purview of the right).
False Media. Outright lies, and accusations to throw dirt on opponents.



Yup. The left is thoroughly doing a wonderful job.

I could also point to the desire to bring in questionable practices like transgender procedures for children. With very dodgy psychology and biased research papers to encourage it.

As for mass shootings, you're talking about school shootings in the US? They're being very selective in the data that they use to promote their aims.

Climate Change? You really want to throw that out as a "leftist" thing?

Issues being challenged by the right:
Men say they can have periods but I said they can't and someone on twitter was mean about it.

Well... considering that everyone who is not on the left is now apparently on the right.... far more issues than the above are being challenged. As for men having periods, nah.

I've always considered myself as a moderate. I'm on the right on some issues, and the left for others. However, in this day and age, the Left simply cannot allow anyone to stay in the middle, swinging a little left or right on certain issues. Your list above simply reinforces that point.

KyussB

Irish Guitarist wrote: »

There's a 'documentary' series called Explained on Netflix. There's an episode about cults. They're talking about the Jonestown massacre and the Heavens Gate cult. Then out of nowhere they go into this weird rant about Donald Trump because apparently Trump supporters are in a cult too. They somehow make a tenuous link between cults, Trump and recent mass shootings by white people. There's another episode where they're talking about how computer coding works. This airhead explains that if you do a Google search for the word 'party' you'll find loads of pictures of Asians and white people partying because that's the race of most programmers, therefore more people from ethnic minorities and women need to start coding.

I'd consider this kind of nonsense the left wing equivalent of Paul Joseph Watson. This series is made by a company called Vox who have their own YouTube channel. Here's a video where they explain how colour film couldn't reproduce black peoples skin, not because of any technical limitations, but because of racism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d16LNHIEJzs

There's loads more shite like this on Netflix too. Pretty much any documentary they produce themselves has some biased angle.

I didn't watch that video - but here is a good article explaining the technical issue, which I assume the video is about:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/25/lens/sarah-lewis-racial-bias-photography.html

So in that case, it sounds silly, but when you read about it - it's a real technical issue, which was preventable - but now it's baked-in to industry standards.

If you've ever had to mess around with e.g. figuring out the right colour settings for a high end monitor/TV, and matching that to high quality video/movies you're watching, their colour gamut and such, and what the different standards are - then it's not very surprising at all, that there can be a technical bias like this.

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

Issues being encouraged to grow and develop into "sub"-categories by the left.

Racism. Against white males.
Sexism. Against males. Legal changes to make men marginalized in society.
Promoting feminism far past the case of equality.
Preferential treatment of females in many areas of society.
Social conditioning. Application of drugs and biased psychology in schools to "manage" male children.
Bigotry. Demanding the end of particular religious festivals
Discrimination. Against moderates, those on the right and far right.
Multiculturalism. A theory that has never proven successful in any nation long term.
Media monopolies.
Revisionism of history.
Poverty. Just look at any state in America where the left has gained power. (Bad budgeting and idiotic economic ideas aren't simply the purview of the right).
False Media. Outright lies, and accusations to throw dirt on opponents.



Yup. The left is thoroughly doing a wonderful job.

I could also point to the desire to bring in questionable practices like transgender procedures for children. With very dodgy psychology and biased research papers to encourage it.

As for mass shootings, you're talking about school shootings in the US? They're being very selective in the data that they use to promote their aims.

Climate Change? You really want to throw that out as a "leftist" thing?



Well... considering that everyone who is not on the left is now apparently on the right.... far more issues than the above are being challenged. As for men having periods, nah.

I've always considered myself as a moderate. I'm on the right on some issues, and the left for others. However, in this day and age, the Left simply cannot allow anyone to stay in the middle, swinging a little left or right on certain issues. Your list above simply reinforces that point.

It's posts like the above that make me dislike the alt right grifters so much.
They make poor simple souls think that all the above are huge issues and the main goals of "the left" while giving free pass to the terror, crime and fascism occurring by their own governments.

Gynoid

20Cent wrote: »

It's posts like the above that make me dislike the alt right grifters so much.
They make poor simple souls think that all the above are huge issues and the main goals of "the left" while giving free pass to the terror, crime and fascism occurring by their own governments.

Because all the people who answer you back on boards are giving free passes to terror and fascism....

Sometimes my mind makes a loud kaddunk sound when I read certain posts......

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Did you tell them you thought they were wrong then?
Or just keep it to yourself?

They asked me my opinion on self identification and I told them what I thought and that I don't think that a woman could become a man or vice versa.

Why hold an opinion if you aren't confident enough about it to voice it?

It's possible to do so as long as you remain respectful when tackling tough subjects.

KyussB

Winston Mealy Dirt wrote: »

Freedom of speech is fine. Being given a free platform to spread violent nonsense is not fine.

I liked Sacha Baron Cohen's speech to the ADL. Wing nut social media presence is like someone going into a restaurant and shouting about white power. They would and should be told to leave.

When your 'town hall' is effectively privatized - which is effectively what we have on social media, and right here on Boards, Reddit, mainstream media etc. - and has sole discretion on who is allowed onto the platform, then deplatforming is censorship and a breach of freedom of speech.

It's weird that people don't get this. Freedom of speech doesn't exist when the major platforms for public discussion, can remove you for whatever reason they like.

This is the greatest example of all lately, of how many people on the left are becoming more conservative than the right. It's dangerous.

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

They asked me my opinion on self identification and I told them what I thought and that I don't think that a woman could become a man or vice versa.

Why hold an opinion if you aren't confident enough about it to voice it?

It's possible to do so as long as you remain respectful when tackling tough subjects.

Why feel the need to tell them they are wrong?
If they identify as men what's it to you? Why even care?

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Why feel the need to tell them they are wrong?
If they identify as men what's it to you? Why even care?

Because they asked for my opinion.

That's how a conversation works.

Junkyard Tom

Deleted User wrote: »

They asked me my opinion on self identification and I told them what I thought and that I don't think that a woman could become a man or vice versa.

Junkyard Tom

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Couldn't give a **** chief. Says more about you than me if you find having a conversation with people you disagree with unbelievable.

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

Because they asked for my opinion.

That's how a conversation works.

Wow.

Can imagine how hurtful it must have been to them, if they cared about your opinion but I'd hasten to guess they would have experienced much worse many times before.

nkl12xtw5goz70

KyussB wrote: »

When your 'town hall' is effectively privatized - which is effectively what we have on social media, and right here on Boards, Reddit, mainstream media etc. - and has sole discretion on who is allowed onto the platform, then deplatforming is censorship and a breach of freedom of speech.

It's weird that people don't get this. Freedom of speech doesn't exist when the major platforms for public discussion, can remove you for whatever reason they like.

This is the greatest example of all lately, of how many people on the left are becoming more conservative than the right. It's dangerous.

The only legitimate test of free speech is whether those who profess to believe in it will defend the right of those with whom they ardently disagree to speak their minds.

Instead, we see high-fives all round when someone like Milo Yiannopoulos gets deplatformed.

I agree with you that this new authoritarianism, where so-called "liberals" cheer the removal of their ideological opponents from the marketplace of ideas, is highly dangerous.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Wow.

Can imagine how hurtful it must have been to them, if they cared about your opinion but I'd hasten to guess they would have experienced much worse many times before.

Funnily enough, I was able to explain my position and do so in a respectful manner. They understood my points, I understood some of theirs but we ended up agreeing to disagree. We had a great night not in spite of the conversation but because of it.

I see that you're of the opinion that they should be shielded from anything that disagrees with them.

Your attitude is actually much more patronising and disrespectful to assume that trans people are not able to have a conversation about themselves with anyone except people who think exactly like them.

Not everyone who you deem as in need of protection needs you to white knight for them

Junkyard Tom

Jaelyn Uptight Speedway wrote: »

Instead, we see high-fives all round when someone like Milo Yiannopoulos gets deplatformed.

I think you're confusing the right to free speech with the imagined 'right' to speech free of consequences.

20Cent

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Funnily enough, I was able to explain my position and do so in a respectful manner. They understood my points, I understood some of theirs but we ended up agreeing to disagree. We had a great night not in spite of the conversation but because of it.

I see that you're of the opinion that they should be shielded from anything that disagrees with them.

Your attitude is actually much more patronising and disrespectful to assume that trans people are not able to have a conversation about themselves with anyone except people who think exactly like them.

Not everyone who you deem as in need of protection needs you to white knight for them

Wow. Trying to imagine how big a **** someone would have to be to do that. Very big.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

were you forced to listen? did they tie you to a chair perhaps?

why is this not the relevant test for all sides and all opinions, then?

why such wildly-swinging goalposts?

KyussB

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I think you're confusing the right to free speech with the imagined 'right' to speech free of consequences.

In the case I highlighted, of deplatforming, when the platforms are so big that they've effectively become the 'town hall' - the deplatforming transforms from a minor consequence (e.g. on a small/inconsequential platform when many more are available), into something bigger, it starts to blur the line into censorship and a breach of free speech.

You see it with the drive to censor 'fake news' online. That isn't just hitting right-wing outlets, it's having blowback and is being used to hit left-leaning outlets that challenge the current political/economic mainstream, too - with such a loose definition of 'fake news', that it's easy for legitimate/independent outlets to be caught up in it, while mainstream outlets are big enough to get hand-tweaked off the blacklists.

That's why it's so dangerous - people think they're going after their ideological opponents, they think it's being limited to hateful people - but it's not, it's underming the pillars of free speech that we all depend on - in a subtle way that people are choosing to ignore.

Lefty Bicek

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I think you're confusing the right to free speech with the imagined 'right' to speech free of consequences.

Those 'consequences' are not immutable laws of the universe.

They frequently have no intrinsic merit whatsoever.

Censorship by another name, but fooling nobody.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Wow. Trying to imagine how big a **** someone would have to be to do that. Very big.

This right here sums you up.

How big of an dick would someone need to be to have a respectful conversation with some people about a contentious subject?

You don't want honest dialogue. You want people to agree with you and if you anyone has the audacity to have a differing opinion or hold a view that you don't like, they should just shut up because you don't want to have any conversation that doesn't fit your ideology.

There was conversation between adults about gender identity, body dysmorphia and differing opinions which ended amicably after we realised we were just not going to 100% agree is now considered a dick move because for some reason my opinion is wrong think to you?

Thank **** we aren't all as closed minded as you. I have my opinions and I can back them up and I will always be willing to listen to an alternate opinion once the person in the conversation is respectful and is not arguing in bad faith.

Junkyard Tom

KyussB wrote: »

You see it with the drive to censor 'fake news' ... is being used to hit left-leaning outlets that challenge the current political/economic mainstream

You seem to be arguing against the deplatforming of cranks, reactionaries, frauds, and fascists, on the grounds that it will suppress critical/leftist/anti-corporate voices?

When has the latter never not been the norm?

20Cent

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This right here sums you up.

How big of an dick would someone need to be to have a respectful conversation with some people about a contentious subject?

You don't want honest dialogue. You want people to agree with you and if you anyone has the audacity to have a differing opinion or hold a view that you don't like, they should just shut up because you don't want to have any conversation that doesn't fit your ideology.

There was conversation between adults about gender identity, body dysmorphia and differing opinions which ended amicably after we realised we were just not going to 100% agree is now considered a dick move because for some reason my opinion is wrong think to you?

Thank **** we aren't all as closed minded as you. I have my opinions and I can back them up and I will always be willing to listen to an alternate opinion once the person in the conversation is respectful and is not arguing in bad faith.

Sorry dude.
But the arrogance and ego required to tell another human being that they are wrong about their own identity and you know better than them is so astounding it takes galaxy size ignorance to pull off. Hopefully that's how they took it as well they are probably used to it.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Sorry dude.
But the arrogance and ego required to tell another human being that they are wrong about their own identity and you know better than them is so astounding it takes galaxy size ignorance to pull off. Hopefully that's how they took it as well they are probably used to it.

Sorry dude.

How do you see honest discussions on gender identity and body dysmorphia going?

"I identify as a pangender male even though I have a vagina"

"Well you know best"

"I identify as handicapped and want to amputate my leg"

"Well you know best"

Is that honest dialogue? Do you just agree with everyone because you don't know their experiences? Or do you just expect everyone to respect and not question opinions or beliefs that align with yours?

The telling thing is that you seem astounded that grown adults can actually discuss issues like this in a respectful manner, without ego or offending people.

Thats on you.

20Cent

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Sorry dude.

How do you see honest discussions on gender identity and body dysmorphia going?

"I identify as a pangender male even though I have a vagina"

"Well you know best"

"I identify as handicapped and want to amputate my leg"

"Well you know best"

Is that honest dialogue? Do you just agree with everyone because you don't know their experiences? Or do you just expect everyone to respect and not question opinions or beliefs that align with yours?

The telling thing is that you seem astounded that grown adults can actually discuss issues like this in a respectful manner, without ego or offending people.

Thats on you.

I'd take the persons word for it and assume they know more about it than me.

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

I'd take the persons word for it and assume they know more about it than me.

Is that with everything or just on gender?

Because I reckon your assumption would be pretty accurate.

Junkyard Tom

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

Those 'consequences' are not immutable laws of the universe. They frequently have no intrinsic merit whatsoever. Censorship by another name, but fooling nobody.

Don't worry, you'll still be able to access plenty of content from mouth-breather outrage-generating reactionaries in other parts of the web.

Better still, you could try spending some time listening to some lectures/talks from actual educators, academics, and intellectuals.

nkl12xtw5goz70

20Cent wrote: »

But the arrogance and ego required to tell another human being that they are wrong about their own identity and you know better than them is so astounding it takes galaxy size ignorance to pull off.

Curiously, you have no problem telling anyone identifying as right of centre that they are wrong and you know better.

Lefty Bicek

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Don't worry, you'll still be able to access plenty of content from mouth-breather outrage-generating reactionaries in other parts of the web.

Better still, you could try spending some time listening to some lectures/talks from actual educators, academics, and intellectuals.

I read and listen widely - at the moment to Chris Hedges, A.C. Grayling on the Allied Bombing in WW2; and also Anthony Pagden's book on The Enlightenment.

And confess to a little schadenfreude in the recent humiliation of Naomi Klein, the 'Gloria Steinem Chair in Media, Culture, and Feminist Studies' at Rutgers.

I have little doubt that she is precisely the kind of 'actual educator', 'academic', 'intellectual' that you have in mind.

One thing about having been taught by real world-class academics - and I speak from personal experience - is their academic insistence on thinking for one's self.

How things have turned for the worst in the universities, in twenty years.

One way or another, your impertinent condescension is superfluous to requirements.